Iconic atheist Sam Harris, troubled by the continued criticism of his 2010 book The Moral Landscape, has decided to hold an essay contest: $20,000 dollars to the one who persuades him that the central thesis of his book is wrong (or $2000 to the overall best essay).
So how do you, dear reader, craft an argument that will make the famously stubborn Sam Harris change his mind? Just follow these three suggestions and you’ll stand a very good chance of winning enough money for a mid-sized sedan.*
1) Don’t try to prove God exists
First: pastors and theology professors, put down your pen/stylus. Harris isn’t asking people to prove to him that God exists. Rather, he’s asking them to disprove the idea of objective morality, which forms the basis of The Moral Landscape. In Harris’s words,
Questions of morality and values must have right and wrong answers that fall within the purview of science (in principle, if not in practice). Consequently, some people and cultures will be right (to a greater or lesser degree), and some will be wrong, with respect to what they deem important in life.
Harris’s work isn’t really about atheism, so trying to argue about the merits of religion is unlikely to work.
2) Follow Harris’s instructions
There’s no need to wonder about the best way to critique Harris’s work: you can just follow the very clear instructions he gives. Harris’s explanations of the critiques he wants to see are a tad oblique, but he generally invites two methods of attack:
a) Disprove the idea that morality is that which makes everyone the most happy.
Luckily, Joesph Bingham has already done this for you. In the University of Chicago’s “Counterpoint” magazine, he points out that a society in which many people gain pleasure by torturing a few people for their own amusement is “morally superior,” by Harris’s definition.
b) Disprove the idea that morality is absolute and scientifically measurable.
Harris believes that there is necessarily one society that is the most moral. Said society, in theory, creates the most well-being by doing what is scientifically best for the greatest number of its members. To take down this point, you just have to be able to successfully critique modernism, which basically amounts to pulling some quotes from the paper you wrote on Foucault when you were a college sophomore.
3) Embrace balance
Despite the “cacophony” of criticism of The Moral Landscape, Harris claims that, “I have yet to encounter a substantial criticism that I feel was not adequately answered in the book itself.”
Yikes. If the combined might of philosophers, Christians, many atheists, postmodernists, modernists, and Glenn Greenwald wasn’t enough, how will you persuade Harris?
Your piece will have to be balancing act. Obviously, hitting Harris hard is a recipe for failure. Don’t, for example, point out that Harris’s whole project seems inspired by a perverse need to objectively judge Muslim culture. Don’t, as Bingham does, call The Moral Landscape “laughable” and full of “innumerable silly things.”
At the same time, you can’t completely kiss up to Harris. One of Harris’s friendlier critics, Russell Blackford, will be judging the contest and determining which essays Harris actually reads. Harris is the one who determines whether the winner gets $2000 or $20,000, and the satisfaction of having beaten Sam Harris.
So stay balanced. Appeal to Harris’s notions of scientific objectivity. Start with the critiques others have made, but make them mild enough to not upset Harris and strong enough to appease Blackford. Remember that the only thing Harris hates more than Muslims are the liberals who love them. Make sure you send submissions between February 2nd and 9th, 2014. And God help you.
*Not a guarantee.
