4:10 Sam Harris: "You raise the issue of whether we would wish the churches empty on Sundays. ... I'd want a different church. I'd want a different ritual, motivated by different ideas. But I think there's a place for the sacred in our lives - under some construal that doesn't presuppose any bullshit."
@logicallunatic1 Dawkins says "You can't understand art and music without the Bible," and then adds a moment later, "... For historical reasons."
His intention should be absolutely clear. He's using a conversational shorthand here - among his educated peers - referring to what we would distinguish as western, or occidental, art and music and literature, if we were comparing it with other creative artifacts from other cultures than our own. If he were speaking universally, you'd be right.
I disagree. He made himself as clear as can be here. Conversational shorthand? Come off it! What has history and the bible got to do with understanding music? For example, I play guitar and sing, and I have a good understanding of music. The bible's "historical reasons" had absolutely nothing to do with this. This is one of the very few times where Dawkins is just plain wrong.
So, I CAN understand art and music perfectly well WITHOUT the bible.
@logicallunatic1 He means that so much poetry, literature and music is about religon, God or has referances to the bible and that kind of stuff that if you had never heard of the religion or never even contemplated the notion of God then alot of shakespear for example would not make sense
Maybe, but you certainly don't need to read the bible to appreciate anything really. It's irrelevant. But so much is about religion? Really? Out of 100%, how much would you say is about religion? Have studies been done?
@logicallunatic1 Well you dont have to read the bible I am sure you know what a church is you know what prayer is you know the storys of jesus and moses etc. If you had never heard of any of it though the majority literature like poetry would not make sense for example Wb Yates or T.S elliot. Even further back the majority of literate people were monks. So to properly inderstand literature you need a knowledge of the bible otherwise it wont make sense
One need not be well versed in the bible to the extent Dawkins is making it out. How much much of literature is biblically influenced would you say? What about Joyce? Orwell? Dostoyevsky? I think Dawkins is giving the bible too much credit here.
@logicallunatic1 More ancient literature is because the majority of literate people in the past were monks. Its also not about stuff thats biblicaly influenced its stuff that contains relgious references of mentions God. For example nobody belives in ancient Greek Gods but to understand Homer you need a basic knowledge of them. Even more than literature knowledge of religon is neccesary for history becasue of the massive part it played in all aspects of our past
Harris says "there's a place for the sacred in our lives." I'm confused. How? I made sure to look up the word sacred in the dictionary: "connected with God (or the gods) or dedicated to a religious purpose and so deserving veneration." He calls himself an atheist.
@IzabelParis I think he means "sacred" in a much broader sense. For example: When I go out at night and look at the stars, I am filled with awe and humility; the trivialities and mundaneness of everyday life fade away, and there's a sense of weightiness, importance, profundity, even reverence that has nothing to do with the supernatural. I think he means "sacredness" as a mode of existence apart from the banalities of our typical modes. This distinction is a basic human need.
@IzabelParis Your confusion arises because you're having to look at the world through a cultural lens that itself is still emerging from confusion. I think that I first heard the term "secular sacred" proposed only about ten years ago. That's how new it is to popular discourse! But it makes perfect sense. Don't look in the dictionary, look up at the stars as our ancestors did. Do you feel any less wonder, knowing that they're not angels but nuclear furnaces thousands of light-years away?
I'm a theist, but I love Hitchens. He's such a rebel he sits in a room with people who agree with him about most things, but ultimately ends fiercely arguing with them.
Here in the USA, people are so shallow. All most people here care about is sports and Hollywood stars. It's very hard to get people interested in carrying on and intellectual conversation. I like to talk about Astronomy, and Renaissance history, about Galileo, and the history of the Inquisition. But here in El Paso Texas, all people care about is sports and talking about football. Most Americans are very shallow. HELP!!! GET ME OUTTA HERE!!!
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
@stratomaster136@stratomaster136@stratomaster136 Regarding whether 'The Four Horsemen' was filmed in Christopher Hitchens' house, yes, it was. I have a rather excellent photo of a younger Christopher Hitchens sitting in the exact same place twenty years ago, unfortunately it won't let me post the link but if you'd like to see it let me know. It's a very exquisite photo, shot in front of the fireplace seen in this film.
BOOM! Love how Hitchens pulls them full circle to his contention from a while ago - which they all initially rejected but now accept with open head nods: faith should be here to stay.
@iMentieth He's not referring to faith in the slightest for goodness sake. Is that really what you get from what he said? Honestly?
He clearly said "something like faith" - & he was clearly talking about communal love of poetry, music, philosophy, art etc. Nothing even close to what you're suggesting.
Can you not see how obviously dishonest or just blind you appear when you seemingly willfully misconstrue such comments?
Likewise, the nods you claim are clearly not intended to endorse your view.
@cinesimonj Then we agree. The only difference is that when I say 'Faith' I mean to look beyond poetry, art, etc. treating them as icons of the noumenal (which Hitchens has supported elsewhere) and not as idols. - may I suggest reading Jean-Luc Marion's work.
By 'Faith' I do not mean "accepting without reason" - that is something that I think needs to be cleared up.
I like the set-up: science favouring on the right, humanities on the left. Scietistic at the back, more appreciative of the purely human at the front.
In so many ways Harris and Hitchens compliment each other and stand different and opposed to Dennet and Dawkins.
The "temple" in Matrix Reloaded, despite being an ugly ulcer in the movie itself... was a nice example of the sort of "solidarity" church they're talking about ;)
"When has secularism built anything like the music of Bach?"
