The conflict between religion and science is inherent and (very nearly) zero-sum. The success of science often comes at the expense of religious dogma; the maintenance of religious dogma always comes at the expense of science.

Sam Harris’s quote, "The conflict between religion and science is inherent and (very nearly) zero-sum," expresses the idea that the relationship between these two domains is fundamentally antagonistic. Harris argues that science and religion are often at odds, with the progress of one often undermining or challenging the validity of the other. In a zero-sum conflict, the gain of one side leads to the loss of the other. As science advances and uncovers more about the natural world, it frequently contradicts long-held religious beliefs or dogma, creating tension between the two.

Harris highlights that the "success of science often comes at the expense of religious dogma." This suggests that as scientific discoveries challenge previously accepted religious narratives, the authority of religious institutions or traditional beliefs is weakened. The more we understand the natural world through empirical research and critical thinking, the more it calls into question explanations based on faith or supernatural claims. Conversely, Harris argues that "the maintenance of religious dogma always comes at the expense of science," meaning that for religion to maintain its doctrines and authority, it often has to resist or dismiss scientific findings that contradict those beliefs.

This conflict, according to Harris, is not just historical but deeply inherent in the nature of each system. Religion, often based on faith, tradition, and the unprovable, can be at odds with science, which is grounded in evidence, reason, and empirical verification. Harris, a prominent philosopher and neuroscientist, has often discussed the ways in which religious belief can conflict with the rational inquiry at the heart of scientific progress.

The origin of this quote lies in Harris’s broader critique of religion and his advocacy for scientific reasoning. As one of the leading voices in the New Atheism movement, Harris has frequently discussed the tensions between faith and reason, arguing that religion can be detrimental to societal progress. His perspective on the conflict between science and religion reflects his belief that for humanity to thrive, we must prioritize rational thought, critical thinking, and scientific inquiry over dogmatic belief systems.