Margaret Fell vs. Sam Harris

Margaret Fell is referred to as the ‘Mother’ of Quakers because of pressing for more liberal values that are socially progressive, while at the same time maintaining a conservative viewpoint as far as religion was concerned. She promoted the role of women in both religious aspects and social aspects, and encouraged the emulation of the examples set by other women speakers. She provided evidence from the Bible and believed in the equality of men and women. Although it can be argued that the selectivity of certain passages from the Bible can lead to numerous interpretations, her methodology in presenting her argument makes it seem very plausible. She develops a model through which she offers her argument and selects specific Biblical passages in a subtle manner, and goes to great lengths to support her findings by providing detailed explanations of how the passages related to her principles. She believed that only women with limited knowledge, and not all women affiliated with a religious organization, should remain silent. Her efforts resulted in the Quakers becoming the largest group of women publishing during the 17th century. Sam Harris is very different from her because he launches a relentless attack on Muslims. Margaret Fell uses quotes from the Bible in a subtle manner and provides a context through which each argument is developed, while Sam Harris provides about five pages worth of ‘selected’ quotations from the Quran to support his view of the threat posed by Muslims. He does not make any further use of the quotes in his argument and even mentions ‘This is all desperately tedious, of course’, which begs the question of putting the quotes in his argument in the first place

Margaret Fell presented an ever-present theme in the Bible regarding the role of women and selected passages that supported her argument, providing allegorical as well as literal interpretation while responding to opposing passages. In this respect, Sam Harris completely fails to acknowledge the allegorical aspect of certain theological aspects in Islam. He mentions that the inner or ‘greater’ Jihad involves waging war against one’s sinfulness but overlooks it. Instead, he chooses to argue that the outer or ‘lesser’ Jihad, waging war against infidels, is ‘a central feature of the faith’ (The End of Faith, 111). He also fails to compare the parallel between violence in Islam and violence in early Christianity, although Islam is a relatively young religion compared to Christianity. While this is not an excuse for the terrorist attacks perpetrated by extremist Muslim groups, a distinct lack of mentioning violence in other religions is an indication of shirking away from opposing circumstances, an issue that Margaret Fell addresses in her arguments.

Margaret Fell aspired to elevate the role of women in religion and society, and worked towards the goal of establishing Quakerism. I read an interview conducted with Sam Harris, where he advocates Nationalism and argues against the necessity of the existence of any form of religion. This highlights a very important difference because Margaret Fell aimed to promote Quakerism, while Sam Harris dismissed the importance of religion in modern society. The argument put forth by Margaret Fell plausible not only because it proposes the equality of men and women, but also the presentation and development of the argument are critical aspects of the credibility of her reasoning.

Source: Harris, Sam. ‘The End of Faith’
Fell, Margaret