PDA

View Full Version : It's raining hard-drinking, God-denying, public intellectuals



Miroir Noir
12-15-2011, 08:39 PM
RIP, Hitch. :(

Alchemy
12-15-2011, 08:46 PM
Damn it. This cool cat taught at my grad school. At least, I believe he taught a class during my first semester. I had planned on stalking him...

RIP... I hope you're not burning in some kind of hell.

HandBanana
12-15-2011, 08:52 PM
Always wanted to meet him.

RIP

Miroir Noir
12-15-2011, 08:57 PM
The final column (http://vanityfair.com/culture/2012/01/hitchens-201201) published during his life: the argument against Nietzsche's second-most famous aphorism.

tigermilkboy
12-15-2011, 09:00 PM
Hitchens always had something to say, even if you didn't like it you came away a little wiser from having listened to him. He left behind a body of work that will be talked about for many years.

stinkbutt
12-15-2011, 09:02 PM
How can you leave something behind without going anywhere amirite?

McDunnough
12-15-2011, 09:27 PM
Shit. Too fucking soon. Would've loved to see him lecture. Rest in peace, Hitchens.

Stickjohn
12-15-2011, 10:07 PM
Just read his piece in Vanity Fair the other day and decided I have to read more of his stuff. So much for redemption through suffering.

RageAgainstTheAoki
12-15-2011, 10:46 PM
Oh, man. I was really hoping he'd get well. Very sad news. This is a great collection of some of his best moments.

mQorzOS-F6w

wmgaretjax
12-16-2011, 07:23 AM
i'll just pretend the last decade and a half didn't happen and remember him as I liked him...

algunz
12-16-2011, 07:40 AM
He was a member of the "Cancer Elite." RIP

Miroir Noir
12-16-2011, 07:52 AM
i'll just pretend the last decade and a half didn't happen and remember him as I liked him...

Ironic that he passed on the day that the Iraq occupation formally ended.

VigoTheCarpathian
12-16-2011, 08:02 AM
I hope he is in Heaven and I hope Dawkins joins him soon.

jackstraw94086
12-16-2011, 08:51 AM
i'll just pretend the last decade and a half didn't happen and remember him as I liked him...

was it just his warmongering that you had issue with or his antagonism against religion?

jackstraw94086
12-16-2011, 08:51 AM
I hope he is in Heaven and I hope Dawkins joins him soon.

hoping for someone's death. How very christian of you.

VigoTheCarpathian
12-16-2011, 09:04 AM
When did i say that I believe in death? I just don't think that spouting off 2nd rate ayn randian syllogisms against peoples faith is particularly helpful or beautiful.

insbordnat
12-16-2011, 09:12 AM
Ghostbusters II was on last night. I thought of you.

TomAz
12-16-2011, 09:13 AM
what does "RIP" mean in this context?

algunz
12-16-2011, 09:20 AM
It means he's gonna RIP heaven a new one.

Miroir Noir
12-16-2011, 09:21 AM
It just means that RIP has an idiomatic, non-religious meaning, too.

wmgaretjax
12-16-2011, 09:40 AM
was it just his warmongering that you had issue with or his antagonism against religion?

the warmongering mostly. but i feel like his writing deteriorated substantially as well (the shift from substantial articles to more frequent short op-ed pieces being my principle frustration)... i agreed with him a lot about religion, but his delivery made his arguments next to worthless.

Stickjohn
12-16-2011, 10:03 AM
I really liked this 2007 interview (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2007/07/transcending-god/6076/) in The Atlantic. Seemed like a good starting place for someone not familiar with his writings (me.)

amyzzz
12-16-2011, 10:12 AM
I really liked this 2007 interview (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2007/07/transcending-god/6076/) in The Atlantic. Seemed like a good starting place for someone not familiar with his writings (me.)
Thanks. I didn't want to ask.

chunk
12-16-2011, 11:37 AM
Sad day. Always an interesting read even if you disagreed with him. I completely forgot his spiel on Mother Teresa until today.

Many more people are poor and sick because of the life of MT: Even more will be poor and sick if her example is followed. She was a fanatic, a fundamentalist, and a fraud, and a church that officially protects those who violate the innocent has given us another clear sign of where it truly stands on moral and ethical questions.

jackstraw94086
12-16-2011, 11:52 AM
When did i say that I believe in death? I just don't think that spouting off 2nd rate ayn randian syllogisms against peoples faith is particularly helpful or beautiful.

the term "2nd rate ayn randian syllogisms" says a heap about your ignorance of what either Hitchens or Ayn Rand have ever said.
Hitchens is on record as having no use for her, and I'm not sure Dawkins ever mentioned her at all. Get your shit straight.

