PDA

View Full Version : "In Defense of Witchcraft" by Sam Harris (remarks about the reviews on atheist books)


Questioninggeller
26th June 2007, 05:37 PM
"In Defense of Witchcraft"
By Sam Harris
June 26, 2007
Huffingtonpost.com

Imagine that the year is 1507, and life is difficult. Crops fail, good people suffer instantaneous and horrifying turns of bad luck, and even the children of royalty regularly die before they have taken their first steps. As it turns out, everyone understands the cause of these calamities: it is witchcraft. Not all witchcraft is at fault, of course -- there are "white" witches who use their powers to heal -- but there is no question that some witches have formed an alliance with the Devil. Happily, the Church has produced many learned and energetic men who are equal to this challenge, and each year hundreds of women are put to death for casting spells upon their innocent neighbors.
...
What sort of criticism would these misguided authors likely encounter? In the following essay, I present excerpts from actual reviews of recent atheist bestsellers, replacing terms like "religion," "God," and "atheist" with terms like "witchcraft," "the Devil," and "skeptic." Observe how much intellectual progress we have made in the last five hundred years:
...


Full: huffingtonpost.com (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/in-defense-of-witchcraft_b_53865.html) or richarddawkins.net (http://richarddawkins.net/article,1338,In-Defense-of-Witchcraft,Sam-Harris)

Miss Anthrope
26th June 2007, 10:24 PM
A clever little idea he had there. Made for a fun read. I wonder how many people will actually understand his point, though.

ChristineR
26th June 2007, 10:46 PM
I don't get it. First of all, Wicca is a religion and prayer is a magic spell and the Devil is a god, so it's not real shocking that syntactically everything works out. Where it loses me is in the social differences between these things. The place of witchcraft in 1502 is not equivalent to the place of Christianity in 2007. Although some people (then as now) tried casting spells, they weren't a powerful social group. No one wrote essays defending witchcraft in 1502.

Ultimately all I get out of it is that you can use the exact same words to defend unpopular religions as well as popular ones. Sure, people scoff at once popular religions, and the article would work just as well with references to Zeus, but religious people seem to ignore the obvious parallels between Zeus and Yahweh, so will they be struck by the less correct parallel between Satan and Yahweh?

quixotecoyote
26th June 2007, 10:49 PM
I think the idea is to use those differences. By picking something shameful in the Christian hertiage (witchcraft persecution), it's emphasising that the same mindset was in place to believe in the evil witch as there is now to believe in God. That's how it seems to me anyway.

CFLarsen
27th June 2007, 12:17 AM
I don't get it. First of all, Wicca is a religion and prayer is a magic spell and the Devil is a god, so it's not real shocking that syntactically everything works out. Where it loses me is in the social differences between these things. The place of witchcraft in 1502 is not equivalent to the place of Christianity in 2007. Although some people (then as now) tried casting spells, they weren't a powerful social group.

What is the difference between condemning someone by referring to God and condemning someone by referring to the Devil?

No one wrote essays defending witchcraft in 1502.

Well, the witches may have scribbed a few things, but they couldn't find a publisher. :)

Ultimately all I get out of it is that you can use the exact same words to defend unpopular religions as well as popular ones. Sure, people scoff at once popular religions, and the article would work just as well with references to Zeus, but religious people seem to ignore the obvious parallels between Zeus and Yahweh, so will they be struck by the less correct parallel between Satan and Yahweh?

That's not the point of the essay. Zeus, to Christians, is just a false god, where Satan is the antithesis to God. The point is that there is no difference between Satan and Yahweh - they are exchangeable.

The only difference is that Yahweh had a better ad agency....