Sam Harris (author)

This article's use of external links may not follow Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive and inappropriate external links. (August 2010)

Sam Harris
Harris pictured c. 2007
Born	1967 (age 42–43) United States
Occupation	Author, CEO
Nationality	United States
Alma mater	Stanford University, UCLA, Harvard
Genres	Non-fiction
Subjects	Religion, philosophy, neuroscience
Notable work(s)	The End of Faith Letter to a Christian Nation The Moral Landscape
Notable award(s)	PEN/Martha Albrand Award
Spouse(s)	Annaka Harris
samharris.org

Sam Harris (born 1967) is an American non-fiction author, and CEO of Project Reason.^[1] He received a Ph.D. in neuroscience from UCLA, and is a graduate in philosophy from Stanford University. He has studied both Eastern and Western religious traditions, along with a variety of contemplative disciplines, for twenty years. He is a proponent of scientific skepticism^[2] and is the author of The End of Faith (2004), which won the 2005 PEN/Martha Albrand Award,^[3] Letter to a Christian Nation (2006), a rejoinder to criticism of his first book, and The Moral Landscape (2010).

He is considered one of the most prominently ardent critics of religion in the 21st century, along with evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, philosopher Daniel Dennett, and writer Christopher Hitchens. Being a member of the New Atheism movement, Harris also calls for separation of Church and State, civil rights for the non-religious as well as freedom to criticize religion.^[4] Being a writer, Harris has also written numerous articles in Huffington Post, Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, The New York Times, Newsweek as well as scientific journals such as Nature. He has written articles on Islam, Christianity, and religion in general.^[5]

In his 2010 book, The Moral Landscape, he posits that science can shed light on questions regarding moral values and facilitate human well-being. After the release of his books, he continued to give numerous talks at universities such as Caltech, UCSD, Stanford University, Harvard as well as making numerous television appearances and interviews. Harris has also made an appearance in the 2005 film The God Who Wasn't There, as well as numerous television appearances for Bill Maher and Bill O'Reilly.

Harris has reportedly traveled with bodyguards due to death threats he receives from Muslims and Christians.^[6]

Contents 1 Early life and education 2 Worldview 2.1 Religion As Failed Science 2.2 Conversational Intolerance 2.3 Religious America 2.4 Islam 2.5 Miracles 2.6 Moderation 2.7 Morality and ethics 2.8 Spirituality 2.9 Organizational Affiliations 3 The Moral Landscape 4 Criticism and debate 5 Neuroscience 6 Writings and media appearances 7 Books 8 References 9 External links

[edit] Early life and education

In an August 21, 2009 appearance on Real Time with Bill Maher Harris stated that he grew up in a secular home and his parents never discussed God. However he has stated that he has always had an interest in religion.^[7] Harris was married in 2004. His wife, Annaka Harris, is Co-Founder of Project Reason and an editor of scientific, nonfiction books.

Harris attended Stanford University as an English major, but dropped out of school. Harris has admitted experimenting with the drug ecstacy as a student and the powerful insights he felt it gave him into spirituality and psychology.^[8] Harris found himself interested in spiritual and philosophical questions when he was at Stanford and the notion that he might be able to achieve spiritual insights without the help of drugs.^[9] After leaving Stanford, he traveled to Asia, where he studied meditation with Hindu and Buddhist teachers.^[9] Eleven years later, he returned to Stanford and completed a B.A. degree in philosophy. In 2009 he obtained a Ph.D. degree in neuroscience at University of California, Los Angeles,^[10][11][12] using functional magnetic resonance imaging to conduct research into the neural basis of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty.^[11][12]

[edit] Worldview

Harris's basic message is that the time has come to freely question the idea of religious faith.^{[13]p. 13–15} He feels that the survival of civilization is in danger because of a taboo against questioning religious beliefs. Harris describes Islam and Christianity as more dangerous than Jainism. He also believes that a "conversational taboo" exists against criticizing religion, and that this taboo impedes progress toward more enlightened approaches to spirituality and ethics.