How about... the WORDLY MUSIC by... Bach?
There was a HUGE "patronage" for "secular" art in the Baroque period, as lots of it was done for festivities and decoration at palaces.
Then we've got the Romantics who, while probably being religious, or certainly spiritual, to some extent, create most of their work for their own sake, to perform in concert halls and salons.
I love Hitchens but if you sit him in a room with anyone for long enough, he will disagree with them and stray off topic slightly to win, he just loves to debate. Great to watch but I can't help feeling that he is hindering this discussion towards the end.
I don't really like everything dawkins sais. You don't need the bible to understand art or litterature. I have never opened the bible and I still understand litterature and art. Art is to imagine beautiful things from nature while combining it with human emotions. You can read any good book to understand litterature. The brother grim stories...lord of the rings...and yes the bible. But not only the bible...the problem isn't the fantasy but that these people take it litteraly.
@Hermoor To understand the history of art and literature, to know where, why and how art and literature evolved, is what he means. Not to have the ability to comprehend art and literature. Obviously.
@MRfullon Then they might as well read the norse stories or the japanese shinto mythology or any other mythology. Far from every fictional work has been inspired by the Bible. In fact most of the stories that has got dragons trolls etc in them...like lord of the rings, the hobbit, harry potter and the brother grim stories etc. They came from swedish and finnish mythology.
@Alexdurrant7 no idiot, and no one has ever heard of that novel you mentioned. No one reads such shit...what if I told you you need to understand the Koran or the holy veda texts from india in order to understand fiction. Idiot...
@Hermoor Nobody has ever heard of Ulysses or Finnegans Wake? LOL. Try reading some real literature - James Joyce is one of the most renowned authors in the English language. And if you actually bothered reading my comment you would know that I said you need an understanding of the Bible TO GET THE MOST OUT OF the novels of, for example, James Joyce. Try offering a real response this time rather than your mindless rubbish.
@Alexdurrant7 Ok what about this, you don't understand great fictional litterature because you haven't read the norse edda. About the great norse gods. One can't understand much modern fantasy like lord of the rings, harry potter brother grim stories. Without having read and understood the norse stories.
@Hermoor That could be true in some cases. If James Joyce is heavily influenced by, and uses lots of allusions to, the bible in his works, how can you suggest that one can fully make the absolute most of his novels without reading it?
@Alexdurrant7 Well this might come to a shock to you but not many people value James Joyce as a fictional writer. The greatest of the english fictional litterature is...Tolkien's stories, Daniel Defoe's stories and that is pretty much it. Most great fictional litterature is made in other languages than english. I don't read much english fictional litterature since there aren't many good ones. Most great litterature is made in other languages than english, and because of that...your and dawkin's
@Hermoor You're continually missing the point. I never said that James Joyce is thought of as great (even though he's taught on every reputable university's english literature course). I said that to get the most out of many works of fiction you need an understanding of the bible. You're yet to refute this.
@Alexdurrant7 "I said that to get the most out of many works of fiction you need an understanding of the bible" What about the stories that wasn't inspired by the bible...written in other languages than english and that are in many ways far superior to the biblical stories? Wouldn't you need to understand the Finnish Kalevala to understand most of fictional litterature? You know that Tolkien took the elves...the entire god concept in his books from Kalevala...ok so therefore I will say...
@Alexdurrant7 No person that has read the lord of the rings understands it...because many of them haven't read the finnish Kalevala. If a finnish man/woman would have said that, it would be very arrogant. You are a english man saying this about your english written bible. You are wrong in saying one has to understand the bible in order to understand fiction...another example. In order to understand the male body...you need to have fucked mine. Does it make sense? English arrogance...>_>
@Hermoor statement that one has to understand the bible to understand fiction is very arrogant. You could have said one has to understand the bible to understand james joyce...a big man in the english speaking world but a small and insignigificant guy in the rest of the world. It's time to wake up and learn some new languages or be a bit humble to the many superior languages and authors there are out there that doesn't write in english.
@Hermoor You're yet to address my point. I said that the bible is necessary to get the most out of *some* pieces of literature... the mere fact that there are many, many pieces that the bible isn't required to get the most out of does not change the fact that a knowledge of the bible does help the reader to get the most out of some other pieces of literature.
@Alexdurrant7 My original comment was on dawkin's statement. That in order to understand fiction you need to understand the bible. Which is wrong, that is what I have been saying all along. You said this as well at the beginning now you have changed it to "some". A smart way of admitting your first reply was incorrect and idiotic. Yes in order to understand harry potter you must have first read about witches and wizards as a kid....but there are many stories that you don't need to...especially
@Alexdurrant7 original mythologies of the vikings...the folktales in scandinavia etc. All these stories you don't need the bible in order to understand. And they far surpass the bible in greatness. Saying you need to understand the bible in order to understand fiction...as dawkins put it. Is a stupid comment...just like your first one.
@Hermoor I can't remember his comment, but I've heard him make similar statements in which he says that to get the most out of some works of fiction you need an understanding of the bible.
@Alexdurrant7 alright you are dead, you lost this argument...and have now inofficially admitted to be defeated. So far through your comments you have displayed nothing but the arrogance that the english speaking countries around the world are so famous for and your ignorance of the great fictional stories of so many other cultures and languages...
@Hermoor Are you denying that you do, in fact, need an understanding of the bible to get the most out of SOME works of fiction?
Notice that I:
1) Never said you need an understanding of it to get the most out of all or the majority of literature
2) never said that you need to understand the bible to UNDERSTAND these particular works of fiction - I said that you need an understanding to GET THE MOST OUT OF them.
