Link to the conversation that sparked these notes:
We don't worry as much about Christian violence because it isn't a major factor in the international violence in the world and to Americans right now. Sam says in the beginning that he could see a circumstance where he would shift his attention away from Islam is a different ideology such as Christianity was causing more harm in the world.
Sam Harris does not talk about the reformation processes in the western world and how it undermined violent religious factors in the past. Moral progress has come from some of the western ideals such as free speech, gender equality, democracy and the separation of church and state. These moral reformations needs to happen in the Muslim world in order for this particular type of violence to cease. Sam seems pessimistic about this prospect.
Sam Harris and Cenk Uygur are both pro government but I think Sam looks at belief as a bedrock of psychology and Cenk looks at political and economic motivation as the bedrock of psychology.
Cenk thinks about government a lot and ascribes that thinking to others which blinds him to the real motivational power of pedestrian beliefs such as jihad. Cenk acknowledges that religious ideas play a role in violent acts but that Sam should "tone it down"? I don't fully understand the debate or where Cenk disagrees with Sam about religion.
If you can admit that religion is part of the problem just like politics then why can't religion be a major factor in some cases? Especially cases where the perpetrator tells us explicitly that their motives are religious.
If it is a simple matter of the weight of the influence religion accounts for behavior then you have to admit that at some point religion could be 100% responsible just like any other case where variable motivations exist. If it possible for the motivation to consist of 25% religion, 25% nationalism, 25% economics and 25% politics then any combination of the variables could be possible in an individual. And getting to the exact amount may be impossible. But if reason is the best method then we must take into account the testimony of the person committing those acts.
What are the proportions of psychopathology in the general population compared to Muslim suicide bombers? If the proportion of suicide bombers is higher then you can't explain it away that way.
Neither Sam nor Cenk are politicians, dictators, policy makers or in any other position of power other than as speakers and writers. A war of ideas is important but real wars make them difficult to enact. When people are really being murdered for their ideas it is hard to get the word out.
Conversations, investigations and thinking about right and wrong are the best ways to learn and grow both as individuals and as societies. Reformation comes from the peaceful exploration of ideas and if an ideology meets free speech with violence then reformation can not occur within that ideology.
Cenk admits that Christianity plays a role in the psychology of human behavior yet struggles to downplay the role Islam plays in what Muslims do. Is it so controversial to talk about bad ideas and their role in human behavior?
Sam has written, studied, debated and talked so much about the things that he takes seriously and explains the nuances of the topics with such eloquence and logical consistency that anyone that disagrees with him faces a formidable challenge. Sam's rigor and discipline for discovering the truth about the world is daunting and I think Cenk was not up to the task or at least I was not compelled by his position which is unclear to me still.
I will give Cenk credit for sticking with the conversation and being very cordial and professional. I don't think Cenk defends the charge that he is propagating bad journalism and allowing people to lie about Sam's positions very well, if at all.
All in all a really good conversation. Not the most efficient or effective one but very thought provoking.
No comments:
Post a Comment