While an atheist by definition,^{[citation needed]} Harris asserts that the term is not necessary. His position is that "atheism" is not a worldview or a philosophy, but the "destruction of bad ideas." He states that religion is especially rife with bad ideas, calling it "one of the most perverse misuses of intelligence we have ever devised."^[14] He compares modern religious beliefs to the myths of the Ancient Greeks, which were once accepted as fact but which are obsolete today. In a January 2007 interview with PBS, Harris said, "We don't have a word for not believing in Zeus, which is to say we are all atheists in respect to Zeus. And we don't have a word for not being an astrologer." He goes on to say that the term will be retired only when "we all just achieve a level of intellectual honesty where we are no longer going to pretend to be certain about things we are not certain about."^[15]

He also rejects the claim that the Bible was inspired by an omniscient God. He insists that if, that were the case, the book could "make specific, falsifiable predictions about human events." Instead, he notes, the Bible "does not contain a single sentence that could not have been written by a man or woman living in the first century."^[16]

In The End of Faith, Harris suggests is that all our^[who?] beliefs, except those relating to religious dogma, are based on evidence and experience. He maintains that religion allows views that would otherwise be a sign of "madness" to become accepted or, in some cases, revered as "holy," citing as an example the doctrine of transubstantiation. Harris contends that if a lone individual developed this belief, he or she would be considered "mad," and that it is "merely an accident of history that it is considered normal in our society to believe that the Creator of the universe can hear your thoughts while it is demonstrative of mental illness to believe that he is communicating with you by having the rain tap in Morse code on your bedroom window."^[13]p. 72.

[edit] Religion As Failed Science

Harris postulates that religion is essentially a failed science.^[17] He states that "religon was the discourse we had when all causes in the universe were opaque" and asserts that "we didn't know disease spread or what disease spread or what disease was, we didn't know why people died early".^[17] Harris believes that as a consequence of obliviousness to the natural order of our environment, and claimed that the rise of religion could be explained within a psychological construct ^[17]:

As a cognitive and behavioral imperative, we form descriptions of the world and we try to figure out what's going on. We tell ourselves stories about our origins, about where we are going and about causes in the world. Given our pervasive ignorance and our disposition to see agency in the world, these stories entail relationships with invisible friends and enemies.

Harris believes that religion is "losing the argument" with science, given the escalating popularity of science within the past hundred years on almost all fronts.^{[citation needed]} As an example he states that, given our knowledge of epilepsy, most parents today do not send their epileptic children to exorcists. Harris also predicts that science will one day truly be capable of understanding spirituality and feelings of otherworldliness commonly associated with religion.^[17]

[edit] Conversational Intolerance

Harris suggests that he advocates a benign, noncoercive, corrective form of intolerance, distinguishing it from historic religious persecution. He promotes a conversational intolerance, in which personal convictions are scaled against evidence, and where intellectual honesty is demanded equally in religious views and non-religious views. He suggests that, just as a person declaring a belief that Elvis is still alive would immediately make his every statement suspect in the eyes of those he was conversing with, asserting a similarly non-evidentiary point on a religious doctrine ought to meet with similar disrespect.^{[clarification needed]} He also believes there is a need to counter inhibitions that prevent the open critique of religious ideas, beliefs, and practices under the auspices of "tolerance."^[18]

Harris maintains that such conversation and investigation are essential to progress in every other field of knowledge. As one example, he suggests that few would require "respect" for radically differing views on physics or history; instead, he notes, societies expect and demand logical reasons and valid evidence for such claims, while those who fail to provide valid support are quickly marginalized on those topics. Thus, Harris suggests that the routine deference accorded to religious ideologies constitutes a double standard, which, following the events of September 11, 2001 attacks, has become too great a risk.^[18]

In the 2007 PBS interview, Harris said, "The usefulness of religion, the fact that it gives life meaning, that it makes people feel good is not an argument for the truth of any religious doctrine. It's not an argument that it's reasonable to believe that Jesus really was born of a virgin or that the Bible is the perfect word of the creator of the universe. You can only believe those things or you should only be able to believe those things if you think there are good reasons to believe those things."

