Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 112

Thread: Christopher Hitchens Dies, Age 62

  1. #41
    obscurely fossiliferous Stoniphi's Avatar
    Posts
    2,750
    Denial is both the most common coping strategy employed by us humans and the least effective.

    "The island is not sinking."

  2. #42
    All aboard, me Hearties! Captain Kremmen's Avatar
    Posts
    11,071
    Hitchens and Kim Jong
    Dead in one week.
    The Babble Bashers will think their prayers are being answered.

  3. #43
    Caput gerat lupinum GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Stoniphi View Post
    Denial is both the most common coping strategy employed by us humans and the least effective.

    "The island is not sinking."
    Yes seemingly, and that's strange, isn't it? Is it part of some more elemental process? If so, why? Surely it can't be an effective response to adversity. Does a chimp live in denial? Does a crocodile live in denial?

  4. #44
    Just putting it out there..

    Come on.. Someone had to!

  5. #45
    Caput gerat lupinum GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,595
    Finally someone spotted it. That's worth one point. The rest of you should hang your heads in shame.

  6. #46
    Robbing the Shalebridge Cradle CptBork's Avatar
    Posts
    4,479
    Quote Originally Posted by joepistole View Post
    I listened to a preacher this evening speak of Hitchens. It found it interesting that he even brought up the topic. But he was telling folks that Hitchens was now a believer and in Hell. These guys never cease to impress me.
    It just exposes a weakness in their own faith that they would even care what Hitchens might have thought on his deathbed. An argument should be judged based on the merits of its substance, not the fact that Abe Lincoln or Christopher Hitchens or Kim Kardashian said so.

  7. #47
    Caput gerat lupinum GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,595
    Humh. I wonder what Christopher Hitchens might have said about that.

  8. #48
    had a mod but let him go spidergoat's Avatar
    Posts
    46,445
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Kremmen View Post
    Hitchens and Kim Jong
    Dead in one week.
    The Babble Bashers will think their prayers are being answered.
    kim Jong was one the world's most worshipped religious leaders. Hitchens would be happy about his death too.

  9. #49
    had a mod but let him go spidergoat's Avatar
    Posts
    46,445
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiassa View Post
    And in all that, the allegedly socialist Hitchens never really seems to get around to the kind of scorn he aims at religion.

    It's kind of like a question we have going on at Sciforums right now: Does religion cause violence?

    Whether it is Catholics molesting boys, Jews and Muslims trying to tear each other's throats out, or even the Christianized determination against Communism that led Americans to proclaim national theistic faith on their currency, it's never actually religion. Rather, religion is the metaphor exploited to hide the underlying greed. In this context, there are a number of nontheistic religions that never receive the sort of critical scorn so many, including Hitchens, pour on theistic faith.

    One can easily suggest that Hitchens' antipathy toward religion stems from, or was exacerbated by, his mother's suicide pact with a Christian preacher. But in all I've ever seen of the man, I never heard him indict the marketplace of the late twentieth and early twenty-first century with anything comparable to the ferocity he showed religion.

    Simply addressing the "capitalist-communist duality" is what it is. But he never seemed to actually strike after the heart of the matter. Whether church or capitalism or communism or whatever, the fundamental problem rests within our very humanity, and as long as we continue to argue about symptoms, we will never be able to even attempt to cure the disease.

    Even back in ancient times, the Jewish genocide against the Amelekites was not really about God and religion. The early fitnas were not actually about religion, nor were the Crusades. The Pilgrims, what happened in Salem, and even the Protestant usurping of Maryland were not about religion. None of it is ever actually about religion. The same problems religious faith seems to bring to the world can be found with or without religion.

    Not China against Buddhists or Falun Dafa; not Protestants and Catholics in Ireland.

    People will do anything for greed, even steal the very breath of the gods.

    Hitchens, much like Dawkins, was not so much about liberating humanity from the human neuroses manifesting themselves through religious conduct, but, rather, legitimizing his own hatred of other people.

    This is why his cultish canonization is problematic. In twenty or fifty years, perhaps Hitchens will, in fact, stand out as a luminary of the age. I rather suspect, though, that he will be recalled in the long memory of our human experience, as a popular fad, perhaps merely symptomatic of a troubled age.
    Your reasoning is typically liberal wishful thinking. You don't wish to think there is anything basically wrong with religion because it contradicts your ideology that all the world's religions are just different ways of practicing the same kind of thing and that they can all get along in a perfect multicultural world. So in this context, Hitchens must be acting out a personal vendetta against religion due to his mother's death, not that religion is a major source of world conflict. You further make the fallacy that because human reasons can be found for some aspects of religious persecution, that religion has nothing to do with ALL cases of religious persecution and violence. If anything this has to do with the falsity of religion, since it's a human creation and can serve human ends. But it also makes good people do bad things, like hate their own children because they violate some religious rule. And faith makes political and religious leaders above criticism. You may say that priests wanted to molest children anyway, but faith gave them the infrastructure of authority to get away with it. You aren't going to trust your children with just some dude, but if he pretends to be holy and above earthly desires, you don't question it.