And I have no problem with anyone's personal faith if it's kept personal, but publicly stating your hope that someone's life end soon warrants a call out.
you're not being persecuted.

jackstraw94086
12-16-2011, 11:56 AM
the warmongering mostly. but i feel like his writing deteriorated substantially as well (the shift from substantial articles to more frequent short op-ed pieces being my principle frustration)... i agreed with him a lot about religion, but his delivery made his arguments next to worthless.

I think its a bit harsh to say that his delivery somehow negated the power of his arguments. Sure he was caustic, but there was almost always heavy substance to his arguments. He was also one of the only notable debaters on religion and morality that actually varied and sharpened his arguments (especially in the last 2 years) while his opponents pretty much spewed the same blather over and over.

VigoTheCarpathian
12-16-2011, 01:25 PM
Many more people are poor and sick because of the life of MT: Even more will be poor and sick if her example is followed. She was a fanatic, a fundamentalist, and a fraud, and a church that officially protects those who violate the innocent has given us another clear sign of where it truly stands on moral and ethical questions.

Impotent school boy 'teach to fish' talk.

"If you dont spend your time helping the people around you then you're going to look back at the end of your life and ask yourself: why did I even bother living?"

- Naom Chomsky

jackstraw94086
12-16-2011, 01:47 PM
Impotent school boy 'teach to fish' talk.

"If you dont spend your time helping the people around you then you're going to look back at the end of your life and ask yourself: why did I even bother living?"

- Naom Chomsky

again you display fantastic ignorance of the actual argument. Hitchens' arguments against MT had absolutely nothing to do with "teach to fish" crap. Never did he ever suggest that the people she claimed to help should have been responsible for helping themselves. His arguments were that she was a fraud and a hypocrite, took tons of money from the Duvaliers in Haiti, and ultimately was obsessed with a cult of pain, with no intention of actually improving the living conditions of those she claimed to help. He argued that she viewed pain and suffering as saintly virtues and the ideal condition (because she said so). Not to mention her lies and propaganda regarding condom use. He was saying that those people she was claiming to help could have been better served by an honest humanitarian who worked to improve the conditions that these people lived in while feeding them.

I'm not saying you should swallow all of that without considering it, but again, it has nothing to do with "teach to fish" bullshit.
You really need to do at least a tiny bit research on some of this shit if you want anything you say on the subject to be taken seriously.

MissingPerson
12-16-2011, 01:58 PM
Impotent school boy 'teach to fish' talk.

"If you dont spend your time helping the people around you then you're going to look back at the end of your life and ask yourself: why did I even bother living?"

- Naom Chomsky

Her fetishisation of suffering was not rooted in honest humanitarian compassion, and her devout public image was a sham (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1655720,00.html) woven into her own cult of personality.

It might be worth looking into Hitchens' actual beef with aul Agnes.


MT was not a friend of the poor. She was a friend of poverty. She said that suffering was a gift from God. She spent her life opposing the only known cure for poverty, which is the empowerment of women and the emancipation of them from a livestock version of compulsory reproduction. And she was a friend to the worst of the rich, taking misappropriated money from the atrocious Duvalier family in Haiti (whose rule she praised in return) and from Charles Keating of the Lincoln Savings and Loan. Where did that money, and all the other donations, go? The primitive hospice in Calcutta was as run down when she died as it always had been—she preferred California clinics when she got sick herself—and her order always refused to publish any audit

Hitchens was not wrong in this.

http://business.in.com/printcontent/15932


In early 2000, Susan Shields, a former Missionaries sister who left the organisation “unhappy”, created a furore by saying she herself had “written receipts of $50,000” in donation but there was no sign of the “flood of money.” Forbes India talked to a volunteer in the Los Angeles office of Missionaries of Charity who admitted that “even when bread was over at the soup kitchens, none was bought unless donated.”

A report in German magazine Stern, revealed that in 1991 only seven percent of the donation received at Missionaries of Charity was used for charity. Former volunteers and people close to the Mother House revealed that the Vatican, home to the Pope, has control over the “monetary matters” ever since Missionaries of Charity came under its fold in 1965.

