Sam Harris on suicide bombing

Here is a video in which Harris talks about suicide bombings in the muslim world, among other topics.


Basically he is standing on moral high grounds regarding suicide bombings, and he choose that as example of why religions are bad and particularly martyrdom in islam.

My objections to him are the following :

Sam Harris seems to be ok with bombing as long as it is not suicide bombing, what a weird philosophical argument. Let's just say he is ok with the western way of killing people. Does he think that if suicide bombing were formally prohibited by islam that there would be no bombing at all ? Does Harris want to bomb people in order to prevent them from doing suicide bombing ? From my philosophical point of view, I would say that it is more honourable to die with your victim than to bomb people with drones from far away comfortably seated in your living room with your kids playing around. Are "atheist bombs" better in some sense than "religious bombs" ?

Regardless, it would be better if there were no bombs at all, and for me religion is outdated software.

originally posted by: gosseyn
Here is a video in which Harris talks about suicide bombings in the muslim world, among other topics.


Basically he is standing on moral high grounds regarding suicide bombings, and he choose that as example of why religions are bad and particularly martyrdom in islam.

My objections to him are the following :

Sam Harris seems to be ok with bombing as long as it is not suicide bombing, what a weird philosophical argument. Let's just say he is ok with the western way of killing people. Does he think that if suicide bombing were formally prohibited by islam that there would be no bombing at all ? Does Harris want to bomb people in order to prevent them from doing suicide bombing ? From my philosophical point of view, I would say that it is more honourable to die with your victim than to bomb people with drones from far away comfortably seated in your living room with your kids playing around. Are "atheist bombs" better in some sense than "religious bombs" ?

Regardless, it would be better if there were no bombs at all, and for me religion is outdated software.

As a Muslim I will say that suicide bombing is forbidden. And the killing of any form of innocence, be it Jew,Christan ect ect.
People that adopted this extreme form of innovative Islam are not concidered to be Muslim by the majority of the umma (Islamic nation/community) but rather they are that of the khawarij (people who teachings and ideas that differ or deveiat from Islam)

a reply to: gosseyn

Hey, i dont have 10 mins to watch the vid, let alone over an hour - but i wholeheartedly agree with your post.

The heroism of (for example) western soldiers who sacrifice their life, hoping to save another is openly celebrated; war films glorify such acts and as kids we used to emulate them when playing at war like good little soldiers to be. We are told that this is right and proper.

But when when your family have been bombed to smithereens and your country is rubble; when you have no future and a war-machine that you cannot otherwise stop is grinding your people and way of life into the dust - for some reason we are supposed to hate or disdain those who find a way to fight back?

Suicide bombing is an entirely legitimate way to wage war and those who seek to categorise ways of killing into the acceptable and unacceptable are really missing the point.

Excellent OP

yeah i agree with the other guys, no religion really agrees to suicide bombings.

Muslims dont like it, Christians dont like it and general political figures hate it.

If you are gunna kill people, fine do it, but dont cap yourself in the process thats just f'ed up

a reply to: gosseyn
What can one small individual do against overwhelming odds?
Seems like an age old question to the downtrodden.
Add to that the loss of family and friends, maybe all of the family and friends.
Looking at it from that standpoint, you'd be crazy not to strap on a bomb vest and go destroy a large chunk of your enemy.
Suicide bombers have only figured out the one thing they have left to give is all.
Don't you wish you could stand by your convictions so steadfast?
That being said I abhor bombs, they have a way of catching too many innocents.

a reply to: gosseyn

Sam Harris seems to be ok with bombing as long as it is not suicide bombing, what a weird philosophical argument. Let's just say he is ok with the western way of killing people. Does he think that if suicide bombing were formally prohibited by islam that there would be no bombing at all ? Does Harris want to bomb people in order to prevent them from doing suicide bombing ? From my philosophical point of view, I would say that it is more honourable to die with your victim than to bomb people with drones from far away comfortably seated in your living room with your kids playing around. Are "atheist bombs" better in some sense than "religious bombs" ?

I don't see how Harris talking about suicide bombs equates to him being ok with other types of bombing.

On the other hand, saying one type of bombing and killing is more "honorable" than the next, is despicable. In both cases, the victims are unaware of their impending doom, likely without time nor preparation to defend themselves. There is nothing honorable about that.

you have to understand that some people want to kill a lot of ppl and we cant let them. therefore we kill them before they kill more. like hitler. had we not killed him millions of more jews might have died.

thats why sometimes it is necessary to kill.

now on the why ppl suicide bomb is their religion. hope this helps

originally posted by: gosseyn
Basically he is standing on moral high grounds regarding suicide bombings, and he choose that as example of why religions are bad and particularly martyrdom in islam.

Harris was using it as an example of evidence that turning to violent religion is not entirely based on desperation or poverty. In his example, he was referring to religious people who are well educated with phds who commit terrorist attacks. He was also discussing the metaphysical reasoning of suicide bombing briefly, and that it does matter.

Sam Harris seems to be ok with bombing as long as it is not suicide bombing, what a weird philosophical argument. Let's just say he is ok with the western way of killing people.

He actually explicitly rejects that in this video. He repeatedly reminds Chris Hedges that 'you are attacking views I don't hold' (paraphrasing) when Hedges goes on a rant about this very issue. So we cannot say Harris is okay with the 'Western' way of killing people, in fact I believe it would be safe to say that Harris also has issue with American politics being dominated by Christianity.

Harris was mostly referring to the conclusions religion can lead to both metaphysical and logical, and how these conclusions are not isolated to the impoverished.

I think often these types of debates are prone to straw men, presumptuous accusations of racism, and other ad hominem strategies to draw attention away from discussing parts of the actual issue. If the debate was 'what is more evil, suicide bombing civilians or nuking them' then these would be fair points.