This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Debate between Sam Harris and Chris Hedges

Fishpeddler's Avatar Jump to comment 64 by Fishpeddler

Comment #50747 by ramboner32x
"Also, if I remember correctly at one point in the debate Harris did say that poverty/opression is a variable in the equation, so I don't think he discounts it altogether."

Absolutely. And I haven't read all 62 preceding posts, so I have to simply hope that no one here is under the impression that Harris DOES discount poverty and oppression as contributing factors toward violence, or they need to rewatch the debate.

It's not altogether clear to me why these two were put on opposite sides of a debate, because their positions were not (or did not have to be) mutually incompatible. Hedges efforts went almost exclusively toward demonstrating that, at root, despair is an important cause of violence. Sam argued that religious dogma is an important cause of violence. THEY ARE BOTH RIGHT. Where I believe Sam deserves a great deal of credit in this debate is that he made clear that he is not trying to discount the role of the factors Hedges cites. Hedges refuses to make a corresponding acknowledgment or concession about the contribution of religion, and I think his argument fails because of it.

Tue, 19 Jun 2007 21:11:00 UTC | #47749