/lit/ - Literature

And nothing of value was lost... Life goes on.

who the shit is apostrophe? have you posted here before

>>2258902
>>2258904

u guys r edgy

he really hasn't done anything special enough to be called brilliant, sorry. name one lasting contribution he's made to any field

>>2258910
he stated his opinion extremely eloquently. He was a beast at debate and as someone who enjoys debate and logic in general, he provided me with a ton of enjoyment/knowledge/entertainment.
not to mention he provided amazing arguments against christfags.

and no contributions to any "field"? he's written something like 20+ books. if you don't appreciate authors, why are you on /lit/?

>>2258908

not anti-hitchens in the least, just curious since i've never seen you up in here before

>>2258913
yeah, 20+ books that no one will be reading any more 100 years in the future. he has produced nothing of value. he exists now only as a momentary celebrity intellectual

>>2258910
>He's popularized secular materialism and humanism more than any other person in recent memory.
>He was one of the most brilliant debaters to ever live.
>He was a great journalist.
>He challenged the left/right paradigm that poisons modern politics
>He was witty as fuck

Sad day for the edgy atheists.

Great day for the atheists who actually give a shit about not being considered dickbags. Fuck Hitchens. People like him are why theists think atheists are cynical assholes.

>>2258920
Can I borrow that crystal ball btw?

christopher hitchens isn't dead you faggots, because christopher hitchens is alex jones' alternate identity

look at their pictures and say otherwise

Watch him debate William Lane Craig regarding the existence of god. His rhetoric and appeals to emotion don't save him in this debate...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KBx4vvlbZ8

>>2258921
>He was one of the most brilliant debaters to ever live.
what the fuck, seriously

>>2258922

You are a huge moron.

>>2258922
He was honest and refused to bend over backwards unlike every other egalitarian agnostic spineless faggot. I'm sorry you still believe that bullshit deserves respect and tolerance.

>>2258922

So you don't like him because he hurt religious people's feelings?

>>2258922
The world needed an outspoken to counter the balance in outspoken religious nutjobs. Just because you fail to appreciate his arguments without associating him with "cynical assholes" doesn't mean the world can't.

>>2258936
>outspoken athiest

>>2258929
That's not even controversial. Even his most stringent detractors give him that much.

>>2258927
his rhetoric and appeals to emotion are at least more entertaining than Craig's tired old logical proofs of the existence of god, and I actually respect Hitchens for not bothering to engage them, which would have been a waste of valuable time (that could have been spent on more anti-religious propaganda)

And what did he do for academia?

>>2258927
Biola actually refused to post the video until students started speaking out. If you honestly think Craig won that debate, you're delusional beyond help.

>>2258941

You're missing the point, dipshit.

Your thread was the first news I heard on this.

And I was watching his videos only earlier today.

Just...fuck.

If you can't understand why the man was held with such reverence by his friends and even enemies, I pity you.

You don't have to agree with someone on everything to know they were a fucking incredible human being.

>>2258927

Don't be fucking stupid. One man was arguing about the divine authority of millennia old documents, and of the existence of an unprovable omnipresent deity; the other was arguing that believing in ancient myth is self-destructive and unnecessary.

How the fuck could you possibly, in any way at all, believe that the former defeated the latter?

How?

>>2258927
Craig tries using "logic" to prove something that is empirically unprovable... You have to be an idiot to think that Hitchens lost that debate.

>>2258947
when you don't have a point, there isn't one to miss, idiot

>>2258933
>>2258935
>>2258932
>>2258936
I don't think one single fucking person was swayed into changing their beliefs by Hitchens' debates. Religious debates were never about trying to prove you were right and the other side was wrong. It's about understanding the other person, their life view, and how to coexist.

All of you are edgy fucking teenagers who wouldn't say a single word to theists like Hitchens does; you're just starting shit.

I'm shedding about as many tears over his death as I was for Steve Jobs'

>>2258941
>tired old logical proofs of the existence of god

>Awww shittt son dems deductives arguments mean nothing no more.
>Derp them Crazy Christian nutjobs don't use premises and what not...
>look up the Kai Nielsen and Craig debate, a far more enlightening debate. Ask the a typical angst ridden teen who read "Why god is not great" or "The God Delusion" to sit through it, they would be bored after 20 minutes.

>>2258958
>I don't think one single fucking person was swayed into changing their beliefs by Hitchens' debates.

Thou agitated?

I just don't know how someone could drink so much and still be this brilliant.

>>2258958

Another fool of contemptible intelligence railing against Hitchens. If you people aren't trolls, then you're doing a great job of representing the stubborn, parochial ignorance and simplicity of the type Hitchens fought against his entire life. And his taking on of that thankless task is one of the reasons he is so admired by the rational.