Please address my points and stop dancing around them.
@ToDisassociate It makes sense. We're not hostile towards theist individuals, but their ideas. If we confront them with even the slightest opposition, their kneejerk reaction is to be offended. When their defenses go up, all avenues for debate and discussion goes out the window. I appreciate Hitchen's way of thinking about theology because he's almost sympathetic to them. He acknowledges why they still grasp on to theology and attacks their ideals from that angle. In many ways, more effective.
this reminds me of my dad, and 3 of my uncles around the dinner table at christmas (all very highly intelligent individuals) - sitting around debating and pontificating about religion, music, art etc. My dad would be Hitchens.....articulately pontificating on things whilst steadily getting more and more hammered! :) xxxx
harris' point is annoying (5:00) : scientists DO spend their time devoted to seeking profound meaning : there simply is nothing more profound than the universe in which we live!
it seems that by this point they have ironed out the qustion of "should ALL vestiges of religion, i.e. devotional music, an unerstanding of the bible, church as a place for certain ceremonies, be eradicated?"
like a league of super heroes meeting to plan the downfall of a tyranical system of evilness, i keep thinking hitchens glass is a paper cut out hamburger when the camera is angled from the left lol
thats true ! whether you believe or not the bible is an incredible piece of literature! it is still to this day the number 1 selling book ever! which kinda makes you think,cuz they keep coming out with new books as tho god was still writing novels.lol
@DaAlphaOmega not really, " The Lord of The Rings " Trilogy by J.R.R. Tolkein is a masterpiece of literature. Most of the stories like Jonas in the mouth a whale which the bible claims is a fish. Nothing incredible about that. Many of the stories existed in other cultures before they were modified and retold in the bible.
@jacksawild Well I think he does, he studied eastern religion for years, and for some reason it's hard for atheists like myself to come out and say anything that resembles religion to other atheists. He tried in 'The End of Faith' and caught eight tons of shit for it from other atheists.
Dawkins has the utmost respect and admiration for Harris. The way he watches in wonder when Harris speaks is funny. On the other hand, watch how Hitchens is much less impressed by Dennett. It's interesting to watch how these guys interact.
@dchapman2020 lol more fun to the discussion and I would also add that they all have their own unquie ways of demonstrating their ideas that all seem to make them grativate to one another
Later on they talk about ignorance of the bible (or it be before come to think of it). You need to know at least a little about the Bible or religion to get it's meaning.
And life has no meaning without god? Well thanks for informing me of that. And here I was thinking that god had nothing to do with my love for family or sex or chocolate or a good showing of Pirates of Penzance or a good game of chess or what have you. Somehow I must have been mistaken in thinking that I had achieved meaning with my life. How Arrogant Of Me! Seriously... the fallacious arguments and wheedling claims to privilege while bashing other people's values makes my blood boil sometimes.
in knowing all that has & ever will happen, .. & knew it long before anyone existed.. He knew most of us would question Him-resulting in our hell torment forever-then, after seeing this debacle over & over a million lifetimes.. He becomes yet more angry at those He has created, who do precisely that which He created them to do... and so He continues creating & destroying.
Will he ever become sufficiently omniscient to realize his own inane, pointless stupidity?
Interesting chat, but so much goes unexamined. We need to think about meaning says Hitchens, yet all depth and meaning needs someone or something to mean it - without God life is redundant of meaning? Atheism can be consistent, but not when it tries to look for any semblance of meaning in life. A final note on the putative violence of religion and the peacefulness of atheism is that man writes his own morality without any idea of God. Communism carries the most skulls of this century.
please put down the thesaurus! lol. you make a good point, and i think that is that is a very high accolade considering how strongly i disagree with you. but communism has never occurred, do not mistake that.
Nobody is advocating Communist-style atheism with its violent repression of belief and other thought-crimes, not to mention the inherently stagnating effects of communal ownership and central planning. As a theory that idea is abhorrent to anyone who didn't grow up under the brutal yoke of a totalitarian regime or pre-regulated capitalism-gone-wild. At the most, atheists today advocate pointing out the ridiculousness of religion and praising skepticism as a higher virtue than faith.
It's staggering that theists take Stalinist Russia and say "aha, see what a world we would get if the state was athiest"
Just stop and think for a moment of all the horrors carried out in the name of the religion for as long as religions have existed.
The BIG difference is that Stalin wasn't butchering hundreds of thousands of people in the NAME of atheism (unlike the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, the endless wars of religion in Europe, the suicide bombers of Islam, etc ad nauseum).
I'm surprised they beat around the bush in this video. If ever anyone complains that with religion we wouldn't have Bach, Michelangelo, or whatever there is a VERY obvious way to answer them; is the comissioning of artwork/music really the best possible use of the people with incredible talent in our society? Thank god (irony intended), that we don't misallocate resources like that anymore. I can't believe that's not obvious.
Well before Bacon was born to even contemplate induction,there was a severely-limited range of experiences or occupations to be conferred inspirationally to the masses per resource.Art and music touched them in ways Sunday sermons then only could.
I have to say, as I've grown older, more informed, and more atheist, I've lost my ability to create abstract art, to appreciate music as much as I did, or even enjoy fantastical cinema. It doesn't upset me though, however if everyone was more like me that might be a bane to the world at large.
Reason being?:the sphere of your mind which embraced Atheism as objectively solvent-solvent keelhauled all that was subjective as feeble,puerile and disposable...Such trade-offs are common sandtraps of those who once solely trusted FAITH.
