Sam Harris: The Fireplace Delusion

[Select Samaritan]

It seems to me that many nonbelievers have forgotten—or never knew—what it is like to suffer an unhappy collision with scientific rationality. We are open to good evidence and sound argument as a matter of principle, and are generally willing to follow wherever they may lead. Certain of us have made careers out of bemoaning the failure of religious people to adopt this same attitude.

However, I recently stumbled upon an example of secular intransigence that may give readers a sense of how religious people feel when their beliefs are criticized. It’s not a perfect analogy, as you will see, but the rigorous research I’ve conducted at dinner parties suggests that it is worth thinking about. We can call the phenomenon “the fireplace delusion.”

Read on...

[David]

Gosh. Alarming news about woodburning fires there. We have one, and we like it.

I can't help thinking it's a pretty weak analogy, though. The guy needs to raise his game a bit. Too much preaching to the choir, perhaps?

[Select Samaritan]

I can't help thinking it's a pretty weak analogy, though.

He readily concedes this in the beginning, though.

The guy needs to raise his game a bit. Too much preaching to the choir, perhaps?

I fail to see how he's strictly preaching to the choir when he's intentionally making readers (of all stripes) uncomfortable. Besides, there's as much to chew on in that article for a theist as there is for the more secular among us. Also, the man should be commended for challenging his own assumptions, following the facts no matter where they lead, and for having the courage to do all this thinking out loud so that the rest of us have a chance to benefit from it. The fact that the article in question has a distinct atheistic angle to it doesn't diminish its broader appeal.

As for me, I think I'd be willing to shave a short amount of time off my life for "the pleasures of the hearth". But as Sam so incisively points out, there are broader ethical considerations.

Interesting stuff, IMO.

[brianedwards]

Yes it is a weak analogy, but the article isn't without merit. His point isn't to liken religion to wood fires, but to highlight people's reluctance to accept reason at the expense of dearly held beliefs. Of course, that in itself is stating the obvious I suppose, but what's interesting is how that applies to people regardless of their backgrounds or their apparent intellect. I don't think he is preaching to the choir, for the reasons Travis points out, but even if he were I don't see why he should be condemned for that. Those with whom he is in opposition are certainly guilty of the same strategy. I could resort here to suggesting he is merely "fighting fire with fire" but that would be a most unforgivable pun.

Interesting post Travis, thanks.

B.