>>2258958

>I don't think one single fucking person was swayed into changing their beliefs by Hitchens' debates.

I don't think you're very good at thinking.

>>2258942
He's a polemicist, not a scholar silly.

>>2258962
They've all been critiqued into oblivion by literally every western philosopher since Descartes. No one cares about them any more, except for the few remaining Thomists and peripheral Christian apologists like Craig. They'll only convince those who want to be convinced by them

>>2258958
>Religious debates were never about trying to prove you were right
Hitchens never tried to prove that God didn't exist, he argued that there is no reason to live your life according to something that has no rational justifiction for belief in it.

>It's about understanding the other person, their life view, and how to coexist.
No that's being an apologist.

The role model of the deviant teen atheist who quotes God is Dead and has a Bill Hicks poster in their room died today. I'd like the see the reaction of people from /sci/ if Richard Dawkins had stroke. Their so-called voice of "reason" would fade away... only to be replaced by another celebrity with the rhetoric skills of a sleazy dimestore used car salesman preaching another mass produced best seller.

>>2259072
I score this a 10 on the sanctimonious-scale. Congrats.

>>2259072

I get the feeling you were trying to be insulting. A deviant atheist teen with a bill hicks poster on his wall who looks up to christopher hitchens sounds like an awesome individual.

You'd have to be an idiot to imply otherwise.

-------

Those of you who talk about how you wish atheists would just shut dont realize how repressed the atheist position is in much of the world. They'll kill you in the middle east. Even in america, how many atheist politicians are there? Its a political death warrant.

So please, spare me your 'i'm so beyond this religious argument' stuff. Its relevant, anyone advancing the cause of reason, and the cause of atheism, deserves respect.

>>2258962
>arguments for god
>deductive
Why do people use words that they don't understand?

New atheism is the most hateful and hypocritical antitheist movement. You never see them speaking out against any religion but Christianity for no good reason. Do whatever you want, but at least stand by your principles.

>>2259124
Are you joking? Sam Harris is notoriously anti-Muslim, Hitchens has debated many Jews, and Dawkins has spoken out against Hinduism. You've obviously never read any of their works if you honestly believe that they unfairly target Christianity.

Stop regurgitating the misinformed opinions of others.

>>2259124
>'New atheism' is an academic movement in the west
>The west is made up mainly of Abraham religions
>Atheists mainly argue against Abraham religions
I'll give you three guesses as to why this may be the case.

discuss.

>>2259139
I don't care about what these people have done. I am talking about the general population of new atheists. Most of these people are 18 to 20-something liberal hipsters who are rebelling against their parents. They love eastern religion and Islam, but they hate Christianity and Judaism. ALSO, how many times has being an intolerant douchebag been the right thing to do?

>>2259147

don't just post a thing and tell everybdoy else to discuss it

have an opinion you worm

>>2259149
>Fox News characterizes these people these people are 18 to 20-something liberal hipsters.
ftfy

>>2259147
Nothing wrong. A religious person prays, a dead man knows what happends after you die. What's the matter?

Wait a second, "truth" is in caps for absolutely no reason!

I mad.

>>2259149
So many things wrong with this I don't know where to begin.

First, arguing against a concept or philosophy simply based on the people who adhere to it HAS to be some sort of logical fallacy. Second, "They love eastern religion and Islam" is a completely unqualified criticism. Where is your proof? I could say that it's the complete opposite in my case, but we'd both be spewing anecdotal nonsense.
Third, new atheism isn't intolerant against people, they're intolerance is directed toward bad ideas. Equating a dislike of religion to a form of racism or hatred is pretty fucking stupid.

>>2259149
>They love eastern religion and Islam, but they hate Christianity and Judaism

lmao there are people who actually believe this

>>2259162
it was for emphasis.

Finished: 'Letters to a Young Contrarian' last night, only to wake up to find out he's dead.

Feels bad man.

>>2259164
Do I really need proof to say that? How can one be so unaware of so many things? Oh I see. You're saying it's anecdotal and somehow less true to make yourself appear correct. Also, how can one be intolerant of ideas and not have any intolerance of those who adhere to them? It's not like you have some deep love for Christians and want to save them, right? ALSO, you just contradicted yourself because many new atheists do hate Christianity because of the people who follow it and not because of the philosophy.

>>2259166
Ask anybody why Christianity is bad and they will tell you how many deaths it has caused. Ask anybody why Islam is bad and they will call you a racist. Seriously. Go do it right now.

>>2259202
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLiku08FlRg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=an7TaDQ5Yo0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjpqeZirDqU

>new atheism only targets Christianity

>>2259202
Please can you read this
>>2259143
Even if you were right (you are not) this explains it.

>>2259202
Like I said, it isn't the case with me. The reason it may seem that new atheists happen to criticize Christianity more often is simply because it's the preponderant religion in the west.