[edit] Religious America

Harris focuses much of his critique on the state of contemporary religious affairs in the United States. Harris worries that many areas of American culture are harmed by beliefs that are driven by religious dogma. For instance, he cites polls showing that 44% of Americans believe it is either "certain" or "probable" that Jesus will return to Earth within the next fifty years, and suggests that the same percentage believe that creationism should be taught in public schools and that God has literally promised the land of Israel to the modern-day Jews.^[19][20]

When then-President George W. Bush publicly invoked God in speeches regarding either domestic or foreign affairs, Harris questioned how people might react if the President were to mention Zeus or Apollo in a similar vein.^[19]

[edit] Islam

While Harris is extremely critical of all religious faiths, he asserts that the doctrines of Islam are uniquely dangerous to civilization.^[21] Harris states that unlike Jainism, Islam "is not even remotely a religion of peace".^[4] Harris criticizes the general response in the West to terrorist atrocities such as the 9/11 attacks, i.e. the response of pronouncing Islam a "religion of peace" while simultaneously declaring a "war on 'terrorism'." Harris sees the first sentiment as demonstrably false, and the second as meaningless.^{[13]p. 31, p. 28.}

Harris has also openly criticized the term Islamophobia, in an essay for the Huffington Post:^[22]

There is no such thing as Islamophobia. Bigotry and racism exist, of course—and they are evils that all well-intentioned people must oppose. And prejudice against Muslims or Arabs, purely because of the accident of their birth, is despicable. But like all religions, Islam is a system of ideas and practices. And it is not a form of bigotry or racism to observe that the specific tenets of the faith pose a special threat to civil society. Nor is it a sign of intolerance to notice when people are simply not being honest about what they and their co-religionists believe.

Instead, he asks for an acknowledgment that Western civilization is at war with Islam, which, he maintains, preaches a doctrine of religious and political subjugation, not a message of peace. He observes that the Koran and the hadith contain incitements to kill infidels or subjugate them and reward such actions with Paradise (including 72 virgins). Harris considers jihad, which he calls "metaphysics of martyrdom", as taking the "sting out of death" and a source of peril. He rejects arguments that suggest such behavior is a result of extremist Muslims, not mainstream ones. He argues that the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy erupted not because the cartoons were derogatory but because "most Muslims believe that it is a sacrilege to depict Muhammad at all."^[23] Harris maintains that the West is at war with "precisely the vision of life that is prescribed to all Muslims in the Koran, and further elaborated in the literature of the hadith."^{[13]pp. 109–110.}

Harris acknowledges that religions other than Islam can inspire, and have inspired, atrocities. In The End of Faith, he discusses examples such as the Inquisition and witch hunts. However, Harris believes that Islam is better suited to this purpose than most other religions. He summed up this argument in a 2005 blog post:

Anyone who imagines that terrestrial concerns account for Muslim terrorism must answer questions of the following sort: Why are there no Tibetan Buddhist suicide bombers? The Tibetans have suffered an occupation far more brutal, and far more cynical, than any that Britain, the United States, or Israel have ever imposed upon the Muslim world. Where are the throngs of Tibetans ready to perpetrate suicidal atrocities against Chinese noncombatants? They do not exist. What is the difference that makes the difference? The difference lies in the specific tenets of Islam. This is not to say that Buddhism could not help inspire suicidal violence. It can, and it has (Japan, World War II). But this concedes absolutely nothing to the apologists for Islam. As a Buddhist, one has to work extremely hard to justify such barbarism. One need not work nearly so hard as a Muslim. The truth that we must finally confront is that Islam contains specific notions of martyrdom and jihad that fully explain the character of Muslim violence.^[21]

Harris has called upon Muslim communities to practice open criticism of their faith and to offer assistance to Western governments in locating the religious extremists among them. He has argued that Muslims must be prepared to accept ethnic profiling as a tool in the fight against terrorism.^[21]

It is simply a fact that the greatest predictor of terrorist behavior anywhere in the world (with the exception of the island Sri Lanka) is whether or not a person believes that Allah is the only god and Muhammad is his prophet.^[21]

[edit] Miracles

Sam Harris claims that "evidence for our religious doctrines is either terrible or non existent"^[24] and denies miracles as being logically or evidentially conceivable. When assessing the miracles of Jesus Christ in relation to contemporary miraculous allegations Harris states:^[24]

The truth is even if we had multiple contemporaneous eye witness accounts of the miracles of Jesus, this still would not provide sufficient basis to believe that these events actually occurred, or why not? Well the problem is that first hand reports of miracles are quite common, even in the 21st century.

