Harris' thesis is not intuitive, and I don't think he did his own thesis justice in this work. I had to really think about it and debate it with friends to fully grasp it myself. And I've come to agree. You merely have to take the step of saying "morality has to do with human well-being" and then his thesis is well reasoned from there.
This is a very interesting book on morality. It is satisfyingly clear, honest and realistic. Sam Harris has successfully changed my mind multiple times in his books and lectures.
Fan of Sam Harris. Find the subject matter worthy of discussion.
About the same. Conversational style is easy to listen to.
Currently going to school for theology and philosophy so most of the books I read are on those subjects.
sam Harris is a good author and he's really great at writing books but not everyone is a scientist or a neuroscientist so sometimes following along with some of the medical terms that he gives it's kind of hard
Very thought provoking and at times mind blowing. He gets a little off tangent at times with his anti religious stuff for a bit if that bothers you but it is a great book and a must read.
Having now read Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris, I find Harris the clearest thinking of the bunch. He still begins with some seriously flawed premises and shows a galling lack of awareness of what faith means and how it works, but he does not make a complete straw man out of faith in the way both Dawkins and Hitchens do (his attack on Collins does stand in as his attack on all people of faith, in a kind of straw man argument). The book purports to try and show how science can shape human values, but he never actually explains that fundamental point -- he only points out that he thinks he can observe his way out of religion.
I loved listening to Sam Harris read his own book, I though it brought a lot of personal integrity to the words. It was brief for my taste, but I think that's only due to loving the book and craving more of it.