And refusing to criticize ideas for fear of being considered "intolerant" is ridiculous. You don't have to hate someone to disagree with them. I'm sure Rick Warren was a genuine friend of Hitchens. I don't hate my Aunt for being a creationist, I just try to tell her how unscientific her views are.

He was a tool; entertaining, but a tool none-the-less.

He was a cunt, but a brilliantly intelligent cunt.
His brother is just a cunt, and he's still alive.

>>2259236
Tool implies that he's being used. I disagree with some of his views, but i'm sure that definitely wasn't the case.

>>2259221
You need a huge 'Hitch Slap'.

Why do all the cool guys turn into batshit insane Republicans? He wasn't even fucking American. Democrats are extreme right compared to British politics.

Guy could write though. Shame his brother can't. Nasty bigoted piece of shit.

>>2259202
>>2259202
Shot yourself in the foot. Hitchens raised the point about the left refusing to criticize Islam himself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3OTS5gSO0E

>>2259256
Then I respect him.

>>2259216
They're scholars and they're not afraid to talk bad about how violent and shitty Islam is. Like the guy I quoted above said, the left IS afraid to criticize Islam. Now I would like some anti-Hindu and anti-Buddhist videos please.

>>2259261
Hindus and Buddhists are harmless and irrelevant. Christianity, Islam and Judaism is not.

>>2259261
Causation, correlation, ect. Most western atheists come from Christian families, most of their friends and/or audience are Christian, hence they speak about Christianity more often.

>>2259273
HAHAHAHAHA

>>2259273
Have you ever talked to a buddhist? Read their shit? They're obnoxious.

he was a pretty cool guy who doesn't afraid of anything

>>2259275
Don't bother he seems to be ignoring this argument as it doesn't suit him like any other dutiful Christian.

>>2259278
>obnoxious
Wow, someone should stop them!

>>2259273
Laughing aside, new atheism is intolerance of ALL RELIGIOUS INFLUENCE.

>>2259284
Nobody ever won an argument by making shit up.

>>2259291
But they have no influence, sure I agree they should not be encouraged in any way, but hindus and buddhists make up a very small minority of the audience any anti-theist literature is going to reach.

There also is virtually no extremism, other than a bit of butthurt between India and Pakistan, I assume the muslims aren't the only ones throwing stones.

>>2259291
>making shit up
How? Please address either post.
>>2259275
>>2259143

>>2259291
>Nobody ever won an argument by making shit up.
Yes they have. Have you never heard of politics? the court system? the lead up to the iraq war?

>>2258922
By trying not to be edgy you are in fact engaging in the same dialogue as other pretentious hacks.

I wish everyone like you ITT died instead of Hitchens.

>>2259317
1. I'm not religious.
2. It's totally true of course.
3. Why is it true though? Trying to reach more people just seems like pandering. These guys should disparage all religions equally instead of trying to appeal to people. They're scholars for fuck's sake.

>>2259202
so you hate atheism because you hate the people, not the philosophy

>>2259346
Well I specifically do not like new atheism because I do not believe in their perceived war between religion and science.

Ahahaha, op your a troll. You've said it yourself that your only purpose on lit is to troll. Fuck off.

>>2259354
Oh, you must be an idiot.

>>2259371
Alright, bro.

>>2259337
>Trying to reach more people just seems like pandering.
No it seems like a logical allocation of time.

>These guys should disparage all religions equally instead of trying to appeal to people.
You don't understand the movement. It is not entirely scholarly. It is also trying to convince people in the disbelief in God. Although they do engage with other religions, it would be illogical to engage all equally. If there was a similar movement in India you would see them engage mainly with Hindu/Islam believers. This is so painstaking obviously obvious that I'm not sure how you think you can argue with this.

>>2259381
>not a war of religion vs science

What do you want me to say to you? point out the fact that like 50% of americans dont accept evolution? That people think the earth is 10k years old? That religion has systematically opposed almost every scientific advancement throughout history? Stem cell research comes to mind.

You must be an idiot.

>>2259385
Look like the guy ran of.

>>2259385
So you admit they're pandering, but you won't call it pandering. It's so easy to call it what it really is. I also asked for some anti-Hinduism videos and haven't gotten any yet, instead being told they are harmless and irrelevant which contradicts everything new atheism stands for.

>>2259389
I don't know how what you're saying relates to me. Only religious whackjobs call proven science wrong and they should be stopped because they are a problem.

>>2259416
>Only religious whackjobs call proven science wrong and they should be stopped because they are a problem.

Now you're maintaining an inconsistent position, or backtracking.

Either way, shove off.

---

You expect WESTERN INTELLECTUALS to attack hinduism? Sorry, they're attacking RELEVANT religions. Religions affecting the world they live in, that they know something about. The abrahamic religions.

