Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Sam Harris

Quote by Sam Harris

“There is no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too reasonable.”

Quote by Sam Harris

Create image

Author

Sam Harris
Sam Harris

Sam Harris is an American author, philosopher, and neuroscientist known for his work on atheism, rational thinking, and the scientific method. Born on April 9, 1967, Harris graduated from the University of California, Los Angeles with a Bachelor's degree in cognitive psychology. His writings, including 'Free Will', 'The End of Faith', and 'The Knowledge Problem', have sparked widespread debate around the world. Harris is also the host of several podcasts and television shows, including 'Sam Harris Podcast' and 'Waking Up with Sam Harris'. more

You May Also Like

“Let's Look at Subjective Religious Experiences This Way: What if ten thousand people went up to a mountain top, saw something, and then they all disagreed with what they saw, even people who largely agreed with each other? Even with this best possible analogy to subjective religious experiences we would still have a reason to think the lack of oxygen caused them all to hallucinate.”

ReasonAtheismReligious ExperienceHallucinationOccam S RazorSubjective ExperienceAnecdotal EvidenceSubjective Religious Experience
Author:John W. Loftus
Create image

“Religion has ever filled the mind of man with darkness, and kept him in ignorance of his real duties and true interests. It is only by dispelling the clouds and phantoms of Religion, that we shall discover Truth, Reason, and Morality. Religion diverts us from the causes of evils, and from the remedies which nature prescribes; far from curing, it only aggravates, multiplies, and perpetuates them.”

ReasonTruthNatureDarknessAtheismIgnoranceMoralityPhantom Of Religion
Author:Paul Henri Thiry d'Holbach
Create image

“...Spinoza’s Conjecture:“Belief comes quickly and naturally, skepticism is slow and unnatural, and most people have a low tolerance for ambiguity. The scientific principle that a claim is untrue unless proven otherwise runs counter to our natural tendency to accept as true that which we can comprehend quickly. Thus it is that we should reward skepticism and disbelief, and champion those willing to change their mind in the teeth of new evidence. Instead, most social institutions-most notably those in religion, politics, and economics-reward belief in the doctrines of the faith or party or ideology, punish those who challenge the authority of the leaders, and discourage uncertainty and especially skepticism.”

InspirationalReasonSkepticismRationality
Author:Michael Shermer
Create image

“The traditional arguments for the existence of God have been fairly thoroughly criticised by philosophers. But the theologian can, if he wishes, accept this criticism. He can admit that no rational proof of God's existence is possible. And he can still retain all that is essential to his position, by holding that God's existence is known in some other, non-rational way. I think, however, that a more telling criticism can be made by way of the traditional problem of evil. Here it can be shown, not that religious beliefs lack rational support, but that they are positively irrational, that the several parts of the essential theological doctrine are inconsistent with one another, so that the theologian can maintain his position as a whole only by a much more extreme rejection of reason than in the former case. He must now be prepared to believe, not merely what cannot be proved, but what can be disproved from other beliefs that he also holds.”

ReasonPhilosophyAtheismArgumentTheologyIrrationalInconsistentProblem Of EvilAtheist ArgumentAtheistic PhilosophyRejection Of ReasonPhilosophy Of AtheismRational ProofArgument From EvilRational Support
Author:J.L. Mackie
Create image

“One of the recent arguments from design, that based on the so-called fine-tuning life of some fundamental physical constants, founders on the following objections: an extremely small prior probability merited by the God of theism in light – if that is the right word – of the Problem of Evil; the fact that it is not unreasonable to place a substantial probability on the hypothesis that a future theory will fix those values; and the sheer incoherence of computations of the ‘chances’ of fine-tuning were there no fine-tuner.”

ReasonPhilosophyValuesAtheismTheoryProbabilityHypothesisCoherenceProblem Of EvilAtheist ArgumentsFine Tuning DebunkedArgument From Design DebunkedGod Of Theism
Book:Objecting to God
Create image

“[On Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz] The answer is unknowable, but it may not be unreasonable to see him, at least in theological terms, as essentially a deist. He is a determinist: there are no miracles (the events so called being merely instances of infrequently occurring natural laws); Christ has no real role in the system; we live forever, and hence we carry on after our deaths, but then everything — every individual substance — carries on forever.”

ReasonScientistDeismNatural LawsLeibnizLeibniz Religious BeliefsDeterministNo Miracles
Author:Peter Loptson
Create image

“Following feeling, relying on liking or wanting, we are not free. The freedom to "do as we like" is not freedom of choice because we are ruled by the powerful property of feeling; we cannot choose apart from liking and disliking. Likes and dislikes may be articulated in the form of sophisticated-sounding opinions, but the decision is made for us by feeling. The Western world places a high value on personal feelings and opinions: Each individual "has a right" to an opinion. But rarely do we question how we have arrived at our opinion. Upon examination, we may discover that opinions tend to stem from convenience, familiarity, and selfishness–what feels good or what is pleasing or comfortable to us. Upon this basis, we act, and receive the consequences of our action. Even if we compile a large number of such opinions, there is no guarantee that we will develop a wise perspective as a ground for action. Often this process only creates a mass of confusion, for opinions of one individual tend to conflict with the opinions of another. If there appears to be agreement, we tend to assume this agreement will remain stable. But agreement only means that the needs of the individuals involved are temporarily similar, and when those needs shift, agreement will evaporate. To make certain decisions, we rely on logic or scientific findings, which are supposedly free from personal opinion but are still weighted with the opinions of a particular culture. This style of knowing is founded on particular distinctions and ignores other possibilities. The evidence is clear that the scope of modern scientific knowledge is limited, for this knowledge is not yet able to predict and control the side-effects resulting from its own use. Its solutions in turn create more problems, reinforcing the circular patterns of samsara. Only understanding that penetrates to the root causes of problems can break this circularity. Until we explore the depths of consciousness, we cannot resolve the fundamental questions that face human beings.”

SelfReasonOpinionBuddhismWillIndriyas
Book:Ways of Enlightenment
Create image