• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Christopher Hitchens (1949-2011)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Jake

Jake

Once a Buckeye, always a Buckeye
‘17 The Deuce Champ
Fantasy Baseball Champ
'18 The Deuce Champ
    • Hitchens died of cancer 3 days ago. Rather than an obit, some bits of philosophy and some rips of Palin, Obama, Bush and others.

    Nothing optional - from homosexuality to adultery - is ever made punishable unless those who do the prohibiting (and exact the fierce punishment) have a repressed desire to participate.

    Owners of dogs will have noticed that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they will think you are god. Whereas owners of cats are compelled to realize that, if you provide them with food and water and affection, they draw the conclusion that they are god.

    If Falwell had been given an enema, he could have been buried in a matchbox.
    Click to expand...



    Hitchens best zingers
     
    I'm sure theists think Hitchens was an "asshole" but that term is often in the eye of the beholder.


    By the way, Hitchens didn't write God Delusion. That's by Richard Dawkins. :wink:
     
    Upvote 0
    Gatorubet;2066794; said:
    ?Owners of dogs will have noticed that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they will think you are god. Whereas owners of cats are compelled to realize that, if you provide them with food and water and affection, they draw the conclusion that they are god.?

    ?The Portable Atheist: Essential Readings for the Non-Believer, 2007


    I see why you like him. :biggrin:
    Click to expand...

    Hitchens said some other things that I'm sure you would like more than I like them. Despite that, I'd rather be in hell with Hitchens than in heaven with this clown.

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FmIMAA46A8"]Fischer: God Sent Christopher Hitchens to Hell Because He Loved Him - YouTube[/ame]
     
    Upvote 0
    Jake;2066790; said:
    Hitchens died of cancer 3 days ago. Rather than an obit, some bits of philosophy and some rips of Palin, Obama, Bush and others.
    Click to expand...
    Probably my favorite journalist. Great wit, always an interesting perspective - he will be missed.

    Unfortunately, he failed to realize that "science" could be every bit as dogmatic and totalitarian as "religion", but no one's perfect.
     
    Upvote 0
    He smoked too much, drank too much and probably fucked too much - but, enough about his best qualities.

    A great read, even if you disagreed with every word he wrote.

    Also enjoyed seeing him run intellectual rings around the favored guest of the week on shows like Real Time. Even when I disagreed with him.
     
    Upvote 0
    Personally, found him greatly overrated. While entertaining due to his sharp wit, I think too many confused his intellectual humor for keen insight and wisdom--and I say this in regards to not only his views on religion, but politics and culture.

    In addition, he was a bully. He would vilify his opponents with ad hominem attacks, but if anyone ever treated him in the same manner he would throw a tantrum and threaten to leave a discussion. Likewise, in his debates he often avoided the big intellectual heavy weights. Interestingly, I was listening to an interview several days before Hitchen's death in which Eric Metaxas made this very criticism, of how Hitchens (and Dawkins) avoid engagement with the scholarly leaders in modern theology on the existence of God.

    In regards to Hitchen's views on God and Christianity, I have only recently come to realize how out-of-date his views were--primarily due to reading I have been doing on the history of higher criticism. Most of his attacks relied upon theories that are at least a century old and very few respected scholars, secular or religious, hold as valid today.

    Personally, I find Hitchen's less-known brother, Peter, a more enjoyable read. Anyone interested in the God question who has read Christopher, should try Peter's Rage Against God, which is part autobiographic explaining his own conversion from atheism to Christianity, and part a response to his brother's God is not Great.
     
    Last edited:
    Upvote 0
    LordJeffBuck;2067633; said:
    Unfortunately, he failed to realize that "science" could be every bit as dogmatic and totalitarian as "religion", but no one's perfect.
    Click to expand...

    Actually, science is only viewed as "dogmatic and totalitarian" by people who either don't understand the meaning of the word, or simply choose to misuse it (often for religious and/or political purposes).

    But again, no one's perfect.
     
    Upvote 0
    Jake;2068126; said:
    Actually, science is only viewed as "dogmatic and totalitarian" by people who either don't understand the meaning of the word, or simply choose to misuse it (often for religious and/or political purposes).

    But again, no one's perfect.
    Click to expand...



    "could be" was a key part of LJB's claim yet your rebuttal was for a statement without it.

    Dogmatic is hardly limited to religious circles, as you often demonstrate :)
     
    Last edited:
    Upvote 0
    buckeyegrad;2068003; said:
    Personally, I find Hitchen's less-known brother, Peter, a more enjoyable read. Anyone interested in the God question who has read Christopher, should try Peter's Rage Against God, which is part autobiographic explaining his own conversion from atheism to Christianity, and part a response to his brother's God is not Great.
    Click to expand...
    Wasn't that the book where he basically rationalized his conversion by saying that atheist Soviet Russia is bad and Christian England is good?
     
    Upvote 0
    Buckeye513;2068833; said:
    Wasn't that the book where he basically rationalized his conversion by saying that atheist Soviet Russia is bad and Christian England is good?
    Click to expand...

    That is an important thread in the book, but a gross simplification of the entire work and his conversion. Of course it is very relevant for the autobiographical part of the book as Peter was a British journalist in the Soviet Union and his direct observations caused him to loose faith in modern utopian pursuits. It is also relevant for the book as a counter to Christopher's claims that religion is bad for societies. Peter saw the Western alternative to a religious society directly in the Soviet Union (as well as historically in Nazi Germany) and realized religion, specifically the Judeo-Christian tradition, as a benefit to the West.
     
    Upvote 0
    MaxBuck;2069353; said:
    Atheists typically fail to recognize that atheism is itself a religion. As opposed to agnosticism, which is really absence of religion.
    Click to expand...
    Um, no. That's not at all correct. Atheism is simply non-believe in a god or gods. It has no creed, or doctrine or authoritative committee. I would bet that you are atheist towards thousands of gods that mankind has worshiped over history, are you saying that somehow you are part of some religious organization with regard to non-belief in those gods?

    And agnosticism is the view that certain claims (like the existence of God) are unknowable. Since the very nature of God is unknowable, both theists and atheists are agnostic to a certain degree.
     
    Upvote 0
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top