    We don't worship Hitchens, we admire him for his eloquence and clarity. We don't hate people, we hate that religion robs people of something that makes us human, our ability to use reason to distinguish truth from fiction.

    By the way, Hitchens did write extensively on capitalism and Marxism.
    Last edited by spidergoat; 12-19-11 at 01:03 PM.

  10. #50
    Robbing the Shalebridge Cradle CptBork's Avatar
    Posts
    4,479
    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP View Post
    Humh. I wonder what Christopher Hitchens might have said about that.
    If you watched his recent interview with Anderson Cooper, he said that religious fundamentalists would probably start throwing around wild claims about him accepting "God" on his deathbed. He said that if such stories are passed around, they're either lies or else the byproduct of something he might say while tripping out hard on painkillers. I'm sure at the end of the day he'd readily laugh at the fact so many people care about what he says just because of who he is and not because of any specific arguments for or against an issue; doubly so for those who've convinced themselves beyond any doubt that they speak for some abstract divinity and want to co-opt his words and views to their cause.

  11. #51
    Caput gerat lupinum GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,595
    I resent your implication that I would used his words to the advantage of the great Myuu. Such things are beneath him, and beneath me, his godhead on earth.

    As for caring about him strictly because of who he is: to whom are you referring? I admire his writings because I find them eloquent, poignant, thought-provoking, frank, logical, and because they piss off Sam and Tiassa.

    I'm not sad he's dead because I'll miss his label; I'm sad because a great polemicist with a solid moral grounding is gone. He shocked even me at times with his comments, but his support of same forced me to re-evaluate my positions on issues. He changed my mind. That's a good thing.

  12. #52
    Caput gerat lupinum GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,595
    Quote Originally Posted by spidergoat View Post
    kim Jong was one the world's most worshipped religious leaders. Hitchens would be happy about his death too.
    I +1 to that one. I wonder if there's a gloating petition going around.

  13. #53
    Bloodthirsty Barbarian
    Posts
    9,391
    We may not have Hitch to kick around any more, but at least we still have the bemusing spectacle of his inferiors tying themselves into rhetorical knots in search of some way to dismiss - rather than address - his output. And always in visible ignorance of major facets of the guy and his work, to boot.

    All of which I've long found to be the case study par excellence on the ineffectual left.

  14. #54
    Let us not launch the boat ... Tiassa's Avatar
    Posts
    30,111

    Cool Thank you for that, Geoff

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP

    Well, that was a pack of nonsense as a response.

    Why is this becoming so common? "No, I disagree! Your substantial response has no substance!" I find this professionally sometimes too. Is it that same kind of baseless opposition that sustains the anti-global warming collective? It's bizarre.
    Well, at least the hypothesis is reaffirmed. That is, I'm sort of chuckling at that complaint from you. After all, you're pretty fluent with the approach.

    However, in the larger picture, the fact that you offer no real answer to the issue is apparent.

    Like Dawkins, Hitchens' criticisms of religion are valid in a pissing contest. But the reality is that even if we purged humanity of theistic religion, the same human influences of greed that pervert the great holy texts will still exist. As such, it does not seem that Hitchens' criticism is really intended to accomplish anything but denigrate various groups of people. That is, he does not demonstrate a similar antipathy toward the neurosis that arises when the primal human animal attempts to participate in that quixotic venture known as "civilization".

    Such narrow approaches only lead to the familiar adage, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

  15. #55
    Bloodthirsty Barbarian
    Posts
    9,391
    That criticism is so generic as to make me wonder whether you've actually read much of any of Hitchens' output.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiassa View Post
    Like <controversial figure>, <target>'s criticisms of <object of criticism> are valid in a pissing contest. But the reality is that even if we purged humanity of <object of criticism>, the same human influences of greed that pervert the <object of criticism> will still exist. As such, it does not seem that <target>'s criticism is really intended to accomplish anything but denigrate various groups of people. That is, he does not demonstrate a similar antipathy toward the neurosis that arises when the primal human animal attempts to participate in that quixotic venture known as "civilization".

    Such narrow approaches only lead to the familiar adage, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."
    That should make a handy template for dismissing anything critical that anyone has to say about anything, as misguided and tangential.