Well, I want there to be abstract art, and fantastical movies, at least sometimes. I think it makes life a little more colorful. Kind of like Hitchens' saying he wants Christians around to argue with (which he says in this discussion) I'd still like there to be abstract art even if I don't appreciate it that much, and I'd still like religious people around to create religious music because I doubt as a secularist I have that same ability.
All of which is understandable to THIS Atheist,Maximus...There's a distinction to be made between hegemonic Fundamentalism and the mere extant 'ding an sich' of spiritualism.Some would tar both with the same brush.
I don't think this is univeral. I find the more informed and, as a result, the "more" atheist I become is currently correlating to my ability to more easily create music, abstract art, and appreciate the abstract.
That might be just because you've grown older, not because you've grown more informed. I don't understand how any correlation could exist between being atheist and appreciating music.
I'm not saying I have a great explanation for it. I'm just saying I could see an Atheist society being a very sterile society because in a way taking a very materialistic stance and engaging in critical inquiry can discourage overactive imaginations...but then again, maybe many have both.
This DVD starts out good, and gradully gets less impressive as it goes on, perhaps the alchohol. Harris raised a good point about the inability of science to truly represent love and other human first hand human experiences that Hitchin toally hijacked and led of in another direction
Hitchens doesn't make any sense at all. First he says all religions are in nature totalitarian. Then he sais, he wishes the persistence of faith. ... He knows that everybody is going to object to him,. This is a cheap shot for being at the centre of attention.
...Perhaps point to studies that laud the benefits of phytosterols contained in hops and barley that act as potent antioxidants?Like xanthohumol?---Counterfactual speculation at best,Blowhort...
I can't help but notice what a meme has been made of the Hitchen's whiskey glass,it's chic on a par with the lip-dangled cigarette that deified James Dean.I wish to lambaste these flippant references as nugatory,but cannot;Hitchens has brought the stigma on himself.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Wordonfire video describes Richard Dawkins best: "He is analogous to a 6th grade primary school science student presuming to debunk the whole of science". Virtually NO serious scientist , or even atheist, agrees with his RIDICULOUSLY POOR SCHOLARSHIP. Read "DISMANTLING THE NEW ATHEISM" by Dr Scott Hahn and Benjamin Riker: Once you examine the detail of Dawkins' arguments they are a joke, as confirmed by famous atheists who at least try to propose RATIONAL arguments instead of biased rhetoric.
Since the very raison d'etre' of ritual is rooted in primal needs to either sublimate vanity or assuage fear,how might one go about weeding the greenhouse composed entirely of weeds?
well it seems you speak in relation to the superstitious element, but instead be reminded of the morale we inherently created that was childishly placed on a deity, hence the negativity placed along with it. the greenhouse as you put is not entirely made up of weeds i would say, but the only thing i see in real pursuit of lasting change is open dialogue, intellectual discussion and free speech with religion being criticized like any other.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The only real value of truly believing in God is the morality love and peace that results which is the whole point of believing the truth of God's word.
There are historical reasons for believing in Christ too... beginning with the fact that Adam and Eve were told about Christ and every word after that was based on that fact that Christ would be born of a woman and would crush the serpent's head.
Please can you let me know the book chapter and verse thanks. And this has nothing to do with a decent education.... If you had all the knowledge in the world, you would not have made the comment about noah you made below. If noah had 3 sons awho were married to 3 unrelated women, then the diversity of diseases and heredatry traits you have in the world would have been largely classified into 6 pools and as you know that is not so. i await the book, chapter and verse(s).
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Your speculation does not constitute a scientific basis. The gene pool is always getting thinner. That is an observable fact no matter how much it is ignored. The conclusion then is that 6000 years ago, the gene pool was much richer and we know that the people that were buried by the flood were larger and had a larger brain capacity.
Hutchin's knee-jerk analog may fail to take into consideration a contrast in how the 2 deaths are precipitated,Kamikaze suicide is construed as devaluing Life,as opposed risking it in conflict to defend an ideal presumed noble enough to engage in combat.
Well,at least to me,cessation of existence ,period! is not admirable.Submitting one's life to an ideal perceived as noble,however,with respects ,even 'semantics' invokes a moral relativism.
4:10 Sam Harris: "You raise the issue of whether we would wish the churches empty on Sundays. ... I'd want a different church. I'd want a different ritual, motivated by different ideas. But I think there's a place for the sacred in our lives - under some construal that doesn't presuppose any bullshit."
drazzellstarfish 1 week ago
Dawkins says "you cant understand art and music without the bible".
What a load of stupid nonsense! The bible is not required for appreciating anything really.
logicallunatic1 3 weeks ago
@logicallunatic1 Dawkins says "You can't understand art and music without the Bible," and then adds a moment later, "... For historical reasons."
His intention should be absolutely clear. He's using a conversational shorthand here - among his educated peers - referring to what we would distinguish as western, or occidental, art and music and literature, if we were comparing it with other creative artifacts from other cultures than our own. If he were speaking universally, you'd be right.
drazzellstarfish 1 week ago
@drazzellstarfish
I disagree. He made himself as clear as can be here. Conversational shorthand? Come off it! What has history and the bible got to do with understanding music? For example, I play guitar and sing, and I have a good understanding of music. The bible's "historical reasons" had absolutely nothing to do with this. This is one of the very few times where Dawkins is just plain wrong.
