Friday, December 16, 2011

Hitchens is Not Great



Christopher Hitchens, lunatic author of God is Not Great, is finally dead yesterday at age 62, a victim of his own  debauched lifestyle.

42 comments:

Ironmistress said...

So far nobody has survived alive.

jewish philosopher said...

However I still don't understand how idiots like this are qualified to tell me what to think and how to live.

Mighty Garnel Ironheart said...

I'll say Baruch Dayan Emes but not out of any sympathy for the bastard. It took the Ribono shel Olam long enough to get around to dealing with him.

Sam Hamad Yousef said...

"However I still don't understand how idiots like this are qualified to tell me what to think and how to live."

This is exactly how i feel about idiots that are weak enough to believe in a god, a magician-creator. You are jealous of him... and at your age, it's very sad. You are no one. Poor you.

Anonymous said...

Hatred based on religious preferences...

You know who else did that? I'll give you a hint, he was really big in Germany back in the first half of the 20th century.

Anonymous said...

he did not tell anyone what to think, just to think... which you clearly do not do effectively.

jewish philosopher said...

"This is exactly how i feel about idiots that are weak enough to believe in a god, a magician-creator."

I suppose Hitchens however was the master of self control. Like for example when he dumped his pregnant wife for another woman.

http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/media/features/868/index5.html

"Hatred based on religious preferences..."

I believe the atheist Sam Harris has advocated verbal intolerance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Harris_(author)#Conversational_intolerance

"he did not tell anyone what to think"

On 1/29/2009 Hitchens called male circumcision disgusting, wicked genital mutilation. 

http://www.youtube.com/v/U93ZiR692l4

Which implies that most Jews should go to prison for child abuse.

That's in spite of the fact that on 3/28/2007, the United Nations had officially recommended male circumcision as an important intervention to reduce the risk of HIV infection in men.

http://www.who.int/hiv/mediacentre/news68/en/index.html

natschuster said...

Anonymous at 4:33:

If you are refering to Hitler, then maybe yuo should read what Hitler actually wrote. His whole thing was race based Darwinism, not religion. the Aryans where a race, not a religion. He considered Jews a race, not a religion.

natschuster said...

SMY:

You might not believe in a maigician creator, but yuo believe that a universe can magically pop into existance out of nothing, that it can magically arrainged itsefl to accomodate life, that life can magically form out of simple molecules, that bacteria can magically turn into blue whales, that a bunch of neurons can magically form a mind. Are yuo sure you are the stong one?

natschuster said...

Anonnymous at 4:46:

Dawkins said that anyone who denies evolution is evil. He also said that religious people are worse than child molesters.

And Sam Harris said that it is okay to kill religious people because it is a form of preemptive slef defense. He also said that all religious people are guilty of enabling the religious fanatics. Who's the real hater?

Alex said...

"finally dead yesterday at age 62, a victim of his own debauched lifestyle."

We know he drank and smoke, but his death is probably only related to his smoking, seeing that he died of esophageal cancer. Thus, all you can really say is that he was a victim of his smoking. If you want to call smoking an example of a debauched lifestyle, then you'll have to say the same about my mom. She smoked for about twenty years. Would you like to say that?

Ironmistress said...

male circumcision as an important intervention to reduce the risk of HIV infection in men.

And amputation is an important intervention to reduce the risks of twisted ankle on both genders.

Given to the very nature of circumcision and its psychological effects, it is no wonder that Woody Allen is the stereotype of Jewish men, and not Mark Spitz.

Already Rambam covered pretty well the effects of circumcision and what is its real purpose, and that women far more prefer natural men over circumcized. It is not one or two shabbos goy who has shtuped the rabbi's wife for apparent reasons.

In my honest opinion, circumcision is mutilation - regardless of sex - when it is not done for medical reasons.

Ironmistress said...

On 1/29/2009 Hitchens called male circumcision disgusting, wicked genital mutilation.

http://www.youtube.com/v/U93ZiR692l4


Hitchens himself had Jewish mother, which makes him a genetic Jew.

I think, as a Jew, he had right to express his opinion of the customs of his own people.

jewish philosopher said...

"We know he drank and smoke, but his death is probably only related to his smoking, seeing that he died of esophageal cancer."

Considering his overall lifestyle, it seems likely that if smoking hadn't killed him them something else soon would have.

What I think is interesting is the way Hitchens, in the article I link to

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2007/10/hitchens200710

has such a stupid attitude regarding his lifestyle:

"I’d noticed a touch of decline here and there, but one puts these things down to Anno Domini and the acquirement of seniority. A bit of a stomach gives a chap a position in society. A glass of refreshment, in my view, never hurt anybody. This walking business is overrated: I mastered the art of doing it when I was quite small, and in any case, what are taxis for? Smoking is a vice, I will admit, but one has to have a hobby."

