Puppets and Their Beloved Strings
-Dan DeWitt
Sam Harris quickly cast the gauntlet for a new expression of atheism in the wake of the 9-11 terrorist attacks. His first book, “The End of Faith,” is an open letter, a short one at that, citing religious belief as the motivation for much, if not all, evil in the world.
Though more serious works have followed, Harris’ first book was not much more than a paperback rant. He set his sights higher with “The Moral Landscape,” which is predominantly a philosophical work punctuated with scientific references. Though the subtitle claims “How Science Can Determine Human Values,” the reader might separate the science from the philosophical assumptions and question how much support is left for the author’s thesis. But who can blame the guy for trying to tackle one of the largest difficulties that plagues a reductionist worldview.
Although a noble effort, it doesn’t seem that Harris has solved the riddle offered by David Hume that we cannot derive a moral “ought” from a scientific “is.” This always makes me think of Oxford University prof John Lennox’s apt illustration that science can tell me if I put strychnine in my grandmother’s tea it will poison her (the scientific is), but science cannot tell me why I shouldn’t do it (the moral ought).
If we were to concede for a moment that Harris is right and science really can determine our values, we should go all the way and accept the conclusion of his most recent book that claims free will is an illusion. This book is less of an attack on religion, and more of an honest look at the implications of Harris’ view of the world.
Read more at Theolatte.com