    And since the "groups of people" getting denigrated appear to be, well, damned near every major human population on Earth, I'm wondering what the implication about his motives or outlook or whatever was supposed to be. Is this an oblique charge of anti-Islamic bigotry? Because this is a guy famous for going after Mother Teresa and Gandhi as well, not to mention Thatcher and Stalin. So, exactly which "group" is he supposed to be an overwrought shill for?

  16. #56
    C'mon, get happy! chimpkin's Avatar
    Posts
    4,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Bells View Post
    Just putting it out there..

    Come on.. Someone had to!
    Reminds me of my mom... Not the leathery skin but the river in question...

  17. #57
    Caput gerat lupinum GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,595

    You're welcome; regroup and attack again

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiassa View Post
    Well, at least the hypothesis is reaffirmed. That is, I'm sort of chuckling at that complaint from you. After all, you're pretty fluent with the approach.

    However, in the larger picture, the fact that you offer no real answer to the issue is apparent.
    God, not this crap again. You throw up a couple of long-versed complaints, neither of which panned out in the most basic element: being familiar with the body of work you're dismissing. I think I know the name of this tune of yours: ad hominem and dive for the deck. Is there a reason I should take your request for a solution seriously, knowing that it will just come back in another disjoint and implausible form?

    Like Dawkins, Hitchens' criticisms of religion are valid in a pissing contest. But the reality is that even if we purged humanity of theistic religion, the same human influences of greed that pervert the great holy texts will still exist. As such, it does not seem that Hitchens' criticism is really intended to accomplish anything but denigrate various groups of people. That is, he does not demonstrate a similar antipathy toward the neurosis that arises when the primal human animal attempts to participate in that quixotic venture known as "civilization".

    Such narrow approaches only lead to the familiar adage, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."
    He's addressed both bosses. Your almost-adage above is so broad as to be completely useless: it amounts to the assertion that diff'rence is bad cos it makes for unequal power balances. Well, no shit. Unfortunately, it's also possible to have such differentiation without the bias of this new synthesis of human greed. Enjoy the Kool-aid while you sort out your overwhelming personality issues in this new pissing contest of your creation.

  18. #58
    C'mon, get happy! chimpkin's Avatar
    Posts
    4,416
    Hitchens. Even dead he starts arguments.

  19. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiassa View Post
    Well, at least the hypothesis is reaffirmed. That is, I'm sort of chuckling at that complaint from you. After all, you're pretty fluent with the approach.

    However, in the larger picture, the fact that you offer no real answer to the issue is apparent.

    Like Dawkins, Hitchens' criticisms of religion are valid in a pissing contest. But the reality is that even if we purged humanity of theistic religion, the same human influences of greed that pervert the great holy texts will still exist. As such, it does not seem that Hitchens' criticism is really intended to accomplish anything but denigrate various groups of people. That is, he does not demonstrate a similar antipathy toward the neurosis that arises when the primal human animal attempts to participate in that quixotic venture known as "civilization".

    Such narrow approaches only lead to the familiar adage, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."
    He never claimed differently though. His anger was that religion fed on that greed, made it worse. It was not the people who believed that angered him as much as it was the leadership of religious and non-religious organisations, those who preyed on the insecurities of mankind to further their own means.

    And I think that is what many people missed about Hitchens.

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by chimpkin View Post
    Reminds me of my mom... Not the leathery skin but the river in question...
    You know, it was actually my very Catholic parents who pointed me in Hitchen's direction and they too agreed with some of what he had to say, especially about the Catholic leadership. My own mother, who admired Mother Theresa for example, will be the first to state that she was manipulative and had a very public persona that she wanted to portray, but that in private, she was driven to succeed, not for the public as she tried to portray herself, but for her own means. My mother read Hitchen's articles at Slate, one could almost say religiously. While she did not agree with all that he said and like me, found some of it quite repulsive, she could not deny that some of his observations were correct.

    Like his accusation against Pope Benedict, how he was not interested in defrocking and reporting a priest that used the confessional to rape hundreds of children, but was more interested in lowering the age of confession for children, which put more children in the path of priests who used that to commit further abuse. And how Pope Benedict was more interested in preserving the Church and blatantly ignored and protected paedophiles. That is where Hitchens excelled and for that, he should be praised.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. By kmguru in forum SciFi & Fantasy
    Last Post: 04-17-08, 12:39 AM
    Replies: 39
  2. By cato in forum Religion Archives
    Last Post: 03-31-08, 12:10 AM
    Replies: 6
  3. By cosmictraveler in forum Free Thoughts
    Last Post: 01-27-08, 12:10 PM
    Replies: 2
  4. By kenworth in forum Politics
    Last Post: 05-19-07, 07:16 AM
    Replies: 10
  5. By Syzygys in forum Religion Archives
    Last Post: 05-05-07, 10:27 PM
    Replies: 0

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •