Why did so many people admire Christopher Hitchens?

  • Thread starter Thread starter IanAG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think you have blinders on, if you believe that. (And no, I never said I would ‘use google’.)
 
tomarin said:
I think you have blinders on, if you believe that.
Click to expand...
Was that in reference to Harris and the FSM? Good grief, tomarin…I gave you chapter and verse as to where the concept originated. I’ve been aware of it for very many years. I can’t even recall, off the top of my head, Harris ever using the term. It’s just not his style. Which is why I suggested that you hadn’t read much of what he’s written or you’d have known that.

But having doubled down, I now expect you to find something that counters the information that I have given you. Or accept it as given.
 
Last edited:
IanAG said:
That’s not a manifesto for how we will live without religion, it’s a polemic against religion, an attack which from my point of view shows an amazing level of naivety about the human condition.

Above which, it is factually incorrect and philosophically confused. The Bible has many stories of morality prior to Mt. Sinai…take for instance the story of Cain and Abel in Genesis…so it has never been claimed that there wasn’t some sense of morality prior to then. What was missing was an objective moral code.
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that there were no laws against theft and murder? Was Moses simply saying: ‘Hey, I know you know that you’re not supposed to do these things, but now you know why!’

And there’s a huge thunderclap of palms being slapped against multiple foreheads and everyone says ‘Oh,now I get it…’.

And the golden rule does indicate what is good and bad. You don’t want someone stealing your lawnmower because you worked hard to earn the money to buy it and you need it to cut the grass. So there’s a social contract whereby you don’t steal your neighbours stuff and he doesn’t steal yours. Etc etc.

How much simpler do you want it to be? Do you need that concept carved onto a stone tablet before it makes sense?
 
Last edited:
Freddy said:
Are you suggesting that there were no laws against theft and murder? Was Moses simply saying: ‘Hey, I know you know that you’re not supposed to do these things, but now you know why !’

And there’s a huge thunderclap of palms being slapped against multiple foreheads and everyone says ‘Oh, now I get it…’.
Click to expand...
Why the indignant tone?

I don’t know what laws existed prior to Moses being given the Ten Commandments. But I do know that for the Jews as a society there was no objective morality, and the Ten Commandments changed all that.

Further, as you will know, the Commandments aren’t just against theft and murder, but set a moral code in terms of relationship with God and others.
And the golden rule does indicate what is good and bad. You don’t want someone stealing your lawnmower because you worked hard to earn the money to buy it and you need it to cut the grass. So there’s a social contract whereby you don’t steal your neighbours stuff and he doesn’t steal yours. Etc etc.
Click to expand...
It clearly does not state what is good or bad.
How much simpler do you want it to be? Do you need that concept carved onto a stone tablet before it makes sense?
Click to expand...
The idea of objective morality has nothing to do with simplicity or making sense, but with authority.

As we have seen and continue to see in many totalitarian regimes around the world, the rule of law and justice can be totally ignored and overtaken by the will of the most powerful. Without the moral objectivity the Commandments provide, there is nothing to stop us sinking into a Darwinian survival of the fittest. Moral objectivity protects the weak and vulnerable in our society.

Just out of interest, do you have the an issue with the Ten Commandments specifically or with the idea of objective morality?
 
Last edited:
IanAG said:
Why the indignant tone? Typically atheist, if I might say so.
Click to expand...
Freddy is a very good poster on these forums. I don’t think your comment is appropriate.

There were moral codes before Moses. One could argue that moral codes have existed since humans first evolved. I can recommend some books on mutual aid amongst humans if you’re interested.
 
IanAG said:
40.png
Freddy:
Are you suggesting that there were no laws against theft and murder? Was Moses simply saying: ‘Hey, I know you know that you’re not supposed to do these things, but now you know why !’

And there’s a huge thunderclap of palms being slapped against multiple foreheads and everyone says ‘Oh, now I get it…’.
Click to expand...
Why the indignant tone? Typically atheist, if I might say so.

I don’t know what laws existed prior to Moses being given the Ten Commandments. But I do know that for the Jews as a society there was no objective morality, and the Ten Commandments changed all that.
Click to expand...
Pardon my indignant tone. What I write is meant to be mostly easy going. If we were in a bar chatting then you’d take it lightly but how I write is sometime misinterpreted.

However…

It seems to me that defining it as absolute morality adds nothing to the fact that we consider it wrong. And always have known it’s wrong. And sometimes try to get away with it being wrong and do it anyway.