People were suffering and dying in the care of Teresa's order unnecessarily because the money people donated to help them was being funneled back to the mothership.

That's obscene.

VigoTheCarpathian
12-16-2011, 04:50 PM
I'm not trying to defend MT or Catholicism and I certaintly wouldn't like to spread false claims about Hitchens' beliefs the day after his passing; It's only that, at least from what I do know about the guy, that he himself was a bit of a fanatic with a personality cult and was more interested, like Ayn Rand and Dawkins, in having his inherent atheism understood rather than understanding the world.

jackstraw94086
12-16-2011, 05:18 PM
then you've got him entirely wrong. He generally couldn't care less what you thought of him or what you thought about atheism or atheists. Hitchens was an anti-theist, and a big focus later in life was exposing the hypocrisies and abuses of religion. That's not the same as extolling the virtues of atheism. If you were a theist in support of some religion that didn't attempt to impose its will on the public then he wouldn't have had any problem with you. You don't know much about Dawkins either if you insist that he also is primarily interested in his own ego and rather than "understanding the world". It's pretty obvious you've never read anything by either of these people.

And quit trying to shoehorn ayn rand in with these people unless you're prepared to back it up somehow.

VigoTheCarpathian
12-16-2011, 05:23 PM
Ok, I have to play FIFA now. Let me think about these words you say

VigoTheCarpathian
12-16-2011, 06:04 PM
I wasn't insinuating that Dawkins was an ego maniac, just only very confused and too confident in his own theories of science. I'd really wish he'd stick to biology however I don't think his contributions to that field are very relevant any longer anyways.

I've never read hitchens or dawkins but I qualitatively associated them with ayn rand based on their own fervent, uncompromising ideologies... because thats what both of them are: confused ideologues.

VigoTheCarpathian
12-16-2011, 06:10 PM
straw man

MissingPerson
12-16-2011, 06:39 PM
How can you seriously say "I've never read any of their stuff, but let me tell you everything that's wrong with it-"? You have to recognise how absurd it is to refer to three people as "confused idealogues" while making it clear that you have absolutely no grasp of at least two of the ideologies in question.

Literally everything Richard Dawkins has ever written is about his and our understanding of the world. Everything. Eyeballs, rainbows, bird anatomy, everything. It's the very reason he's compelled to be so vocal about atheism, it all comes back to that.

VigoTheCarpathian
12-16-2011, 06:49 PM
lulz... I never said they were wrong. Dawkins is right on about EVERYTHING he says as is ayn rand(who I have read) and hitch as well. They are also right in their assertions that religion is wrong and God useless: they really really believe it. They're confused because they don't know that they are right and want everyone else to confirm it.

MissingPerson
12-16-2011, 07:05 PM
You have absolutely no idea what either of those men are about - a very different pair of men, by the way - and practically every single thing you've asserted about them is incorrect.

VigoTheCarpathian
12-16-2011, 07:06 PM
Literally everything Richard Dawkins has ever written is about his and our understanding of the world. Everything. Eyeballs, rainbows, bird anatomy, everything. It's the very reason he's compelled to be so vocal about atheism, it all comes back to that.

And this is spot on. Dawkins is so lost in his own esoteric, albeit quantitative, understanding of the world that he is willing to travel around and publicly reject the whole history of faith, art, and culture for his already dying view of biology. what arrogance.

VigoTheCarpathian
12-16-2011, 07:07 PM
You have absolutely no idea what either of those men are about - a very different pair of men, by the way - and practically every single thing you've asserted about them is incorrect.

Not true. And yes different men with different ideas and purposes.

Stickjohn
12-16-2011, 08:32 PM
I need a purpose.

jackstraw94086
12-18-2011, 10:39 PM
Not true. And yes different men with different ideas and purposes.

You've clearly marked yourself as someone wholly unprepared or even incapable of saying anything useful on this subject. You have absolutely nothing remotely close to any idea of what you're talking about.

VigoTheCarpathian
12-18-2011, 11:19 PM
His arguments were that she was a fraud and a hypocrite, took tons of money from the Duvaliers in Haiti, and ultimately was obsessed with a cult of pain, with no intention of actually improving the living conditions of those she claimed to help. He argued that she viewed pain and suffering as saintly virtues and the ideal condition (because she said so). Not to mention her lies and propaganda regarding condom use. He was saying that those people she was claiming to help could have been better served by an honest humanitarian who worked to improve the conditions that these people lived in while feeding them .

what a fucking luminary

VigoTheCarpathian
12-18-2011, 11:31 PM
now this is interesting

http://designbit.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/sistine-chapel2.jpg

nathanfairchild
12-18-2011, 11:34 PM
what exactly are you trying to accomplish here?

