Title: The Four Horsemen: The Conversation That Sparked an Atheist Revolution
Authors: Richard Dawkins, Daniel C. Dennett, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens (Foreword by Stephen Fry)
TLDR: Four prominent atheist intellectuals, known as the “Four Horsemen”, engage in a lively discussion about the dangers of religious dogma, the importance of reason and evidence, and the possibility of a world without faith. They debate the nature of faith, the challenges of criticizing religion, and the potential for a secular society to embrace the cultural legacy of religion while rejecting its irrational foundations.
Foreword by Stephen Fry:
Stephen Fry introduces the four intellectuals and the context of their meeting. He highlights their individual contributions to the “New Atheist” movement through their influential books: Sam Harris’s “The End of Faith” and “Letter to a Christian Nation,” Daniel Dennett’s “Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon,” Richard Dawkins’s “The God Delusion,” and Christopher Hitchens’s “God Is Not Great.” These books challenged the role of religion in society, sparking debate and empowering humanism and secularism.
Fry discusses the intense backlash the Four Horsemen faced from religious figures, who attempted to position themselves as victims of “New Atheism” despite centuries of holding the dominant position in society. He argues that the Four Horsemen’s contributions are relevant to contemporary issues such as freedom of speech, blasphemy, and the dangers of social media censorship.
Fry concludes by emphasizing the importance of the Horsemen’s core principle: testing assertions through logic and verifiable facts. He argues that their approach, while firm, is not intended to mock individual believers but rather to examine the validity of religious claims in the public arena.
The Hubris of Religion, the Humility of Science, and the Intellectual and Moral Courage of Atheism by Richard Dawkins:
Dawkins begins by recalling the emergence of the “New Atheist” movement and the publication of the four key books that spearheaded it. He contextualizes the conversation transcript within the Atheist Alliance International conference in 2007, where the Four Horsemen gathered for their only filmed discussion.
Dawkins then tackles the accusation of arrogance often levelled at atheists, contrasting it with the supposed humility of religion. He argues that religious claims of human significance in a vast universe are inherently arrogant and narcissistic. He criticizes the tendency of theologians to “make stuff up,” citing examples of precise but arbitrary rules for living imposed by religious leaders, particularly within Islam. He juxtaposes this with the scientific approach, which thrives on acknowledging ignorance and actively seeking answers through observation and experimentation.
Dawkins highlights the intellectual courage required to embrace atheism, particularly when confronted with fundamental existential questions like “Why is there something rather than nothing?” He argues that while emotionally challenging, the atheistic worldview compels one to face reality with honesty and accept the universe as “wonderfully and shockingly explicable” without resorting to supernatural explanations.
Dawkins concludes by celebrating the advancements of science and human ingenuity as justifications for pride in our species. He contrasts this justifiable pride with the hubris of religion, which claims to possess knowledge it has simply invented. He emphasizes the moral courage required to live a fulfilling life without relying on religious crutches and encourages atheists to “fully inhabit reality, rejoice in it, and do your best finally to leave it better than you found it.”
Letting the Neighbors Know by Daniel C. Dennett:
Dennett begins by acknowledging the difficulty in assessing the impact of public actions. He cautions against both overestimating and underestimating the power of ideas, particularly in the age of the internet. He compares the current upheaval caused by readily accessible information to the Cambrian Explosion, a period of rapid evolutionary change.
He emphasizes the enabling power of shared knowledge, allowing individuals to “come out” as atheists with less fear. Dennett introduces the concept of “sacrificial anodes” as a way for individuals to contribute to political change. He argues that ordinary citizens, by expressing their genuine beliefs, can reduce political polarization and gradually shift public opinion even without holding positions of power.
Dennett highlights the diversity of opinions among the Four Horsemen, rejecting accusations of them having a monolithic creed. He clarifies his own stance as a “good cop” who recognizes the potential social benefits of organized religion but seeks their transformation into secular institutions that don’t rely on irrational beliefs.
He concludes by advocating for the importance of being an “informing citizen” and calmly sharing one’s viewpoints with others, contributing to a more open and reasoned public discourse.
In Good Company by Sam Harris:
Harris reflects on being grouped with the other “New Atheists” and clarifies that while they shared a common concern about religious dogmatism, their collaboration was limited to infrequent encounters and the conversation documented in the book.
