Hitchens and mortality... - by jtr7
Vernon on 7/8/2010 at 23:14
Yeah me too, I mean fuck
I just linked the first thing in Google *pro*
SD on 8/8/2010 at 02:24
Quote Posted by CCCToad
You shouldn't feel any shame in agnosticism. While it may be far less trendy than Atheism, agnosticism is by far the most logical religious view: it does not rule out the presence of beings that exist outside of normal human perception, yet does not make any assumptions about them.
Are you agnostic about leprechauns too?
Anyway, agnosticism and atheism aren't mutually exclusive positions.
Aerothorn on 8/8/2010 at 02:28
Fair enough, RBJ. I admit that I objected more to the post-facto articles of his I read than the ones leading up to the war (which I don't believe I ever read). Of course, the whole "bad for us but maybe good for them" argument becomes complicated if you have to factor in the chance of the cost of the Iraq War (in every sense) seriously damaging the United States and preventing it from doing OTHER good things, etc. This really isn't the topic for a debate on such a thing - it's just one of the key things I always remember about him. That and the fact that I became somewhat embittered against him after reading countless Slate articles of his that got on my nerves - but I stopped reading him years ago, so I can't remember what exactly they are or why they annoyed me so much. Great argument, I know.
Muzman on 8/8/2010 at 12:53
Quote Posted by CCCToad
You shouldn't feel any shame in agnosticism. While it may be far less trendy than Atheism, agnosticism is by far the most logical religious view: it does not rule out the presence of beings that exist outside of normal human perception, yet does not make any assumptions about them.
There's a bit of talk about this lately and the problem is that the definition seems to assume some logical address of god/religion/faith etc as if that were necessary to it. Traditionally speaking this is understandable as that is how it has been. Where it becomes inadequate is the increasing numbers of people who have never had any sort of faith and feel no need to address the issue at all. Literally speaking there's no better term than Atheist for defining such people really.
People contort themselves in an effort to avoid being associated with angry ex-theists, deists, fence sitting humanists or whatever, but all this seems roughly as bad as endless reformation redefinition or The People's front of Judea' v 'The Judean peoples' front' a lot of the time.
The really fun bit for me is that so much of Western philosophy is a long narrative of addressing god, in one way or another, as intellectual necessity. The idea of a generation springing up who have no need to even bother with any of that is pretty fascinating (and plenty of people would probably say it's not possible, without even being serious apologists. But we'll see).
Epos Nix on 8/8/2010 at 13:26
Quote Posted by N'Al
Fair enough. I still don't think it's really an issue, but then again maybe I just haven't met too many vocal atheists who won't shut up. Yet.
Cue vocal atheist:
Quote Posted by SD
Are you agnostic about leprechauns too?
Sometimes I wonder if this stuff is scripted...
N'Al on 8/8/2010 at 13:38
:D
Aerothorn on 8/8/2010 at 16:18
Where the hell has SD been, anyway? Between his reduced presence and the loss of aguywhoplaysthief, I feel like we've lost the two extremist pillars of this community.
SD on 8/8/2010 at 16:48
Quote Posted by Epos Nix
Sometimes I wonder if this stuff is scripted...
No, it's all spontaneous. You can do that when you're creating your own opinions instead of borrowing them wholesale from a 2,000 year old book!
Quote Posted by Aerothorn
Where the hell has SD been, anyway? Between his reduced presence and the loss of aguywhoplaysthief, I feel like we've lost the two extremist pillars of this community.
Extremist (!) :laff:
Well, I think you win the prize for being the first person on here to ever want me to
post more.
I do miss AGWPT though, where is that crazy mofo anyway?
Law12389 on 8/8/2010 at 18:23
As much as I love listening to Hitchens I couldn't help but lose some love for the man in the four horsemen video.
He says (or rather affirms) that if he had the choice, he wouldn't get rid of religion because really, he just loves the arguement and doesn't want it to stop. I can see his point about discussion and debate improving character etc. but as Dawkins says, there are plenty of other things to argue about (plenty of worthwhile things).
Perhaps it's just my cynical nature, but I couldn't help but think that maybe it was because he is such a renowned figure in the 'god debate', and that if atheism finally won so to speak, his position would become obsolete and therefore it was kind of a selfish stance. This as opposed to Dawkins' who just wants to get rid of religion because he thinks it detrimental to society. It was actually quite funny to see how astonished he was to hear Hitchens saying it.
I'm sad to hear this news though. Although as he says, it was to be expected with his lifestyle taken into consideration. At least he doesn't have to worry about the "eternal torment" when he finally does leave us.
Epos Nix on 8/8/2010 at 19:22
Quote:
He says (or rather affirms) that if he had the choice, he wouldn't get rid of religion because really, he just loves the arguement and doesn't want it to stop.
To prove his point, let's delete every religion thread that has been posted on TTLG and watch the total post count drop by half. And of those posts, I'm gonna say 85% are people who say they would want nothing more than for religion to cease to be and yet would be thoroughly bored if it actually was (I'm looking at you Mr. Agnosticism vs. Apatheism).