VigoTheCarpathian
12-18-2011, 11:37 PM
low-brow public intellectual critics get buried beneath the sands of time

boarderwoozel3
12-19-2011, 01:15 AM
now this is interesting

http://designbit.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/sistine-chapel2.jpg

The painter was huffy with a short fuse who stormed off and had to be talked back from Firenze on occasion... what of it?

VigoTheCarpathian
12-19-2011, 01:40 AM
So was Steve Jobs. some people know how to touch the world and they're typically not the easy going types. Now I lay me down to sleep...

CXPpiXdpIq4

VigoTheCarpathian
12-19-2011, 02:54 AM
And it's laughable, really, that Dawkins will go about extolling a dead science; after Heisenberg, after Quine, Godel, the singularity of DNA.... if there's one thing this dick should be saying its that he has no fucking idea where or how the vastly largest and complex polymer on planet earth synthetic or otherwise comes from or operates. At least Russell and Carnap had a real program, even if it failed. All Dawkins does is preach old science rhetoric to people who don't know the conversation anyways like some kind of sophist.

I'd rather rock out with a Harikrishna and his holy cow any day of the week than listen to Dawkins' pea brain.

VigoTheCarpathian
12-19-2011, 03:09 AM
And I can care less if drew endy or craig venter explain themselves oh so elusively as atheists: they're busy doing synthetic biology; not getting into semantical arguments with undergrads. Fucking pathetic.

malcolmjamalawesome
12-19-2011, 04:07 AM
Spoken like a true pussy.

JebusLives
12-19-2011, 06:47 AM
I think he's trolling. Its hard to tell, because it isn't about ghostbusters this time.

Alchemy
12-19-2011, 08:04 AM
And this is spot on. Dawkins is so lost in his own esoteric, albeit quantitative, understanding of the world that he is willing to travel around and publicly reject the whole history of faith, art, and culture for his already dying view of biology. what arrogance.

I think you're lost in your own stupid.

jackstraw94086
12-19-2011, 02:13 PM
he's clearly the unbeliever version of a seeker.

fatbastard
12-19-2011, 04:57 PM
Single malt drinkers are hard to find.

jackstraw94086
12-19-2011, 05:44 PM
And it's laughable, really, that Dawkins will go about extolling a dead science; after Heisenberg, after Quine, Godel, the singularity of DNA.... if there's one thing this dick should be saying its that he has no fucking idea where or how the vastly largest and complex polymer on planet earth synthetic or otherwise comes from or operates. At least Russell and Carnap had a real program, even if it failed. All Dawkins does is preach old science rhetoric to people who don't know the conversation anyways like some kind of sophist.

I'd rather rock out with a Harikrishna and his holy cow any day of the week than listen to Dawkins' pea brain.

This might be the most unbelievably stupid thing I've ever read.

Dawkins has never fucking said he understands how DNA formed. This retard is flailing wildly with absolutely no fucking clue about ANYTHING Dawkins or Hitchens ever said.

The funniest part is he called Dawkins a sophist with no apparent sense of irony.

and this troll's idea that real art can only derive from religious faith is incomprehensibly retarded.

AndLeoObre
12-19-2011, 05:50 PM
Just saw Kissinger on CNN :/ Between the death of Vaclav Havel and rants that Vigo prays we take as trolling, not a good week for Hitch's legacy.

VigoTheCarpathian
12-19-2011, 06:08 PM
I never said anything about real art being religious; don't take words out of my mouth.

I've also never once called you stupid, smart guy.

I only wish that you would actually talk about something, anything, but alas you refuse to and now I'm board. I have to play FIFA now anyways.

Good luck in your quest to support the coldplay of the science world.

PotVsKtl
12-19-2011, 06:18 PM
This guy sucks more dicks than a dick born with a mouth.

VigoTheCarpathian
12-19-2011, 06:24 PM
piss off dike

Miroir Noir
01-09-2012, 07:18 AM
Even at the end, he was still at work, turning in pieces about Dickens for Vanity Fair. (http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/02/hitchens-201202)