Harris also stated that he has "met literally literally hundreds at this point, western educated men and women who think that their favorite Hindu or Buddhist guru has magic powers".

[edit] Moderation

Though Harris accepts that replacing religious extremism with religious moderation would be a positive step, he criticizes moderate theists. Harris argues that religious moderation gives cover to religious fundamentalism. He suggests that under the banner of moderation, respect and tolerance are sacred, thus preventing credible assaults upon extremism. Harris states:

To speak plainly and truthfully about the state of our world — to say, for instance, that the Bible and the Koran both contain mountains of life-destroying gibberish — is antithetical to tolerance as moderates currently conceive it. But we can no longer afford the luxury of such political correctness. We must finally recognize the price we are paying to maintain the iconography of our ignorance.^[25]

Furthermore, Harris believes that it is absurd to continue to expect equal respect for all conflicting religious beliefs, as the claim to absolute truth is inherent in nearly all belief systems at some level. Any religion that claims that all other belief systems are false and heretical cannot foster genuine acceptance or tolerance of religious diversity. Harris concludes that religious moderation stands on weak intellectual ground, as well as a poor understanding of theological issues.

Harris also says that moderation is bad theology because the extremists are, in a sense, right: he thinks that, if one reads the texts literally, God wants to put homosexuals to death or destroy infidels. Harris claims that religious moderates appear to be blinded to the reality of what fundamentalists truly believe. Moderates tend to argue that suicide attacks can be attributed to a range of social, political, and economic factors. Harris counters by noting that many suicide bombers come not from poverty but from mainstream Muslim society. He points to the fact that the 9/11 hijackers were "college-educated" and "middle-class" and suffered "no discernible experience of political oppression." Harris thus asserts that religion is a significant cause of terrorism.^[26]

How many more architects and mechanical engineers must hit the wall at 400 miles an hour before we admit to ourselves that jihadist violence is not merely a matter of education, poverty, or politics? The truth, astonishingly enough, is that in the year 2006 a person can have sufficient intellectual and material resources to build a nuclear bomb and still believe that he will get 72 virgins in Paradise. Western secularists, liberals, and moderates have been very slow to understand this. The cause of their confusion is simple: They don't know what it is like to really believe in God.

Harris discounts the idea that Jesus' teachings, and the New Testament in general, serve to moderate the more extreme laws set forth in the Old Testament. He points out that the Old Testament prescribes death as the punishment for — among other things — breaking any of the Ten Commandments, including heresy against Yahweh and the act of adultery. He asserts that Jesus and his followers never repudiated such teachings in the New Testament. In Letter to a Christian Nation, Harris cites several quotations in the New Testament attributed to Jesus himself that clearly do uphold adherence to the Old Testament prophets. Speaking at the New York Society for Ethical Culture in 2005, Harris said, "I've got news for you — I've read the books. God is not a moderate.... There's no place in the books where God says, 'You know, when you get to the New World and you develop your three branches of government and you have a civil society, you can just jettison all the barbarism I recommended in the first books."^[27]

[edit] Morality and ethics

In regard to morality, Harris considers the time long overdue to reclaim the concept for rational secular humanism. Harris describes the supposed link between religious faith and morality as a myth, unsupported by statistical evidence. He notes, for instance, that the highly secular Scandinavian countries are among the most generous in helping the developing world.