So, I CAN understand art and music perfectly well WITHOUT the bible.
logicallunatic1 1 week ago
@logicallunatic1 He means that so much poetry, literature and music is about religon, God or has referances to the bible and that kind of stuff that if you had never heard of the religion or never even contemplated the notion of God then alot of shakespear for example would not make sense
EmmeMck 1 week ago
@EmmeMck
Maybe, but you certainly don't need to read the bible to appreciate anything really. It's irrelevant. But so much is about religion? Really? Out of 100%, how much would you say is about religion? Have studies been done?
logicallunatic1 1 week ago
@logicallunatic1 Well you dont have to read the bible I am sure you know what a church is you know what prayer is you know the storys of jesus and moses etc. If you had never heard of any of it though the majority literature like poetry would not make sense for example Wb Yates or T.S elliot. Even further back the majority of literate people were monks. So to properly inderstand literature you need a knowledge of the bible otherwise it wont make sense
EmmeMck 1 week ago
@EmmeMck
One need not be well versed in the bible to the extent Dawkins is making it out. How much much of literature is biblically influenced would you say? What about Joyce? Orwell? Dostoyevsky? I think Dawkins is giving the bible too much credit here.
logicallunatic1 1 week ago
@logicallunatic1 More ancient literature is because the majority of literate people in the past were monks. Its also not about stuff thats biblicaly influenced its stuff that contains relgious references of mentions God. For example nobody belives in ancient Greek Gods but to understand Homer you need a basic knowledge of them. Even more than literature knowledge of religon is neccesary for history becasue of the massive part it played in all aspects of our past
EmmeMck 1 week ago
haha... finally someone had to say "bullshit" in this discussion. Well done Harris.
dingusmcgandhi 1 month ago
Harris says "there's a place for the sacred in our lives." I'm confused. How? I made sure to look up the word sacred in the dictionary: "connected with God (or the gods) or dedicated to a religious purpose and so deserving veneration." He calls himself an atheist.
IzabelParis 1 month ago in playlist More videos from PiroNiro
@IzabelParis I think he means "sacred" in a much broader sense. For example: When I go out at night and look at the stars, I am filled with awe and humility; the trivialities and mundaneness of everyday life fade away, and there's a sense of weightiness, importance, profundity, even reverence that has nothing to do with the supernatural. I think he means "sacredness" as a mode of existence apart from the banalities of our typical modes. This distinction is a basic human need.
Ashiman12 3 weeks ago 3
@IzabelParis Your confusion arises because you're having to look at the world through a cultural lens that itself is still emerging from confusion. I think that I first heard the term "secular sacred" proposed only about ten years ago. That's how new it is to popular discourse! But it makes perfect sense. Don't look in the dictionary, look up at the stars as our ancestors did. Do you feel any less wonder, knowing that they're not angels but nuclear furnaces thousands of light-years away?
drazzellstarfish 1 week ago
I'm a theist, but I love Hitchens. He's such a rebel he sits in a room with people who agree with him about most things, but ultimately ends fiercely arguing with them.
rickmcn1986 2 months ago in playlist More videos from PiroNiro
Here in the USA, people are so shallow. All most people here care about is sports and Hollywood stars. It's very hard to get people interested in carrying on and intellectual conversation. I like to talk about Astronomy, and Renaissance history, about Galileo, and the history of the Inquisition. But here in El Paso Texas, all people care about is sports and talking about football. Most Americans are very shallow. HELP!!! GET ME OUTTA HERE!!!
BigFatHeretic 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
SpencerBenedict2nd 3 months ago
The larkin poem being 'here with me' - is this at Hitchens' house then? Can't imagine even he carries a library around with him
stratomaster136 5 months ago
@stratomaster136 @stratomaster136 @stratomaster136 Regarding whether 'The Four Horsemen' was filmed in Christopher Hitchens' house, yes, it was. I have a rather excellent photo of a younger Christopher Hitchens sitting in the exact same place twenty years ago, unfortunately it won't let me post the link but if you'd like to see it let me know. It's a very exquisite photo, shot in front of the fireplace seen in this film.
BritishArrow 4 months ago
I think Hitchens' comment about devotional art shows just how much on the side of the Christianists he is.
cinesimonj 5 months ago
it's not just religion that allows for great art. it's the narrative behind it.
rysw19 5 months ago
BOOM! Love how Hitchens pulls them full circle to his contention from a while ago - which they all initially rejected but now accept with open head nods: faith should be here to stay.
iMentieth 5 months ago
@iMentieth He's not referring to faith in the slightest for goodness sake. Is that really what you get from what he said? Honestly?
He clearly said "something like faith" - & he was clearly talking about communal love of poetry, music, philosophy, art etc. Nothing even close to what you're suggesting.
Can you not see how obviously dishonest or just blind you appear when you seemingly willfully misconstrue such comments?
Likewise, the nods you claim are clearly not intended to endorse your view.
cinesimonj 5 months ago
@cinesimonj Then we agree. The only difference is that when I say 'Faith' I mean to look beyond poetry, art, etc. treating them as icons of the noumenal (which Hitchens has supported elsewhere) and not as idols. - may I suggest reading Jean-Luc Marion's work.
By 'Faith' I do not mean "accepting without reason" - that is something that I think needs to be cleared up.
iMentieth 5 months ago
I like the set-up: science favouring on the right, humanities on the left. Scietistic at the back, more appreciative of the purely human at the front.
In so many ways Harris and Hitchens compliment each other and stand different and opposed to Dennet and Dawkins.
