Brent & Argus

Sam Harris: A Case Study in Cognitive Dissonance

Contents

Few intellectuals have the unique ability to be confidently incorrect with such flair as Sam Harris.

A man of many opinions—most of them smug—Harris often presents himself as the final authority on rationality, only to fall into the very biases he claims to transcend.

I’ll admit to some bias against Sam. I feel into the “New Atheist” trap like many others coming of age in the early 2000s (mostly through Christopher Hitchens). No matter how much I want to agree with Sam on so many topics, there is some forced obtuseness that makes him feel like more a contrarian than a unique thinker.

Let’s take a closer look at some of his recent takes on wokeism, his anti-Trump blind spot, his views on religion, and his ominous predictions about the next election.

Sam Harris, High Priest of The New Religion

For a man who has spent his career bashing religion, Harris is so hesitant to criticize its modern secular reincarnation: wokeism.

Like a fire-and-brimstone preacher, the woke movement deals in absolutes—original sin (privilege), sacraments (DEI training), and heretics (anyone who questions the dogma). Yet Harris, who has made a career out of dissecting the irrationalities of faith, treats this new orthodoxy with kid gloves.

Instead of calling out the dangers of woke ideology (its silencing of dissent or its obsession with racial essentialism) Harris hand-waves it away as a minor issue compared to the supposed “existential threat” of MAGA.

“When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.”

G.K. Chesterton

But as we’ve seen, wokeism has institutional power. It shapes corporate policies, infiltrates academia, and dictates media narratives. If irrationality is the enemy, then surely Harris should be at least as concerned about wokeism as he is about Christianity.

Trump Lies

Harris’s disdain for Donald Trump is so intense that he once suggested he would rather see a legitimate election rigged than have Trump remain in office.

He’s so convinced of Trump’s villainy that he’s willing to abandon every principle of democracy just to keep him out of power.

And now, after a failed assassination attempt on Trump, Harris is questioning whether a bullet actually hit the former president or if it was just “shrapnel from a teleprompter.” Because that makes a difference, you know.

So then, thinking there might be some problems with a cheater’s wet dream election scenario in 2020 is world-collapsing misinformation, but half-baked conspiracy theories about ballistics is just getting to important truth?

If an anti-Trump bias so clouds his ability to discern basic facts, perhaps he should consider taking a step back from his own echo chamber.

Atheist Naivete

Harris has spent decades arguing that religion is a relic of our primitive past, a crutch for the weak-minded.

But the reality is that religious belief remains one of the most powerful motivators for human action—both for good and for ill.

Take Harris’s own example of jihadists who believe they are acting out of compassion because they sincerely think they’re guiding people to paradise.

He sees this as a damning indictment of faith, but he completely misses the flip side: the countless acts of selfless charity, moral courage, and societal stability that religion has inspired throughout history.

The abolition of slavery, the civil rights movement, and the preservation of human dignity in law all have deep religious roots.

Not only that, he misses the human need for religion. His invectives against the old religions say nothing about the far more dangerous modern organized religions: namely Leftism, Scientism, Wokeism, Materialism, and Nihilism.

The idea that we can simply discard religious moral frameworks and expect society to function the same way is the kind of naïveté only an atheist intellectual could embrace.

The Election Deniers

Harris loves to warn about “election denialism” from the right, but he seems curiously unconcerned about the left’s long history of contesting elections. Remember “Russia stole 2016”? Or Stacey Abrams refusing to concede? Or the endless claims that Bush “stole” 2000? Funny how those don’t count as threats to democracy.

Harris seems convinced that if a Democrat wins in 2028, conservatives will automatically reject the results, plunging the nation into chaos.

It’s such a tired trope, but Harris and Maher have staked their entire anti-Trump personalities on this. Trump and MAGA won’t concede an election. Strange that he handed the keys over pretty convincingly in 2021.

Scott Adams talks about this a lot – that these same people are willing to accept that every institution is potentially corrupted or corruptible — except elections. Those are 50 processes we can be 100% sure are perfect in every way. End of discussion. Stop asking questions.

Sam Harris, Meet Reality

Sam Harris loves to position himself as the high priest of rational thought.

But when it comes to wokeism, Trump, religion, and elections, his thinking is as muddled as anyone else. Perhaps more so because he refuses to acknowledge the clear effects of his own biases.

While a bit irritating, I’ll continue enjoying the spectacle of a self-proclaimed rationalist floundering in the contradictions of his own making.

Resources