Look, people don’t steal lawnmowers because they think there’s no absolute morality so it’s ok if they think it’s ok. They know it’s wrong…but do it anyway. There isn’t a bank robber or murderer or cheat that doesn’t know it’s wrong to steal or kill or cheat. They just hope to get away with it.

Rather than that slap of palms against foreheads when Moses rolled up with the tablets, I can imagine a complete silence and some shrugged shoulders. And people thinking ‘Uh? We knew that all that stuff was wrong’.

I don’t need divine guidance to know that stealing and cheating is wrong. Nobody does. But what we all might need now and then is a reminder that if we carry on doing the wrong things then things will go pear shaped very quickly indeed.
 
You didn’t respond to my point about authority. Or about your views on objective morality.

Do you think that we could function as a society without objective morality?
 
Last edited:
IanAG said:
You didn’t respond to my point about authority. Or about your views on objective morality.

Do you think that we could function as a society without objective morality?
It seems to me that defining it as absolute morality adds nothing to the fact that we consider it wrong. And always have known it’s wrong. And sometimes try to get away with it being wrong and do it anyway.
Click to expand...
Then we’re back to Jesus reminding us of the Golden Rule. He says stealing your neighbour’s lawn mower is wrong because you don’t want yours stolen. You worked hard for it. You earned it. Those that demand something for nothing add nothing to society. If we all did it then the wheels come off. That’s it. There’s nothing more.

If you want then to call that ‘objective morality’ then…ok. And how do we tell? Jesus explained it to us. Maybe he said ‘Do unto others etc’. And then sotte vocce said ‘And that’s how we determine if it’s right or wrong’.

Can you think of a moral absolute that contradicts the golden rule?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I disagree with Mr Hitchen’s arguments and I understand the criticisms.

I think I will leave it to any admiring atheists to explain what they found admirable in him.

I’ll just note that I thought he spoke his mind and was not particularly beholden to anyone else for his thinking. I think he was also well read and not one to tend to hide in crowds.

I think a lot of young men in particular find these traits desirable.
 
Last edited:
Then we’re back to Jesus reminding us of the Golden Rule.
Click to expand...
Jesus had plenty to say beyond the golden rule.

He reiterated the importance of the first two Commandments, love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength, and love your neighbour as yourself. There is no imperative in the golden rule to love.

Neither is there an imperative to be obedient to God, which includes following His Commandments.

He also taught not just on outer observance of morality but a change in the inner life too, a change of attitude.
He says stealing your neighbour’s lawn mower is wrong because you don’t want yours stolen. You worked hard for it. You earned it. Those that demand something for nothing add nothing to society. If we all did it then the wheels come off. That’s it. There’s nothing more.
Click to expand...
I agree. The wheels come off.
 
IanAG said:
Then we’re back to Jesus reminding us of the Golden Rule.
Click to expand...
Loving God is obviously important as far as morality goes for a Christian. But it is obviously not a requirement. And ‘Love your neighbour as youself’ is patently a version of the golden rule.

And a change in attitude is a great idea if your attitude is wrong to start with. But I’m not sure that any specific religion has a monopoly on that insight.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for your thoughts everyone.

On reflection, I was pretty offended by Hitchen’s comments about God and religion, mainly because my faith has been instrumental in turning my life around since my conversion in my mid thirties, and I know many others in recovery whom it has also helped.

I am a recovering addict living with significant mental illness. My faith in God has literally saved my life and enabled me to live productively and with meaning and purpose. Before coming to faith my future was bleak to say the least.

I confess that sometimes I can be too passionate about my faith, not out of a need to control, but a desire to share the peace and love that my faith in Jesus has brought into my life with others, and to defend the faith so that it is available for others like me for whom it is life saving.

I agree with respecting people’s free speech and freedom of choice, it’s just a pity that some people don’t reciprocate. We are supposed to live in a tolerant society, yet religion is increasingly becoming an area against which it is okay to be intolerant.

Regarding the Ten Commandments, or for that matter any teaching in the Bible, it is wrong for me to expect that anyone who is not a Christian,p or Jew should be bound by them, and I accept that.
 
Last edited:
IanAG said:
Thanks for your thoughts everyone.
Click to expand...
And thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

Just a final word from me…I think that the position of Hitchens, Dawkins et al is that it is better to confront reality (as they see it) rather than rely on what they believe is not true. And I have to say that I am generally in agreement with them.

But…faith is a great help and comfort to a lot of people. And I hope that yours remains strong.
 
I wish you well Ian. May God continue to bless you and the people on these forums.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top