Harris goes further and posits that, far from being the source of our moral intuition, religion can yield highly problematic ethical positions. He cites several examples, including the Catholic prohibition against condom use aggravating the global AIDS epidemic, the attempts made by the American religious lobby to impede funding for embryonic stem-cell research, and the punitive nature of the American "war on drugs." He sees in these examples the tendency of religion to decouple moral judgments from focus on real human suffering. Harris also sees the influence of religion in most of America's "vice" laws. He writes that most of the laws outlawing pornography, sodomy, and prostitution are actually intended to combat "sin" rather than "crime."^{[13][page needed]}

Harris suggests that morality and ethics can be studied, and improved, without "presupposing anything on insufficient evidence."^[28] He states that humans "decide what is good in the Good Books," rather than deriving our moral code from scriptures. He praises the Golden Rule as one moral teaching that is "great, wise and compassionate." He contrasts that with biblical edicts directing that acts such as premarital sex, disobedience of one's parents, and the worship of "other gods" should be punished by death.^[13] Harris states that we have evolved in our thinking such that we understand that the Golden Rule is worth following while some commandments in other sections of the Bible are not. He also points out that even the Golden Rule is not unique to any one religion and was taught by such figures as Confucius and the Buddha centuries before the New Testament was written.

More controversially, Harris has put forward an argument questioning the relative morality of collateral damage and judicial torture during war. He reasons that, if we accept collateral damage when bombs are used in warfare, we have no reason to reject the use of torture. Indeed, Harris argues that the former, involving the killing of innocent civilians, should be much more troubling to us than the torture of, for instance, a terrorist suspect. He claims that it is merely a function of our biological intuitions that suffering appears disproportionately unimportant when enacted impersonally. Harris notes that the deaths of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan were both foreseeable and inevitable consequences of bombing the countries. However, the civilian casualties were seen as unfortunate but not so unacceptable as to prevent the attacks. Any suffering caused by the torture of people such as Al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheikh Mohammed or Osama bin Laden, Harris argues, should pale in comparison to the deaths and injuries of comparatively innocent citizens. In a response to the controversy caused by this argument, Harris stated, "[I]f you think it is ever justifiable to drop bombs in an attempt to kill a man like Osama bin Laden (and thereby risk killing and maiming innocent men, women, and children), you should think it may sometimes be justifiable to "water-board" a man like Osama bin Laden."^[29] Ultimately, Harris maintains that torture should remain illegal, and that comparing torture with collateral damage does not cause him to see torture as "acceptable." However, he believes that discussion is needed on the coherence of our beliefs regarding the two.^{[13][30][page needed]}

More recently, Harris has argued in favour of a Science of morality and will discuss as much in his new book The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values.

[edit] Spirituality

Harris wishes to incorporate spirituality in the domain of human reason. He draws inspiration from the practices of Eastern religion, in particular that of meditation, as described principally by Hindu and Buddhist practitioners. By paying close attention to moment-to-moment conscious experience, Harris suggests, it is possible to make our sense of "self" vanish and thereby uncover a new state of personal well-being. Moreover, Harris argues that such states of mind should be subjected to formal scientific investigation, without incorporating the myth and superstition that often accompanies meditation in the religious context. "There is clearly no greater obstacle to a truly empirical approach to spiritual experience than our current beliefs about God," he writes.^[13]p. 214.

Despite his anti-religious sentimentality, Sam Harris also claims that there is "nothing irrational about seeking the states of mind that lie at the core of many religions. Compassion, awe, devotion and feelings of oneness are surely among the most valuable experiences a person can have."^[9]

[edit] Organizational Affiliations

In 2007 Sam and Annaka Harris founded Project Reason, a charitable foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society.^[31] He is also a member of the advisory board of the Secular Coalition for America,^[32] a national lobbying organization representing the interests of nontheistic Americans.

[edit] The Moral Landscape

In his third book, The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values, Harris argues that "Human well-being is not a random phenomenon. It depends on many factors—ranging from genetics and neurobiology to sociology and economics." He contends that though humanity has reached a point in time when, due to scientific flourishing and inquiry, many sciences can "have an impact on the well-being of others".^[33] Harris argues that it is time to promote a scientific study of morality itself and rejects the idea that religion is a basis for universal morality.^[34] He believes that once scientists can successfully begin to analyze morality, would reduce religious morality to "astrology, witchcraft and Greek mythology on the scrapheap".^[34] The book was widely criticized by reviewers.^{[35][36][37][38][39][40]}