Smart men, interesting interactions.
iMentieth 5 months ago
The "temple" in Matrix Reloaded, despite being an ugly ulcer in the movie itself... was a nice example of the sort of "solidarity" church they're talking about ;)
twooffour 6 months ago
"When has secularism built anything like the music of Bach?"
How about... the WORDLY MUSIC by... Bach?
There was a HUGE "patronage" for "secular" art in the Baroque period, as lots of it was done for festivities and decoration at palaces.
Then we've got the Romantics who, while probably being religious, or certainly spiritual, to some extent, create most of their work for their own sake, to perform in concert halls and salons.
LOTS of secular music back then.
twooffour 6 months ago
I love Hitchens but if you sit him in a room with anyone for long enough, he will disagree with them and stray off topic slightly to win, he just loves to debate. Great to watch but I can't help feeling that he is hindering this discussion towards the end.
BallerT 6 months ago
Go on. Let him read the Larkin. Im gonna go and find it now. hehe
helenmarplehorvat 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Harold Camping was RIGHT about May 21, click on my channel to see...
youneekk 6 months ago
10 videos into this, and I really gotta say Hitchens can be a bit annoying sometimes, interrupting people talking and stuff...
ImAnotherZang 7 months ago
Maybe the point of alcohol in intellectual conversations is to allow a point for them to end - someone will eventually call it quits...
Logoscyth 8 months ago 4
Hitchens is a contrary bugger, isn't he?
neonatalpenguin 8 months ago
Please tell me thats a revolver on hutchens hip
44SuperShredder 9 months ago 8
@44SuperShredder
No, not a revolver. It's that little black box that you wear when you're mic'd up for interviews or things like this.
ASimoneau 6 months ago
@44SuperShredder I don't know if anyone's replied. In case not, What you're seeing on Hitch's hip is the power pack/transmitter for his mic.
TomVodkaCollins 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from PiroNiro
Comment removed
2Draco39 9 months ago
Comment removed
2Draco39 9 months ago
I don't really like everything dawkins sais. You don't need the bible to understand art or litterature. I have never opened the bible and I still understand litterature and art. Art is to imagine beautiful things from nature while combining it with human emotions. You can read any good book to understand litterature. The brother grim stories...lord of the rings...and yes the bible. But not only the bible...the problem isn't the fantasy but that these people take it litteraly.
Hermoor 10 months ago
@Hermoor To understand the history of art and literature, to know where, why and how art and literature evolved, is what he means. Not to have the ability to comprehend art and literature. Obviously.
MRfullon 10 months ago
@MRfullon Then they might as well read the norse stories or the japanese shinto mythology or any other mythology. Far from every fictional work has been inspired by the Bible. In fact most of the stories that has got dragons trolls etc in them...like lord of the rings, the hobbit, harry potter and the brother grim stories etc. They came from swedish and finnish mythology.
Hermoor 10 months ago
@Hermoor It's not to do with that. It's more to do with the impact it has had on the english language and culture. Think Shakespeare.
MRfullon 10 months ago
I don't buy that. To get the most out of novels such as Ulysses of Finnegans Wake you really DO need an understanding of the Bible.
Alexdurrant7 9 months ago
@Alexdurrant7 no idiot, and no one has ever heard of that novel you mentioned. No one reads such shit...what if I told you you need to understand the Koran or the holy veda texts from india in order to understand fiction. Idiot...
Hermoor 9 months ago
@Hermoor Nobody has ever heard of Ulysses or Finnegans Wake? LOL. Try reading some real literature - James Joyce is one of the most renowned authors in the English language. And if you actually bothered reading my comment you would know that I said you need an understanding of the Bible TO GET THE MOST OUT OF the novels of, for example, James Joyce. Try offering a real response this time rather than your mindless rubbish.
Alexdurrant7 9 months ago 2
@Alexdurrant7 Ok what about this, you don't understand great fictional litterature because you haven't read the norse edda. About the great norse gods. One can't understand much modern fantasy like lord of the rings, harry potter brother grim stories. Without having read and understood the norse stories.
Hermoor 9 months ago
@Hermoor That could be true in some cases. If James Joyce is heavily influenced by, and uses lots of allusions to, the bible in his works, how can you suggest that one can fully make the absolute most of his novels without reading it?
Alexdurrant7 9 months ago
@Alexdurrant7 Well this might come to a shock to you but not many people value James Joyce as a fictional writer. The greatest of the english fictional litterature is...Tolkien's stories, Daniel Defoe's stories and that is pretty much it. Most great fictional litterature is made in other languages than english. I don't read much english fictional litterature since there aren't many good ones. Most great litterature is made in other languages than english, and because of that...your and dawkin's
Hermoor 9 months ago
@Hermoor You're continually missing the point. I never said that James Joyce is thought of as great (even though he's taught on every reputable university's english literature course). I said that to get the most out of many works of fiction you need an understanding of the bible. You're yet to refute this.
Alexdurrant7 9 months ago
@Alexdurrant7 "I said that to get the most out of many works of fiction you need an understanding of the bible" What about the stories that wasn't inspired by the bible...written in other languages than english and that are in many ways far superior to the biblical stories? Wouldn't you need to understand the Finnish Kalevala to understand most of fictional litterature? You know that Tolkien took the elves...the entire god concept in his books from Kalevala...ok so therefore I will say...
