In a recent publication on a TruthDig website, Chris Hedges claimed that Sam Harris is a racist who wants to initiate a nuclear attack on all predominantly Muslim countries. Anyone who has read Sam Harris knows that this claim is absurd. But, that is for Sam to rebut. In doing so, he provided a link to a debate with Chris Hedges.
The piece that I took from it, which I want to share for rhetorical purposes, stems from Sam Harris's opening statements in said debate. In regard to justifying religion's role in society, here is what he had to say. Suffice it to assume that non-believing groups/individuals will provide argument against all three(3) claims:
1. The pious will claim religious authenticity and truth-value.
2. The pious will claim religious utility, as a positive societal function.
3. The pious will claim that non-belief (atheism) is just as much a religion as any monotheistic or polytheistic sect.
I think it is important to think about this. I am going to leave any further commentary aside, because I want you to ponder these claims. If you are a believer, which resonates with you? If you are not a believer, which claim(s) do you think needs the most opposition?
No comments:
Post a Comment