A critical analysis of information delegated to someone in school, in the work place, or even functioning as a productive member in society is imperative to ensure a sufficient working knowledge of the subject material at hand. Even more so if one wishes to be a subject matter expert. In this Thematic essay, we will explore the distinct styles of communication Wilson and Harris deploys. Compare central themes, and summarize core concepts. Sam Harris is a world-renowned philosopher and neuroscientist Harris’s prolific writings on atheism and how to be good without god, has propelled him to the forefront of society. In his Ted Talk, Science can Answer Moral Questions, Harris takes on a observably straight forward approach. Using both rhetorical
…show more content…
Why would we then not use that toolbox to make decisions and judgments about societies? Science and facts should be used as the main source when making decisions and judgments. Like Wilson, Harris is looking at how the human condition, planet, and society can be improved. Edward Wilson takes a drastically different approach in To What End. Wilson is extremely wordy and less concise in the delivery. Like Harris, Wilson outlines a criticism of the modern man, which is of course a byproduct of culture. Wilson puts it like this, “They don't understand it, they prefer science fiction, they take fantasy and pseudoscience like stimulants to jolt their cerebral pleasure centers. (Wilson 1998) Wilson argues that societies historically have been judged by their ability to meet the needs of their citizens. This is the same question that Harris addresses in his Ted Talk. To What End breaches a different concept not entirely addressed by Harris, which seems to argue that modern western culture is void of meaning. A more orderly scientific based world view is likely the answer to this problem, from the perspectives of both Wilson and Harris. Essentially this is how morality can be perpetuated in a 21st century secular
Why would we then not use that toolbox to make decisions and judgments about societies? Science and facts should be used as the main source when making decisions and judgments. Like Wilson, Harris is looking at how the human condition, planet, and society can be improved. Edward Wilson takes a drastically different approach in To What End. Wilson is extremely wordy and less concise in the delivery. Like Harris, Wilson outlines a criticism of the modern man, which is of course a byproduct of culture. Wilson puts it like this, “They don't understand it, they prefer science fiction, they take fantasy and pseudoscience like stimulants to jolt their cerebral pleasure centers. (Wilson 1998) Wilson argues that societies historically have been judged by their ability to meet the needs of their citizens. This is the same question that Harris addresses in his Ted Talk. To What End breaches a different concept not entirely addressed by Harris, which seems to argue that modern western culture is void of meaning. A more orderly scientific based world view is likely the answer to this problem, from the perspectives of both Wilson and Harris. Essentially this is how morality can be perpetuated in a 21st century secular