Hermoor 9 months ago
@Alexdurrant7 No person that has read the lord of the rings understands it...because many of them haven't read the finnish Kalevala. If a finnish man/woman would have said that, it would be very arrogant. You are a english man saying this about your english written bible. You are wrong in saying one has to understand the bible in order to understand fiction...another example. In order to understand the male body...you need to have fucked mine. Does it make sense? English arrogance...>_>
Hermoor 9 months ago
@Hermoor statement that one has to understand the bible to understand fiction is very arrogant. You could have said one has to understand the bible to understand james joyce...a big man in the english speaking world but a small and insignigificant guy in the rest of the world. It's time to wake up and learn some new languages or be a bit humble to the many superior languages and authors there are out there that doesn't write in english.
Hermoor 9 months ago
@Hermoor You're yet to address my point. I said that the bible is necessary to get the most out of *some* pieces of literature... the mere fact that there are many, many pieces that the bible isn't required to get the most out of does not change the fact that a knowledge of the bible does help the reader to get the most out of some other pieces of literature.
Alexdurrant7 9 months ago
@Alexdurrant7 My original comment was on dawkin's statement. That in order to understand fiction you need to understand the bible. Which is wrong, that is what I have been saying all along. You said this as well at the beginning now you have changed it to "some". A smart way of admitting your first reply was incorrect and idiotic. Yes in order to understand harry potter you must have first read about witches and wizards as a kid....but there are many stories that you don't need to...especially
Hermoor 9 months ago
@Alexdurrant7 original mythologies of the vikings...the folktales in scandinavia etc. All these stories you don't need the bible in order to understand. And they far surpass the bible in greatness. Saying you need to understand the bible in order to understand fiction...as dawkins put it. Is a stupid comment...just like your first one.
Hermoor 9 months ago
@Hermoor I can't remember his comment, but I've heard him make similar statements in which he says that to get the most out of some works of fiction you need an understanding of the bible.
Alexdurrant7 9 months ago
@Alexdurrant7 alright you are dead, you lost this argument...and have now inofficially admitted to be defeated. So far through your comments you have displayed nothing but the arrogance that the english speaking countries around the world are so famous for and your ignorance of the great fictional stories of so many other cultures and languages...
Hermoor 9 months ago
@Hermoor Are you denying that you do, in fact, need an understanding of the bible to get the most out of SOME works of fiction?
Notice that I:
1) Never said you need an understanding of it to get the most out of all or the majority of literature
2) never said that you need to understand the bible to UNDERSTAND these particular works of fiction - I said that you need an understanding to GET THE MOST OUT OF them.
Please address my points and stop dancing around them.
Alexdurrant7 9 months ago
A secular artist during religious eras - Caravaggio.
andyriggs42 11 months ago
@andyriggs42 what are you talking about? His most famous paintings are explicitly religious.
PapaWilk 11 months ago
Hitchens needs to lay off the fucking Cognac . . .
billbenblue 1 year ago 2
We don't want anyone to get lost at sea just to create great art.
But do we want them to fall in love, dream crazy dreams, etc?
These irrational things have no place in the sterile Museum of Science Dawkins glibly assumes might inspire greatness.
Great art cannot exist without a certain amount of irrationality.
drunkagnostic 1 year ago
@drunkagnostic Certainly, science is often bred from irrationality and spontaneity as well though
johnpotter26 11 months ago
wow four genius minds...
leaving this compilation of video's, can only leave your own mind more intellectually capable:)
buktomsin 1 year ago
Voltaire said that if God did not exist, we would need to invent him.
iwoj 1 year ago
Hitchens is too nice to the religious. Too romantic.
ToDisassociate 1 year ago
@ToDisassociate It makes sense. We're not hostile towards theist individuals, but their ideas. If we confront them with even the slightest opposition, their kneejerk reaction is to be offended. When their defenses go up, all avenues for debate and discussion goes out the window. I appreciate Hitchen's way of thinking about theology because he's almost sympathetic to them. He acknowledges why they still grasp on to theology and attacks their ideals from that angle. In many ways, more effective.
TrueMusou 1 year ago
Comment removed
HellenicHumanist 1 year ago
Sam Harris is such an open-minded individual, it's just awe-inspiring.
Enthos2 1 year ago
What music do they mention at the start bark, barth, baac?
jsmitt06 1 year ago
@jsmitt06 Bach, man. Music often associated (in my case anyway) with numinousness.
watch?v=LU_QR_FTt3E
marredsun 1 year ago
Hitchens is FUCKED UP. He can barely speak
ClintSevilla 1 year ago
Sometimes I wonder if Hitchens is still in the church. Especially when he started to talk about art.
ClintSevilla 1 year ago
Dan and Sam are the smartest ones!
VolansTheNaturalist 1 year ago
this reminds me of my dad, and 3 of my uncles around the dinner table at christmas (all very highly intelligent individuals) - sitting around debating and pontificating about religion, music, art etc. My dad would be Hitchens.....articulately pontificating on things whilst steadily getting more and more hammered! :) xxxx
raspberryripple88 1 year ago
harris' point is annoying (5:00) : scientists DO spend their time devoted to seeking profound meaning : there simply is nothing more profound than the universe in which we live!
quosmo1 1 year ago
it seems that by this point they have ironed out the qustion of "should ALL vestiges of religion, i.e. devotional music, an unerstanding of the bible, church as a place for certain ceremonies, be eradicated?"
noodoo19 1 year ago
would've like more dawkins and less hitchens
moss824 1 year ago
@moss824
idiot
ItsameAlex 11 months ago
Hitchens dissapointed me on this...
SwuaveWEB 1 year ago
It's so hot watching Hitchens drink and smoke and rip the religious new aholes.