Now as an atheist, I assume Hitchens had the highest regard for science. And any expert physician would have told him that he was clearly killing himself. As we know now, he would be dead a little over four years after writing these words. Yet he simply jokes, chuckles and giggles about it all. That's what atheism is really all about. Addiction. Denying reality. Jokes. LOL.

"In my honest opinion, circumcision is mutilation - regardless of sex - when it is not done for medical reasons. "

So you believe, as Hitchens apparently did, that the World Health Organization is advocating child abuse?

"I think, as a Jew, he had right to express his opinion of the customs of his own people."

His Jewish ancestry was pretty vague and as far as I know has not been independently verified.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens#Views_on_religion

And I don't think it gives him any rights to anything.

Jeff said...

I have not been able to discern what people are actually arguing about in this thread.

Hitchens was a provocative writer, he had a big mouth, and probably wasn't the world's healthiest or nicest person. That's all there is to say about him. I don't think anybody here disagrees with these assertions. Nobody, including atheists, see him as an "authority".

How did this slide into the same ridiculous arguments that come up over and over again about "Darwinism" and evolution?

jewish philosopher said...

I believe there have been dozens if not hundreds of people who have been influenced to convert from orthodox Judaism to atheism by Hitchens writings and "debates". However I hope people will be a little more skeptical about him now, considering what a fool he obviously was.

Ironmistress said...

His Jewish ancestry was pretty vague and as far as I know has not been independently verified.

It doesn't matter. As an apparent insider he certainly has his right to express his opinion - and even if he wasn't, the law still guarantee the freedom of expression. The freedom of expression is a stronger freedom than freedom of religion.

My personal opinion is that Hitchens was a foul-mouthed snotty philanderer who was by no means philosiphically par to great Agnostic philosopher Bertrand Russell, not to speak about Atheist scientist Stephen Hawking. He was certainly as good PR to Atheists as Josif Stalin was to Socialists.

jewish philosopher said...

It seems like Hawking does believe in God, in some form.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/10/31/us-pope-hawking-idUSTRE49U6E220081031

Also, incidentally, I know of no noteworthy scientific discoveries made by Hawking, although he is famous as a popular science writer.

Russell was an advocate and practitioner of sexual promiscuity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_love#Turn_of_the_20th_century

who wrote “Practically all advanced opinion in Europe believes that the world’s ills can only be cured by socialism.” (article in New Republic 3/22/1922)

Clearly a genius.

Ironmistress said...

Okay, make Hawking then an Agnostic. Like me and Albert Einstein ;-) Hawking postulated the Hawking Radiation by which the black holes disintegrate, and he also postulated the black hole entropy. Here his discoveries.

Russell was very strict Atheist and Socialist on his early years - and an advocate of free love. He lived long enough to come to his senses and soften his opinions as he saw the true nature of USSR.

jewish philosopher said...

Hawking made some predictions about black holes, some of which turned out to be correct. I'm not sure how significant that is. He's mainly known for his popular science writing.

Alex said...

"Considering his overall lifestyle, it seems likely that if smoking hadn't killed him them something else soon would have."
If that's the case, then your statement, "finally dead yesterday at age 62, a victim of his own debauched lifestyle" has to be changed.

Ironmistress said...

Hawking made some predictions about black holes, some of which turned out to be correct. I'm not sure how significant that is. He's mainly known for his popular science writing.

He is the most notable astrophysicist alive.

jewish philosopher said...

Hitchens died as a result of esophageal cancer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens#Esophageal_cancer_and_death

There are a number of risk factors for esophageal cancer, among them:

Tobacco smoking and heavy alcohol use increase the risk, and together appear to increase the risk more than either individually. Tobacco and/or alcohol account for approximately 90% of all esophageal squamous cell carcinomas.

Obesity increases the risk of adenocarcinoma fourfold.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esophageal_cancer#Increased_risk

Hitchens' smoking and drinking habits are well known.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens#Smoking_and_drinking

In a photo taken just before his cancer diagnosis, he looks obese to me.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/8388695/Godless-in-Tumourville-Christopher-Hitchens-interview.html

So, although I am not a physician and he was not under my care, I think the remark that Hitchens died a victim of his own debauched lifestyle is probably very accurate.

"He is the most notable astrophysicist alive."

Who says?

Ironmistress said...

"He is the most notable astrophysicist alive."

Who says?


Here. And, of course, there is Wikipedia.

Oh, and Sam Harris, BTW is a Jew by his ethnic background. With no qualms of his birth.

As are a lot of others.

jewish philosopher said...

"Here."

It just says he's famous. Agreed.

