Hitchen's methodical dismantling of religion and the danger fundamentalism poses to our future.
Author and journalist Christopher Hitchens has in his 58 years traveled it seems about everywhere, and has amassed a thorough knowledge of the world today and its history. Of the writers who have recently published works assailing religion, including Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion) and Sam Harris (The End of Faith,) Hitchens may be the most literary. Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist and Harris has a degree in philosophy and is working toward a doctorate in neuroscience.…
Article comments
26 - Christopher Rose
If there's one thing that's sure to piss me off it's the smug arrogance of faithists when they make remarks that categorise people who don't believe in their cults as somehow lacking in spirituality and understanding. So, Derek, please take your smug attitude and shove it where the spirit takes you, thanks!
27 - Temple Stark
both sides and the basic stupidy exemplified in this thread are annoying me. Bad faith arguments all around. Do better or just don't.
28 - Baritone
Derek,
You must have struck a nerve with Christopher. He's usually not so hostile. However, I essentially agree with him.
What makes people "pseudo-intellectuals" in the eyes of belevers is simply that we don't believe.
A bit of irony here in that it is my view it is believers who are beyond discussion; they the ones with the closed eyes, or more aptly, with closed minds.
The fact is that most non-believers do not believe in the spiritual. Believing in a spiritual life, necessitates a belief in a duality of existence. I don't.
Christians and believers of other faiths generally take all their cues from a book, a book cobbled together from texts written literally thousands of years ago in the belief that these ancients were somehow wiser and in much closer contact with their respective god or gods than we are today. That is just bunk.
Our world and the universe in which it is suspended is wondrous. What we humans have discovered about its various aspects is often very complex and, for many, difficult to comprehend, but we need no gods, or spirituality or any other worldly phantasms to appreciate it.
There is no life beyond that which we have on this little planet. To spend that life worshiping a non-existent deity in the hopes of gaining ascendance into some kind of equally non-existent eternal paradise is a waste, a total waste of the brief time we have.
As bad as we can be, on balance humans are far more moral, loving, fair and forgiving than your jealous, wrathful, ego-centric god. Perhaps he didn't realize just what it was he had wrought with us humans. Maybe he has become a bit omni-impotent?
Baritone
29 - Christopher Rose
Temple - "stupidy"? he he he
Baritone - I'm not being hostile, it's just these holy joes are all bonkers and do humanity, love and genuine spirituality a massive disservice.
I'm not persuaded by the argument that spirituality "necessitates a belief in a duality of existence". I see it completely the opposite, we live in a giant unity or singularity in which all life is inherently linked.
I googled for the definition of the word and the top two results were the following:-
# This term is defined quite differently by monotheists, polytheists, humanists, followers of new age, Native Americans, etc. A common meaning is "devotion to metaphysical matters, as opposed to worldly things." Another is "Activities which renew, lift up, comfort, heal and inspire both ourselves and those with whom we interact."
An inner sense of something greater than oneself. Recognition of a meaning to existence that transcends one's immediate circumstances.
Neither definition needs or requires the existence of a deity and both imply a direct appreciation of and connection between all things, do they not?
30 - Baritone
Temple,
I'm truly devastated that you find this thread and the tenor of the discussion lacking.
I have been found an unworthy, apparently inarticulate non-believer. I just hope god will find it in his heart to forgive me. I leave the floor to you Temp, the great master debater.
Or not.
Christopher,
As I noted, I agreed with you in your comment to Derek.
However, I know from that and other comments you have written, that you are very taken with spirituality - with a longing, it would seem.
I just don't buy it. I simply don't believe that there is any such transcendence, any such connection.
It certainly exists from a biological perspective. All life is linked. The human genome contains pretty much all the stuff of all life. Most of our genetic make up is useless to us. We have scads of genes that do nothing. But they are, in fact links to all life (on this planet, at any rate.)
But I believe it is simply wishful thinking to accept the notion of some higher spiritual link between each of us humans and other life forms. There is no greater whole.
I imbibed a few hallucinogens many years ago. They were touted as the great road to inner wisdom. By and large it was fun, but I came away with no great inspirations other than that we (my spaced out friends and I) determined that most cliches are true.
But upon reflection what I did ultimately come to understand about the human mind is that we can make ourselves believe about any damn thing, no matter how ludicrous. In fact, the further "out there" something is, the more people are apt to embrace it. We can, in effect, mesmerize ourselves to all manner of states wherein we believe that we are, perhaps, touching the face of god, or literally swooping through the inner workings of our minds, our souls. It can all be pretty amazing and quite unsettling. But when we come back to ourselves, as it were, we are still just the same person we were before we went along "tripping the light fantastic," only now maybe with a small pool of vomitus in our laps and a head that we are convinced will explode at any second.
I know that most "new age" folks now eschew drugs, and rightly so. But it is that experience which was the seed for much of the so called "spiritual" movement of today - people who believe, if not in a god, then in an even more nebulous "higher power," or as you say "something greater than oneself." Again, I just don't buy it.