[edit] Criticism and debate

Harris has been criticized by some of his fellow contributors at The Huffington Post. In particular, R.J. Eskow has accused him of fostering an intolerance toward faith, potentially as damaging as the religious fanaticism that he opposes.^[41][42] Margaret Wertheim, herself an atheist, also weighed in, contending that liberals should view Harris's account of religious faith "with considerable skepticism."^[43] On the other hand, Harris has received backing from Nina Burleigh^[44] and Richard Dawkins.^[45] In May 2006, Harris came under sustained attack in a featured article by Meera Nanda for New Humanist, in which she claimed that his analysis of religious extremism was flawed, and suggested that he was criticizing religion "for what seems to be his real goal: a defense, nay, a celebration of Harris' own Dzogchen Buddhist and Advaita Vedantic Hindu spirituality." Nanda stated that Harris failed to apply the same critical analysis to the eastern traditions as he applied to western religions, and she argues that the detachment from the self in Dharmic spirituality is part of the recipe for authoritarianism.^[46]

Anthropologist Scott Atran has criticized Harris for using what Atran considers to be an unscientific approach towards highlighting the role of belief in the psychology of suicide bombers. In the 2006 conference Beyond Belief, Atran confronted Harris for portraying a "caricature of Islam." Atran later followed up his comments in an online discussion for Edge.org, in which he criticized Harris and others for using methods of combating religious dogmatism and faith that Atran believes are "scientifically baseless, psychologically uninformed, politically naïve, and counterproductive for goals we share."^[47]

In January 2007, Harris received criticism from John Gorenfeld, writing for AlterNet.^[48] Gorenfeld took Harris to task for defending some of the findings of paranormal investigations into areas such as reincarnation and xenoglossy. He also strongly criticized Harris for his defense of judicial torture. Gorenfeld's critique was subsequently reflected by Robert Todd Carroll, writing in the Skeptic's Dictionary.^[49] In response, Harris clarified his stance on his own website, denying that he had ever defended these views to the extent that Gorenfeld suggested.^[50] Shortly afterward, Harris engaged in a lengthy debate with Andrew Sullivan on the internet forum Beliefnet.^[51] In April 2007, Harris debated with the evangelical pastor Rick Warren for Newsweek magazine.^[52]

Madeleine Bunting quotes Harris in saying "some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them," and states "[t]his sounds like exactly the kind of argument put forward by those who ran the Inquisition."^[53] Quoting the same passage, theologian Catherine Keller asks, "[c]ould there be a more dangerous proposition than that?" and argues that the "anti-tolerance" it represents would "dismantle" the Jeffersonian wall between church and state.^[54] Harris has said in response that the passage has been misconstrued. Specifically, he says that "[s]ome critics have interpreted the second sentence of this passage to mean that I advocate simply killing religious people for their beliefs. . . . I am not at all ignoring the link between belief and behavior. The fact that belief determines behavior is what makes certain beliefs so dangerous."^[55] Writer Theodore Dalrymple described the passage as "quite possibly the most disgraceful that I have read in a book by a man posing as a rationalist".^[56]

[edit] Neuroscience

Building on Harris's interests in belief and religion, he has completed a PhD in neuroscience at UCLA.^[11][12] He has used fMRI to explore whether the brain responses differ between sentences that subjects judged as true, false or undecidable, across a wide range of categories including autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual statements.^[57] Statements that were judged as "true" (belief) led to greater activation in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex than did statements that were judged as "false" (disbelief) both when examined across all categories, and when examined for mathematical judgments alone and for ethical judgments alone. Conversely, disbelief led to greater activation of left inferior frontal gyrus, right middle frontal gyrus, and bilateral anterior insular cortex.

When certainty (belief and disbelief) was compared against uncertainty, a widespread network of sub-cortical regions, including the head and tail of the caudate were activated. Uncertainty activated anterior cingulate cortex and superior frontal gyrus more than certainty did.