"Sam Harris, BTW is a Jew by his ethnic background"

There has never been a shortage of Jewish traitors. Hanukkah, beginning Tuesday night, commemorates the victory of orthodox Jews over hellenized Jews.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanukkah#Modern_scholarship
 
I don't believe Hitchens was one of them, however.

Jeff said...

"I think the remark that Hitchens died a victim of his own debauched lifestyle is probably very accurate."

I think that the same could probably be said of about 50% of Americans (including orthodox Jews) who are obese, inactive and eat a crappy diet, and thus put themselves at risk for diabetes, heart disease and colon cancer.

Come to think of it, life is a dangerous business.

Ironmistress said...

There has never been a shortage of Jewish traitors.

Abundance of traitors implies there may be something faulty with the agenda itself.

It is funny that when a Jew abandons his religion, he usually becomes an Atheist. When a Christian abandons his, he usually becomes an Agnostic.

Show me God exists and you'll get a believer on me. Show me Finns are one of the Ten Lost Tribes and I'll promise to become baalat t'shuva. But until then, I will cite Siddhartha Gotama Buddha:

Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

jewish philosopher said...

"I think that the same could probably be said of about 50% of Americans (including orthodox Jews) who are obese, inactive and eat a crappy diet, and thus put themselves at risk for diabetes, heart disease and colon cancer."

Actually, I don't think that more than 10% of orthodox Jews have a Hitchens-level of unhealthy life style. In my neighborhood, I know of two individuals, out of about 200 people over 16, who smoke. I know of no one who drinks heavily. I know of perhaps 20 obese people, most of them not more so than Hitchens.

So here you have a community of people, in Hitchens eyes all of us evil, wicked, child abusing, 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_Is_Not_Great#Chapter_Sixteen:_Is_Religion_Child_Abuse.3F

all of us he, the admirer of Marx and Lenin, would probably have sent straight to prison if he could have, yet we're following scientific advice more than he was.

On the other hand Hitchens, the great champion of science and reason

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_Is_Not_Great#Chapter_Nineteen:_In_Conclusion:_The_Need_for_a_New_Enlightenment

was in his personal life entirely unscientific and unreasonable.

This is the archetypical atheist. A complete fake.

"Abundance of traitors implies there may be something faulty with the agenda itself."

Quite a number of Western Europeans under German occupation became Nazi collaborators.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vidkun_Quisling
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vichy_France  
http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp412.htm

So I guess that proves that the Nazis were really right.

"Show me God exists and you'll get a believer on me."

No problem.

http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/did-life-form-by-accident/

"Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders."

Exactly what I say about evolution.

http://www.trueorigin.org/spetner1.asp

ksil said...

Nat,

I believe that a universe can magically pop into existance out of nothing
I believe that it can magically arrainged itself to accomodate life
I believe that life can magically form out of simple molecules
I believe that bacteria can magically turn into blue whales
I believe that a bunch of neurons can magically form a mind.

LOL. you got it exactly right! you should write a book about this,,,,and start a religion! jeez, talk about trying to create a strawman

natschuster said...

Ksil:

So what do you believe in? Educate me. If you believe only in naturalistic science then you have to believe all the things on my list.

Ksil said...

Nat, i urge you to do some real research and not buy in to all this propaganda.

jewish philosopher said...

The atheist position seems to be that any explanation however astronomically unlikely is better than saying "God did it". Saying "space aliens did it" is better than saying "God did it". Saying "we have no idea what did it and may never know" is better than saying "God did it".

I don't see any excuse for this, except either "I want to live a guilt free life therefore at all cost I must deny God" or "I don't want the clergy to win back any prestige and authority from scientists therefore at all cost I must deny God".

Hitchens lived his life in denial not only of God but also about the consequences of alcohol and tobacco. We see what a success that was. Sooner or later reality has a way of slamming into you.

Ironmistress said...

JP, what you showed me is no evidence. It is merely indice.

That is why I am an Agnostic, not Atheist.

jewish philosopher said...

What's an "induce"?

Ironmistress said...

"Abundance of traitors implies there may be something faulty with the agenda itself."

Quite a number of Western Europeans under German occupation became Nazi collaborators.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vidkun_Quisling
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vichy_France
http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp412.htm

So I guess that proves that the Nazis were really right.


And yet far more people risked themselves in the various resistance movements against the Nazis - well knowing that should they get caught, they would get shot or beheaded. [Nazis used guillotine to execute felons.]

Some 70% of American Jews are Atheists, and over 50% of the European. Israel, however, where religiosity is far more common, is quietly slipping into theocracy - like the surrounding neighbour Islamic states. Choices appear to be between fire and frying pan. Secular legislature based on Bible or Quran does not appeal either.

Ironmistress said...

