Labels

architecture Asheville atheism bard bbq books buddhism buffy burgers cars comics fashion film food japan kung fu Las Vegas manga memory music New Zealand other people's blogs photography podcast updates politics San Francisco Santa Cruz sex shoes shopping snow skiing taoism toys travel TV video web 2.0 women writing

Sunday, September 16, 2007

Book Review #4: The End of Faith

I know I'm a little behind the times on this one. I call myself an atheist, and I let Sam Harris's The End of Faith languish on the shelf for three years? As I've mentioned on many occasions, I rarely pick up books without pictures since my tenure at Malaprop's ended many, many moons ago. Even in those days, you'd rarely catch me with a work of non-fiction. Science fiction and slipstream primarily held my interest. Then again, at the turn of the century, the world was quite different. We all fantasized about what would come in the the new millennium: Would technology bring us to the dawning of the true Age of Aquarius or would its failure return us to the Dark Ages? The future held so much potential, so much excitement. Science fiction really fueled that feeling for me.

Now we're living in the future. We did not go tumbling backwards into darkness - at least not in the manner for which we had so thoroughly prepared with our bottled water, canned goods, fuel, and ammunition. For better or worse, we got a little closer to a Neuromancer world than Mad Max. However, I know that I, for one, was not expecting to find myself in a world dominated by faith-based conflict, a world in which 44% of Americans believe that Jesus will probably return to Earth in the next 50 years, a world in which Muslim mothers rejoice when their sons blow themselves up in crowded markets. My self-absorbed, insulated, liberal world view got a bit of a beating, to say the least.

Sam Harris addresses so many of the questions I've struggled with since 9/11: Why are Muslims at the center of so many military struggles? (One word: Jihad.) Why would I feel better about the war in Iraq if I actually believed Bush wanted to liberate, say, the oppressed women of the world? (Because that would be a logical reason for a war.) Why does the U.S. support Israel so zealously? (Because our president believes that the rebuilding of Solomon's temple will bring the Second Coming of Christ and the ultimate destruction of the Jews.) How can we expect such inherently incompatible belief systems to coexist peacefully in the world? (We cannot.) Why do the liberals attempts to promote religious tolerance sound like bullshit lip service? (Because religious tolerance is impossible and illogical based on the teachings of these religions, themselves.)

Besides so concisely clearing up these nagging little issues for me, Harris covers some ground I didn't expect. His discussion of moral relativism versus realism especially made me sit up and take note. I've considered myself a moral relativist (or pragmatist), but he points out the inherent contradictions in my thinking. As I read his argument for realism, I thought about the moral issues that trouble me, the things that I thought I couldn't resolve for myself without a little relativism, and I realized that they could be resolved in reality.

Let's take abortion, for example. I've always been pro-choice, and yet I find both sides of the argument disturbing. The religious conservative rejection of a woman's right to be in control of her own body is clearly infuriating. On the other hand, the argument that a human life has value, even shortly after conception could hold some water for me. The pro-choice fight to protect abortion in any trimester feels a bit extreme, as well. However, backing down from this fight in any way is not acceptable for those who adamantly support women's rights. The argument becomes political and pragmatist at this point - not based in reality. What do I mean by that? I mean that in reality, we can't pinpoint the true beginning of human life as we know and respect it. Scientifically speaking, we don't know when that embryo truly becomes a person. This is what makes me uncomfortable. If science could tell me without a doubt when that group of cells becomes inherently human (which I believe science will be able to do one day), I won't feel quite so sick about it. For me, this has absolutely nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with ethics based on what we know about the world. If I knew for a fact when consciousness begins, the debate would be over...at least for me.

Speaking of consciousness, the last chapter, Experiments in Consciousness, was not quite what I anticipated, either. He tentatively covers topics like spirituality, self-awareness, and Buddhism, while attempting not to undo all the work he invests in having us, the readers, let go of irrational approaches to thinking about the world. I've, personally, made a very strong effort to think about consciousness as a function of the brain, not something separate or inherently spiritual, so I was skeptical about how Harris was going to navigate these subjects. Ultimately, I have little issue with his characterization of mindfulness, meditation, and the practice of seeking a selfless state of mind as being a logical and scientific approach to learning more about one's own state of consciousness. These are, of course, the reasons that Buddhist philosophy is so appealing to modern practitioners, including me at one time. I'm a little disappointed that Harris doesn't explicitly acknowledge much similarity between Buddhist religion and Western religions. While Buddhism isn't exactly causing a lot of conflict around the world, I would have liked him to at least address the concept of religion as opiate for the masses, a tool used specifically to keep people from questioning the actions of their leaders. Buddhism can be used to this end as well as any other.

All in all, this is the most relavant thing I've read in a long time. Thank you, Mr. Harris, for giving context for so many of the seemingly contradictory thoughts and theories that have been floating around in my head for a while. I feel like I have a useful framework for thinking about some intense subjects, not to mention about a hundred pages of footnotes for reference, in case I want to do any additional reading.

Labels: atheism, books, politics