In another study, Harris and colleagues examined the neural basis of religious and non-religious belief using fMRI.^[58] Fifteen committed Christians and fifteen nonbelievers were scanned as they evaluated the truth and falsity of religious and nonreligious propositions. For both groups, statements of belief (sentences judged as either true or false) were associated with increased activation of ventromedial prefrontal cortex, a region of the brain involved in emotional judgment, processing uncertainty, assessing rewards and thinking about oneself.^[12]

[edit] Writings and media appearances

Harris's writing focuses on neuroscience and criticism of religion, for which he is best known. He blogs for the Washington Post, the Huffington Post, and Truthdig, and his articles have appeared in such publications as Newsweek, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Boston Globe, and the British national newspaper The Times.^[59]

Harris has made numerous TV and radio appearances, including on The O'Reilly Factor, ABC News, Tucker, Book TV, NPR, Real Time, The Colbert Report, and The Daily Show. In 2005, Harris appeared in the documentary film The God Who Wasn't There. Harris was a featured speaker at the 2006 conference Beyond Belief: Science, Religion, Reason and Survival. He made two presentations and participated in the ensuing panel discussions. Harris has also appeared a number of times on the Point of Inquiry radio podcast.

[edit] Books

• The End of Faith (2004). ISBN 0-393-03515-8
• Letter to a Christian Nation (2006). ISBN 0-307-26577-3
• The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values (2010). ISBN 978-1-4391-7121-9

[edit] References

[edit] External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Sam Harris

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Sam Harris

• Official website
• Project Reason
• "The neural basis of belief" article about Harris' recent scientific work.
• Facts, Values and a Place for the Profound The Science Network interview with Sam Harris
• On Faith articles
• Huffington Post articles
• Truthdig articles and interview
• Sam Harris in conversation with Oliver McTernan at NYPL (2007)
• Sam Harris debating Rabbi David Wolpe on Does God exist?
• Speaking at the 2007 Aspen Ideas Festival video on FORA.tv — Jul. 4th, 2007
• The View From The End Of The World video on FORA.tv — Dec. 9th, 2005
• Point of Inquiry audio interviews
• Lecture at New York Society for Ethical Culture — November 16, 2005: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6
• Free Inquiry articles:
  • Rational Mysticism
  • Selling Out Science
  • The Myth of Secular Moral Chaos
  • Reply to a Christian
  • Beyond the Believers

Neurology:

• “The neural correlates of religious and nonreligious belief” by Sam Harris, Jonas T. Kaplan et al.
• Functional neuroimaging of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty – article by Sam Harris, Sameer A. Sheth and Mark S. Cohen
  • What Your Brain Looks Like on Faith at TIME.com

Critiques by Other Atheists

• Germani, Alan (2008-09-15). "The Mystical Ethics of the New Atheists". The Objective Standard (Glen Allen Press) 3 (3). http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2008-fall/mystical-ethics-new-atheists.asp. Retrieved 2008-09-15. 

v • d • e Criticism of religion Criticism of religions Buddhism · Christianity · Hinduism · Islam · Jehovah's Witnesses · Judaism · Latter Day Saint movement · Latter-day Saint Church · Monotheism · Roman Catholic · Scientology · Seventh-day Adventist · Twelver Shi’ism · Unification Church Religious texts Bible · Book of Mormon · Qur'an · Talmud · Upanishads Religious figures Jesus · Moses · Muhammad · Joseph Smith · Ellen White · Charles Taze Russell Critical books and movements The God Delusion · God Is Not Great · Letter to a Christian Nation · Why I Am Not a Christian · Why I Am Not a Muslim · Atheism · Antitheism · Flying Spaghetti Monster · Invisible Pink Unicorn Violence and terrorism Violence · Terrorism · Persecution · War · Fascism · Christianity · Mormonism · Judaism · Islam · Sikhism · India Notable critics Dan Barker · Samuel Clemens · Richard Dawkins · Daniel Dennett · Denis Diderot · Epicurus · Greg Epstein · Ludwig Feuerbach · Sigmund Freud · Socrates · Stephen Fry · Baron d'Holbach · Sam Harris · Christopher Hitchens · David Hume · Karl Marx · PZ Myers · Friedrich Nietzsche · Michel Onfray · Thomas Paine · Ayn Rand · Bertrand Russell · Carl Sagan · Michael Shermer · Steven Weinberg · Voltaire

Persondata
Name	Harris, Sam
Alternative names
Short description	American thinker, writer
Date of birth	1967
Place of birth	United States
Date of death
Place of death