I am quite happy and complete with my flesh and blood self standing on this rock spinning through the universe holding on for dear, and the only, life I have.
Baritone
31 - Christopher Rose
Baritone, I grok what you're saying but surely the fact that all life forms are related to each other is something greater than oneself?
Given that it seems increasingly probable that at least some part of what we now are came to Earth from space, I like the idea that life is the universe exploring itself.
I'm totally down with your sentiment that happiness does indeed involve accepting that we are here on this planet. This is the one and only time the atoms that make up our bodies will come together in the particular configuration that is each unique individual, but those atoms will continue being incorporated into other structures many times after we are gone. That's kind of cool!
32 - Baritone
Christopher,
I also understand what you're saying. My question is, In what way does this connectedness affect our daily lives? How does it, or should it influence say, our decision making or our goals in life?
We can acknowledge an elemental connection to the universe which may help us in understanding how it all works. But I don't see anything spiritual about it. At this juncture we are in a sense a culmination of all that has gone before, but it is an ongoing process. Even given the possibility that, as some scientists who study such things believe, humans are NOT currently evolving owing to the effects of civilization and technology, the rest of the universe certainly is. Given the inexorable movement of time, that beings and all other things continue to interact, bouncing off of one another as it were, leaving a smudge here and a few molecules there, changing trajectories, even if only slightly, it is all a matter of chance.
As sentient beings, we have what may be the unique opportunity to consciously plot our journey with the ability to recover if jostled, or change our path or our very destination if we so choose. But we do this as individuals, either alone or in concert with others through deliberate communication and assent.
We may refer to a part of our lives, our journey as being "spiritual," but I believe what we think of as spiritual is actually attitude, opinion and emotion. It is a part of our being. This "spirit" may be exhalted or devastated. It is what gives us courage or makes us cowards. It is an ineffable quality that, as far as we know, only we humans have. But it is not "greater" than what we are. It simply "is" what we are.
Baritone
33 - Derek
All,
Actually, although many of you don't seem to judge my comments as worthy of anything, I enjoy some of the conversation. I don't consider myself "smug" at all, but rather just a person who believes in God and is not ashamed of it.
Since Mr. Hitchens book deals with this subject, why is it wrong to talk about God on this thread? Do you all enjoy simply agreeing with each other? What's the fun in that?
Temple and Christopher,
Sorry if my arguments are not worthy of your level of debate, but they are not done in "bad faith" and, clearly, you are the smug ones of the group. "Shove it where the spirit takes you?" Come on my brotha', you must be better than that.
Baritone,
I strongly disagree with your comment about believers - or me - using the term "pseudo-intellectual" as a description of non-believers, simply because they don't believe. Actually, I used the term, because many of you seem to believe that you are the intelligent ones and those who believe are not. That is not smart in my book and the arrogance of it is boorish.
Unless you all believe that you are more intelligent than every Christian on the planet, which I doubt even the most egomaniacal person in here would believe, then you must admit that "smart" people can just disagree about faith in God.
If I am not mistaken, then I think Peter Hitchens - i.e. Christopher's brother - is a believer. Do you all look at him as "the dumb brother" because he opposes Prince Christopher...and you? I am sure he has a few more IQ points than most, but he believes and, obviously, there are many like him. The bottom line is that faith is not a question of intelligence.
Also, people who believe in God are not opposed to science. Let's do away with that notion. Obviously, we believe that God created man's brain, so why wouldn't we embrace any and all scientific discovery? We do. Well, at least I do and can speak for all of my Christian friends.
Please just admit that you either believe or don't believe and that it is not a question of intelligence. And please stop minimizing the spiritual experiences of others just because you haven't had them yourselves. I mean, really, how could you expect to if you don't even believe in the first place?
Lastly, have any of you ever read "Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis? I think it might appeal to some of you. In my opinion, his arguments are interesting and sound and I think you might enjoy them.
All the best,
Derek
34 - Baritone
Derek,
Well, there is nothing wrong with talking about god here. That is the topic at hand. I don't know what your experience is here at blogcritics, but these discussions do have a way of moving off the original subject. It's just the nature of the beast. Also, this is not a place for the faint of heart. I wouldn't characterize it as ruthless, but there are some pretty sharp knives ready to cut into anything and everything they read here.
That being said, I don't think the issue of religion and a belief in god is necessarily related to intelligence. There are obviously a great # of very intelligent and successful believers out there.
The discussion often gets heated in this regard and fur and feathers may fly. That is, I believe because the stakes are pretty high. We're not discussing the pros and cons regarding thin and thick crust pizza, or who really shot JR.
Hitchens, and to a far greater extent Chris Hedges in his book American Fascists discuss the dangers of religious fundamentalism worldwide and including here in the US. As noted in some comments above, there is a concentrated effort by many radical fundamentalists to usurp the current US government and establish a christian theocracy. If they managed to realize that goal, life here and elsewhere would likely be very different, and not in a good way.
