By Sam Harris
The moment it was announced that Christopher Hitchens was sick with cancer, eulogies began spilling into print and from the podium. No one wanted to deny the possibility that he would recover, of course, but neither could we let the admiration we felt for him go unexpressed. It is a cliché to say that he was one of a kind and none can fill his shoes—but Hitch was and none can. In his case not even the most effusive tributes ring hollow. There was simply no one like him.
More: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/hitch/
What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.
Join the discussion
Popular Posts
-
Mr Steve Wasserman, Christopher Hitchens' literary agent, kindly replied to my query about a possible memorial. Posted with permission. ...
-
May 12, 2010. The Veritas Forum. Christopher Hitchens debates John Haldane on 'We Don't Do God'? Secularism and Faith in the Pub...
-
By Christopher Hitchens Ever since Tom Lehrer recorded his imperishable anti-Christmas ditty all those years ago, the small but growing... -
Why Evolution Is True has a great post on Hitchens encounter with 8 year old Mason, who wanted to know what books she should read. Read... -
Jeremy Paxman interviews Christopher Hitchens in Washington D.C. Full interview on BBC2, Nov 29, 7.30pm.
-
June 1, 2010. Christopher Hitchens interviewed on BBC on his memoir Hitch-22.
-
Questioning the moral heroism of India’s most revered figure. By Christopher Hitchens "JOSEPH LELYVELD SUBTLY tips his hand in his... -
In The Year of Magical Thinking, the 2005 best-seller, Joan Didion dissected the trauma of losing her husband, John Gregory Dunne. With Blue...
Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Paine
Baruch Spinoza
George Orwell
Bertrand Russell
Leon Trotsky
Rosa Luxemburg
Socrates
8 comments:
keep putting the argument sam
for argument's sake
for hitchs' sake
for all of our sakes
It was a shock to me to hear he died, even though I knew he was very ill. Ever since I "met" him on you tube, together with Sam Harris and Daniel Dennet, my view on religion changed from " everybody has a right to his own beliefs" to " but those beliefs are so unbelievably childish and downright unbelievable". I really want to thank him for existing and I hope his views and eloquency will last an eternity....
Hitchens had some entertainment value. That's about it. If God exists, then Hitchens is in trouble. If God does not exist, then Hitchens is merely dead. Bantering about this, ever so eloquently, will not change the facts which are only available through faith on both sides of this issue. I think Hitchens made a bad bet. I won't make the same bet since I believe God has sufficiently revealed himself. Therefore, I would be betting against the odds. So, Hitchens is dead and perhaps regretting his decision right now. But the God debate continues. I bet it continues from now on. (It has been so decreed.) Many throughout history have cast their vote against a faith in God. That faith still thrives, but they don't. I wish his influence would die with him, but it won't. His legacy is merely another saga in the God debate. He just ramped it up some. He gave those who are trying to defeat faith more to think about. Of course, they will never be able to come to any healthy conclusion for their own lives. Their heavenly spiritual lives will be the most minimal possible. They will simply maximize their own ultimate suffering.
HAHAHA I hope the cretinious twaddle from ANON up top is written by someone spoofing Otis from the Simpsons. It's that good.
This blithering idiot who commented above me has some serious explaining to do. Why is it that when god created humans he made the only one's capable of rationally coming to a sound conclusion that their was not a single shred of evidence for his existence and created a majority who was doomed to ignorance, fear, and delusion? Why did he create non-believers who were so intelligently able to question the integrity of the masses and the few elite who controlled them? Most believers have simply just not had the chance, desire, or requisite objectivity to sift through all the evidence that clearly shows no sign of a creator, especially one who is involved in our affairs. The most you can say in response to my question is that it's all part of the plan. What's the point of worrying about a plan that no one seems to be able to figure out? There is no evidence of a plan. If I constantly sat worried about an axe murderer coming through my door and killing me I'd be immobilized with fear. Similarly, if I sit worried about what god's plan is I allow for the same fear and delusion. Especially delusion. Hitchens was one of the few people today who saw the ridiculousness of that and attacked it as it should be attacked. With contempt, indignation, and rational argument. It isn't fair to all of us who realize this world is almost certainly the only one we get and that we should do our best to make it a better place, not attempt to get it ready for the apocalypse which is what many religious are attempting to do right now. All they care about is making the people of this world ready to be raptured with no regard for the here and now and no regard for the future of this place. Religion is poison. Slowly killing us in hopes that god will see how good we did self-poisoning and pat us on the head.
Right, faith. That's the answer for everyone to arrive at a healthy conclusion for their own lives. To believe in magic with no evidence, but with faith instead. Good job. Maybe you're wrong about your conception of whether or not blue fairies are better than red ones, and then you're in trouble too.
Anonymous,
If there is a God, then Hitchens is safe. A benevolent God who cares about the furthering of the human race will only commend Hitch for fighting tyranny and all those who kill and oppress in 'His' name.
The vengeful, egotistical god created by man who needs constant worship and whatnot, smacks of exactly that: something created by men.
I tend to take Hitch's side on this issue -- a bit more agnostic about it perhaps. But it seems to me that the goodness and moral tendency in humans is the evidence of that tendency in a god. (If there is one.)
Post a Comment