Not induce but indice. It is a judicial term for so-called circumstantial evidence: a phenomenon in which an inference is required to connect it to a conclusion of fact, like a fingerprint at the scene of a crime, but which by itself does not prove the validity of a claim.

Presence of indices (circumstantial evidences) suggest that the claim can be valid, but do not prove it bindingly.

natschuster said...

Ksil:

I have read up a great deal on all this science stuff. I'm still waiting to hear a good naturalistic explanation for all the things I mentioned above. In fact, Hawkings said that with his new theory, we don't need G-d to explain the origin of the Universe. That means that before he produced his theory, we did need G-d. And, I understand there are of course problems with his theroy.

jewish philosopher said...

"And yet far more people risked themselves in the various resistance movements against the Nazis"

Not true. The Polish Resistance, the largest in Europe, had 300,000 members

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_resistance_movement_in_World_War_II#Membership

However 900,000 Poles "discovered" they were Germans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksliste#Results 

Anyway, what's the difference? If 5% of Americans live a scrupulously healthy life style and 30% live a very unhealthy life style, which is probably about right, does that also "imply there may be something faulty with the agenda itself"?

Michael said...

It's utterly absurd that so much time has already been spent eulogizing this guy. He was a talented word-smith, with an excellent memory-so what? He may have said some worthwhile things, but they are easily cancelled out by his irresponsible diatribe on belief in God.

One of the most repugnant things about atheists of this sort (and their admirers) is that they have few qualms about launching ad-hominem attacks against others, especially if they are religious; but somehow their lack of belief in God is supposed to protect them from undergoing a similar critique of their own personal lives. As if the lack of commitment to any formal value system excludes you from the human race.

Any Rabbi who lived the lifestyle this man lived would be raked over the coals by the public, and many within the Jewish community. For Christopher Hitchens, however, it simply adds magnifies his cult of personality in the eyes of his admirers.

Talk about morally bankrupt.

Ironmistress said...

JP, as a Jew, you are now pot blaming the kettle from blackness. Here a snippet of the article you cited:

This group included ethnic Germans whose families had lived in Poland proper for centuries, and Germans (who became citizens of Poland after 1920) from the part of Germany that had been transferred to Poland after World War I. Many such ethnic Germans had married Poles and remained defiant.

Often the choice was either to sign and be regarded as a traitor by the Polish, or not to sign and be treated by the German occupation as a traitor to the Germanic race.


Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

jewish philosopher said...

"One of the most repugnant things about atheists of this sort (and their admirers) is that they have few qualms about launching ad-hominem attacks against others, especially if they are religious; but somehow their lack of belief in God is supposed to protect them from undergoing a similar critique of their own personal lives."

Atheists will claim that when a Muslim for example shoots an infidel, he is doing so because he believed Islam required him to do it. However if an atheist kills someone, this does not reflect on atheism since atheism does not command people to kill.

This is in fact true. Atheism does not ask anyone to do anything. However I would point out is what atheism does do is it unleashes man's natural instincts and, as meat eating mammals, humans, especially males, tend to be quite volatile and violent. Therefore the atheist is like a terrorist who blew up a dam which drown 10,000 people in a town downstream. Surely he cannot claim "I harmed no one; it's the water that killed 10,000 people."

Likewise, atheism didn't command Hitchens to be an obnoxious drunk - however it permitted him to be one, which is just as bad.

"Damned if you do, damned if you don't. "

The fact is that statistically there were far more collaborators than resisters in Nazi Europe. This doesn't prove Nazis were right since, after all, look how many people rushed to join them. Of course they did. And people rush to become atheists, Hellenists or whatever else is easy and convenient.     

jewish philosopher said...

"JP, what you showed me is no evidence. It is merely indice. It is a judicial term for so-called circumstantial evidence: a phenomenon in which an inference is required to connect it to a conclusion of fact, like a fingerprint at the scene of a crime, but which by itself does not prove the validity of a claim. Presence of indices (circumstantial evidences) suggest that the claim can be valid, but do not prove it bindingly."

Wrong.

A popular misconception is that circumstantial evidence is less valid or less important than direct evidence. This is only partly true: direct evidence is popularly, but mistakenly, considered more powerful. Many successful criminal prosecutions rely largely or entirely on circumstantial evidence, and civil charges are frequently based on circumstantial or indirect evidence. Much of the evidence against convicted American bomber Timothy McVeigh was circumstantial, for example. Speaking about McVeigh's trial, University of Michigan law professor Robert Precht said, "Circumstantial evidence can be, and often is much more powerful than direct evidence". The 2004 murder trial of Scott Peterson was another high-profile conviction based heavily on circumstantial evidence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence#Validity_of_circumstantial_evidence

McVeigh and Peterson were both sentenced to death by the way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh#Incarceration_and_execution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Peterson#Sentencing