I was just struck this morning with a realization about Sam Harris’s latest
book:
The Moral Landscape. I’m browsing through portions of it again after reading it when it was
released, and I’ve come to realize that it’s not simply a great book with an
interesting proposition regarding science and values.

It’s quite sneaky actually, although I don’t think it’s on purpose. I am
wondering now how much of it he knows about vs. what simply took on a form
and strength of its own.

Basically, his main proposition is that science can, and should, help guide
humanity toward the good life. In other words, not just in the sense of
teaching us about what is, but also telling us what should be. It’s the
demolition of a centuries-old and violently-held belief that science cannot
tell us anything about the big questions.

So, that’s a big bite, to be sure. But I think it’s the smaller one in the
book1. I think the real brilliance, and what will change the world more is
what he says about values and truth claims. In short, he seems to have
written a brilliant science book where he claims more of life’s questions
for science, but in fact he’s written one of the most important
philosophical works ever created.

The fundamental argument is that facts and values are not as separate as
people think they are, given that they are both built upon a given view of
how the world works. He writes:

He goes on to say:

This seems like a necessary detour to get to where he’s going, but this
minor point, if accepted, will fundamentally change how we view the world.
To me this is the parent idea, with one of the outcomes being the main point
that people think he’s making.

I honestly think we may be looking at one of the most important
philosophical works in a long time, and I find it amusing that most
people–including those who enjoyed the book–probably think it’s just another
“New Atheist” book. ::

[ EDIT: Removed some hyperbole. ]