And stop with your term 'new atheism' its fucking retarded. There has always been ONE atheism. Its the position that 'god does not exist'

it has not changed. Advances in science have just given us answers better than 'god did it'

>>2259424
I don't expect anybody to attack anybody. Only immature idiots attack people. I expect members of the new atheism movement to stand by the principle that all religion should be countered and contradicted. You're not going anywhere with this though so I'm not going to talk to you anymore. If anybody more sensible is here, I'd rather speak to them.

>>2259416
First off, it is not pandering

pandering present participle of pan·der
Verb: Gratify or indulge (an immoral or distasteful desire, need, or habit or a person with such a desire, etc.)

There is nothing immoral or distasteful about ontological debate. Also the people that they debate with don't desire to hear how their beliefs are fallacious. So now that we both agree that they aren't pandering, I'll put forward my definition 'a logical allocation of time' as what makes the most sense. As when trying to persuade the most amount of people of your beliefs, it would make sense to allot the most amount time tackling the beliefs of the majority. Please try and address that, instead of dodging the question with tautology otherwise I will conclude that you have no argument to counter this point.

>>2259450
>>2259446
>>2259424
>>2259416

maybe you guys can exchange contact info so you can continue your boring offtopic slapfight someplace otehr than /lit/?

>>2259454
>Get off /lit/, we need more trigfag appreciation threads and Tao Lin threads.

>>2259446

YOu're mad you're being called on your bullshit.

New atheism doesnt exist. You mean 'atheists'

How do you expect prominent western atheists to argue against religions they are unfamiliar with?

They advance arguments valid against EVERY religion, and in that sense, they do repudiate the hindu religions so your critique has no legs to stand on.

>I don't expect anybody to attack anybody. Only immature idiots attack people

Are you an idiot? Once again i have to question how dumb you must be.

LASTLY

>I expect members of the new atheism movement to stand by the principle that all religion should be countered and contradicted.

Since when is this a principle of atheism?
Where is hinduism encroaching on the lives of others and forcing itself into public schools? Thats right, its not. So why would they argue against it?

The fact that you DONT see atheists constantly 'bitching' about hinduism and bhuddism DOES tell you something. It tells you that if religion knows enough to keep itself out of the public domain, out of our schools, then it WILL BE LEFT ALONE largely.

So, fuck off.

>>2259454
>hitchens thread
>offtopic argument

nope.jpg try again

>>2259164

You know what? How about you shut the fuck up, you retarded dumbfucking cum-guzzling cunt. Your arguments are most of a child, as so is your behaviour. You provide no facts to your debates.

Also fuck your shitty name, how the HELL do you expect anyone to take you seriously with it? You look like a child, you act like a child, I also saw your pictures in a while back and you DO look like a fucking child. You must be autistic. Why don't you go back to /mu/ and start making retarded ILAAAVU JESAS KARIRISTTTT threads, it's where you belong. Stop acting like you're intelligent and capable of debating things, because you aren't. Pseudo intellectual hipster cunt. Inb4 u raged u lost, etc, etc.

>waking up in a world without Hitch

>>2259464

bro none of these post even mention hitchens

its just yall chewing your cud

why not post about book?

>>2259465
I'm guessing this is parody.

>mfw when just yesterday I had learnt about the guy and was looking for his books today

I think I killed him by thinking of him guys. Quick, give me another name.

>>2259479
Justin Bieber

>>2259579

Lol Yeah! Justin Bieber - I hate HER! (Lolz amirite?) Im 14 but I like proper music like The beatles and Iron Maiden, I hate that bieber pop shit so much I wish his early and gruesome death because apparently Im a plebeian sociopath.

Thumbs up this comment if you listen to real music!!

>>2259596
Well, Who else would you recommend?

>>2259638

How about the hundreds of thousands of militant religious fundamentalists, to stay on topic, who plague the developing world with false information and warfare?

How about solidly convicted child rapists or murderers?

How about well known Gang cartel operators or human traffickers?

It really is a display of this generation's intellectual suicide when pop culture has us convinced that an 'annoying singer' (because that really is ALL he is - abit annoying) deserves DEATH.

>>2259715

You take life too seriously.

>>2259730

Well that was my serious answer, you asked for what other name you would suggest and I gave you an honest factual answer.

My shorter, actual, real life answer would be: I dunno, but that bieber shit was never funny, are you retarded?

>>2259737

You seem to have confused me with the other gentleman with a distaste for popular culture.

>talk all the shit you want butthurt neckbeards

I thought atheist were the ones who liked Hitchens.

I've been called an atheist (never would I say I am though) and I have never heard of this guy until he died.

Was he the atheist messiah?

atheist atheist atheist atheist
sounds just like
christian christian christian christian to me.

ftfy, OP