Were it not for that issue, I suppose the intensity of this type of discussion would be far less heated. If belief or non-belief was regarded only as a personal choice with no particular repurcussions beyond, we probably wouldn't be bouncing this issue around here.
Baritone
35 - Derek
Baritone,
Cool. I can handle the sharp knives, however, those wielding them are generally guilty of the same "smugness" they so loathe in others. Hypocritical in my book.
I will end my participation here by saying that I can't defend the church or other people's actions. Obviously, man is often guilty of screwing up the message of Christ and turning it into something ugly.
There is a fine line between sharing Christ's message and "beating into someone's head" and I think that is clear to any thinking person. There is no justification for it. Actually, Christ himself told the apostles to simply dust off their shoes and move on if people did not accept their message.
Baritone, I admire your willingness to share your thoughts and opinions in an "intelligent" way. I wish you well in your search for the truth.
Peace...out!
Derek
p.s. Thin crust is clearly better :)
36 - OSCAR L GUZMAN
BARITONE,
You certainly have a proper name. Your baritonesque voice certainly is overwhelming about your “faith” in anti-theism; but you are simply a boring repetitive individual who parrots the same old disputations of a handful of wannabee philosophers since man began to speak. But in your desire to silence theists you engender in us the desire to speak up in defense of our faith.
I mistakenly opened your blog, looking for an honest book critic, after having read GOD IS NOT GREAT, by Christopher Hitchens, (Who by the way should begin by changing his name: CHRISTOPHER), it does not fit him well.
I was very, very disappointed at your book review. It’s not a book review, it is merely a summary, a paraphrase of a book. Surely you must know the difference. You are not a book critic. You are a parrot. You liked what you read, and you are simply borrowing the thoughts of an eloquent but incredibly ignorant writer and making those thoughts your own; who by the way are much, much less educated. You simply fed your hunger and hatred with the miniscule, absurd, irrelevant and ridiculous arguments by another angry man, such as yourself, and thus are attempting to poison the minds of others, which probably makes you feel better about yourself.
Christopher is a ridiculous man, who, first of all misnamed his book, as it does not in the least describe what it portrays. GOD IS NOT GREAT??? This implies that there is a god, and I agree with him; but, I write it with a capital G.
His attack is mainly against established religions. He portrays himself as an expert on ALL religions of the world. Funny, most people spend a lifetime learning one religion, but in his worthless 58 years of life, he appoints himself as an in incredibly brilliant mind, who has appeared on earth as a messiah to discover man’s foibles and ignorance; and as a knight of the Round Table of atheists, he is going to set the world straight. Unfortunately, he “preaches to the choir.” He indeed caters to people who only know religion superficially, and whose only knowledge derives from what they read in the papers. Who are, as he is, as you are, historical ignoramuses who love to vituperate those whom they disagree with.
What a pitiful crock of superciliousness. This man exceeds pomposity, if that were possible. Yet he is your messiah. I feel sorry for you, because you are just as pitiful.
My messiah has never taught me to harm others; has never taught me to rape, pillage, kill; my messiah has only taught me to turn my cheek, and to love my enemy.
Please do us a favor, and get another job. You are a follower of Hitchens.
REPEAT seven times:
I AM NOT A BOOK REVIEWER. I AM NOT A BOOK REVIEWER. I AM NOT A BOOK REVIEWER, I AM NOT A BOOK REVIEWER. I AM NOT A BOOK REVIEWER. I AM NOT A BOOK REVIEWER. I AM NOT A BOOK REVIEWER…
Now, do you feel better? NO? Ok, you have deluded yourself in believing you are one. What the heck. There are a lot of “believers” out there that are making a mockery of religion too. So don’t feel so bad.
37 - Baritone
Dearest Oscar,
Goodness. For someone who contends that he has been taught to "turn the other cheek" you certainly spew your own brand of hatred with apparent ease.
I'm not going to waste my time in countering your arguments beyond stating that you are very wrong and totally mis-informed as regards Hitchens, atheists in general, and myself in particular. You presume far too much.
[personal attack deleted] I know of no atheists who rape, pillage or kill. I do, however, know of many people who have done just that in the name of your messiah.
Perhaps my arguments are not new. That does not render them any less apt. Mr. Hitchens is not my "messiah." I have none. I do respect him and his writing, although I disagree with his support of the Iraq war and his hatred of all things Clinton.
Your anger betrays you. You are so incensed that anyone would have the temerity to challenge your beloved god. I'll tell you what. If your god is all knowing and even marginally as powerful as all you true believers would have us believe, I'd say hesheit can take care of himheritself. He doesn't need some sniveling submissive [personal attack deleted] defending himherit. You are irrelevant and unnecessary to any so called god.
Oh, and if you don't care for my "book review" talents, well, tough shit!
B