He highlights their shared view that religious dogmatism hinders intellectual progress and exacerbates tribalism. He uses the example of a mother losing twin daughters to microcephaly caused by the Zika virus to illustrate the absurdity of believing in an all-powerful and benevolent God. He argues that faith provides bad reasons for good actions when good reasons are readily available.
Harris emphasizes the existence of true sources of hope and consolation outside religion, such as art, literature, philosophy, and, importantly, science. He anticipates the faithful attributing the eventual cure for Zika to God despite the obvious failings of divine intervention in the girls’ suffering.
The Four Horsemen: A Discussion:
Part I:
The conversation opens with Dawkins addressing the accusations of arrogance and stridency often directed at the Four Horsemen. Dennett responds by highlighting the impossible position religion puts critics in, making it impossible to disagree without seeming rude. Hitchens adds that the Horsemen are equally entitled to be offended by certain religious pronouncements, particularly those justifying violence or suggesting morality is contingent upon a divine dictator.
The conversation explores the special status religion enjoys in being shielded from criticism, compared to other areas like art, music, or politics. The Four Horsemen agree that religious claims should be subject to the same scrutiny as any other claims about reality.
Harris points out that their criticism is more incisive than mere offense; they are also arguing that religious offense is unwarranted in the face of rational inquiry. They further discuss the condescending nature of those who defend religion not out of belief but out of fear of offending believers.
The conversation moves to the topic of “spirituality” and mystical experiences. Harris acknowledges the validity of self-transcending experiences, whether induced by meditation, drugs, or natural predisposition. He criticizes the religious hijacking of these experiences and their use to justify unfounded metaphysical claims.
The Four Horsemen discuss the concept of humility, arguing that science, with its emphasis on acknowledging ignorance and revising theories based on evidence, is far more humble than religion, which makes confident pronouncements based on faith alone. They dissect the Catholic doctrine of the Assumption of Mary, highlighting the lack of evidence and the reliance on theological interpretation of scripture to justify the claim.
The conversation concludes Part I by comparing the confidence of science in its well-established facts with the arrogance of religion in asserting fabricated truths. They celebrate the achievements of science and engineering, emphasizing the justified pride in human ingenuity.
Part II:
The discussion shifts to the possibility of changing minds and achieving progress through their criticisms. Harris argues that many people have abandoned their faith due to reasoned arguments and evidence contradicting their beliefs. He emphasizes the importance of highlighting the inconsistencies within religious doctrines and their incompatibility with scientific knowledge.
The conversation touches on the concept of “faith” as a shield against rational argumentation, as exemplified by a biologist who, despite understanding evolutionary arguments, ultimately resorted to “faith” as a justification for his beliefs.
The Four Horsemen address the challenge of cognitive dissonance, acknowledging its prevalence in various aspects of life. They debate whether it’s possible or even desirable to eradicate faith entirely. Hitchens expresses a desire for the dialectic between faith and reason to continue, arguing that it sharpens intellectual discourse. Dawkins counters that while he appreciates the historical importance of religious texts, he desires a world where people think critically and engage with evidence, finding fulfillment in understanding the natural world.
Dennett proposes a compromise: encouraging the evolution of a “virulent” faith that retains its positive social aspects while abandoning its irrational foundations. The discussion then focuses on the aesthetic and cultural legacy of religion. The Four Horsemen acknowledge the beauty and power of religious art, music, and poetry, but emphasize that this doesn’t validate the underlying beliefs. They recognize the need to address the perception that atheists are cultural vandals seeking to erase this legacy, advocating instead for a secular appreciation of its artistic merit.
The conversation addresses the challenges of criticizing Islam and whether evenhandedness is necessary or even helpful. Harris argues that the dangers posed by Islam, particularly its doctrines of jihad and martyrdom, are far more pressing and actualized than those of other religions. Dawkins stresses his concern with the truth of religious claims, which are equally false across the board.
The Four Horsemen conclude by discussing their hopes and fears for the future. Hitchens expresses pessimism, believing the forces of theocracy will ultimately prevail and destroy civilization. The others are more optimistic, hoping for a future where reason and critical thinking become the dominant mode of understanding the world, while acknowledging the ongoing struggle against unreason and its unpredictable dangers.
This summary provides a comprehensive overview of each chapter’s key arguments and highlights the main points of debate between the Four Horsemen. It aims to capture the essence of their conversation and the critical issues surrounding the conflict between faith and reason in the 21st century.