The Limits to Free Speech, Reaction Paper Example

The central point of discussion in the first chapter is the people’s indulgence in religious beliefs. Of more concern is that religion has given birth to various dangerous activities associated directly or indirectly with religion. Harris believes that faith should no longer be used as a basis for carrying out unlawful activities. He also believes that religious tolerance should not be an excuse for causing terror on other. Indeed, Harris seems to allude to a future with religious faith without, as Harris puts it, believers killing each other over their interpretation of books. If this can happen, then I believe that the world will be free from religious segregation, religious aggression and sacred religious sects.

I have no problem with people challenging the so called “meaning of life” or the belief in meta-physical divine through deity beliefs. The only problem is when religion becomes organized around a system of dogmatic belief laid out by a writing, supposed written by a Supreme Being, stressing the use of terror or any other bad thing on non-believers.

While most of these writing are usually well intended, fundamentalists apply literal interpretations to do terrible things. There is no way a book written by God can claim all non believers to be evil. Only fundamentalists who do not reason can lay claim to such reasoning. Basically, Harris suggests a distressing picture of the future where people are doomed to repeat their past if they do not address the dogmatic beliefs and faith in the literal translation of mythological books.

The first paragraph begins with a story regarding a young suicide bomber whose parents feel great pride that their son has died with other people in a suicide attack. Most clearly, the reason for the parents to be proud is based on the religious belief that people who engage in holy wars are rewarded for dying in that cause.

This brings out the most primal problem with modern religion. Without realizing people who believe in different gods are engaging in war against each other for the same reason; to favor their particular gods.

Harris has gone into the extreme by suggesting that for humans to survive all religions must be eliminated. I may be an atheist, but I beg to disagree. Eliminating religion will eliminate and completely destroy human civilization, something that will not be good for humanity.

According to Harris, People tend to coordinate themselves into sects according to which religious claims which they accept and which is compatible with their belief. And the central basis of all religions is that all non believers are perceived as mere depositories and are dangerously incompatible. Virtually all regions promise eternal happiness for those who observe and obey certain aspects of the religion. Consequently believers will do all that the religion requires in order to live happily in eternity. For example, the boy in the bus blast believes that by killing other, he not only guarantees himself eternal happiness, but his family as well. People are deep into religious beliefs that even killing another person are alright so long as the belief says so.

The indulgence in religious beliefs had made it impossible to criticize other religion. Criticizing another person’s religion is somewhat a taboo, even if the religion involves murdering others.

Works Cited

Sam Harris. Reason in Exile. New York :Cengage, 1992. Print