TheSirBoyKing 1 year ago
like a league of super heroes meeting to plan the downfall of a tyranical system of evilness, i keep thinking hitchens glass is a paper cut out hamburger when the camera is angled from the left lol
gta747 1 year ago
I see many bottles and glasses on the table.. all Hitchens' it seems.. haha
TerryDBlack 1 year ago 7
Profound vs. Trivial is a relevant argument. Using attention wisely vs. perpetual distraction.
Bible has a historical purpose.
unicorn187 1 year ago
thats true ! whether you believe or not the bible is an incredible piece of literature! it is still to this day the number 1 selling book ever! which kinda makes you think,cuz they keep coming out with new books as tho god was still writing novels.lol
DaAlphaOmega 1 year ago
@DaAlphaOmega not really, " The Lord of The Rings " Trilogy by J.R.R. Tolkein is a masterpiece of literature. Most of the stories like Jonas in the mouth a whale which the bible claims is a fish. Nothing incredible about that. Many of the stories existed in other cultures before they were modified and retold in the bible.
chroniclerofthe70s 1 year ago
@chroniclerofthe70s ofcourse,the stories of the bible were stolen from other cultures throughout history,i agree.
DaAlphaOmega 1 year ago
"It's rather like a camouflaged insect." That, Professor Dawkins, is the best analogy I've heard all year. Thank you.
darwinbulldog 1 year ago 3
Harris is definitely the most intelligent, well-spoken and informed person here IMO
Slacktoo2010 1 year ago
I love how sam throws in there "and quit smoking." Hitchens in just like "yeah...."
winterconcert 1 year ago 2
Sam Harris is clearly a Daoist, even if he doesn't realise it.
jacksawild 1 year ago
@jacksawild Well I think he does, he studied eastern religion for years, and for some reason it's hard for atheists like myself to come out and say anything that resembles religion to other atheists. He tried in 'The End of Faith' and caught eight tons of shit for it from other atheists.
SimKoning 1 year ago
4:43 First profanity? Out of nowhere lol.
SevenRiderAirForce 1 year ago
Dawkins has the utmost respect and admiration for Harris. The way he watches in wonder when Harris speaks is funny. On the other hand, watch how Hitchens is much less impressed by Dennett. It's interesting to watch how these guys interact.
dchapman2020 1 year ago 27
@dchapman2020 I would go further- it's fascinating to observe their interactions with each other.
writersblock26 9 months ago
Comment removed
SChome100 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dchapman2020 lol more fun to the discussion and I would also add that they all have their own unquie ways of demonstrating their ideas that all seem to make them grativate to one another
SChome100 7 months ago
@dchapman2020 I noticed those exact same things, its very interesting.
BallerT 6 months ago
I cannot believe that Hitchens said that Donne's poem Holy Sonnet X was gibberish...
Death, be not proud, though some have called thee
Mighty and dreadful, for thou are not so;
For those whom thou think'st thou dost overthrow
Die not, poor Death, nor yet canst thou kill me.
illgodownswingin 1 year ago
He said it's gibberish if one looks only at the words.
MrElectroGizmo 1 year ago
Later on they talk about ignorance of the bible (or it be before come to think of it). You need to know at least a little about the Bible or religion to get it's meaning.
QwidgyboMan 1 year ago
From rest and sleep, which but thy pictures be,
Much pleasure; then from thee much more must flow,
And soonest our best men with thee do go,
Rest of their bones, and soul's delivery.
Thou'art slave to fate, chance, kings, and desperate men,
And dost with poison, war, and sickness dwell,
And poppy'or charms can make us sleep as well
And better than thy stroke; why swell'st thou then?
One short sleep past, we wake eternally,
And death shall be no more; Death, thou shalt die.
illgodownswingin 1 year ago
I mean I like Mr. Hitchens...but I just can't believe he betrayed such a lack of understanding of poetry
illgodownswingin 1 year ago
Sam Harris again seems so reasonable and open. Love it
maddtappin 1 year ago 58
This has been flagged as spam show
"I'm an atheist with respect to the Judeo-Christian God, because there is not a shred of EVIDENCE in favor of the Judeo-Christian God."
~ Richard Dawkins
...Dawkins, that's because you have not visited my channel.
Eye2EyeIIIV 2 years ago
And life has no meaning without god? Well thanks for informing me of that. And here I was thinking that god had nothing to do with my love for family or sex or chocolate or a good showing of Pirates of Penzance or a good game of chess or what have you. Somehow I must have been mistaken in thinking that I had achieved meaning with my life. How Arrogant Of Me! Seriously... the fallacious arguments and wheedling claims to privilege while bashing other people's values makes my blood boil sometimes.
darkmiles22 2 years ago 2
A GOOD GAME OF CHESS!! CAPITAL IDEA!!
zanzibartraveler09 1 year ago
should atheist copie religion anyone agree
FIGHTFANNERD3 2 years ago
About God's omnisciece God..
in knowing all that has & ever will happen, .. & knew it long before anyone existed.. He knew most of us would question Him-resulting in our hell torment forever-then, after seeing this debacle over & over a million lifetimes.. He becomes yet more angry at those He has created, who do precisely that which He created them to do... and so He continues creating & destroying.
Will he ever become sufficiently omniscient to realize his own inane, pointless stupidity?
lostallmymirth 2 years ago 3
And there is, the question of His omnipotence as well.
If this God, as regularly portrayed, is indeed omnipotent .. Why is it that somehow He is unable to exert the power to make us do what wants us to do?
We continually watch Him futilely keep trying over and over in an attempt to get the results he wants...BUT.. He just cant seem to get the job done.
Should possessing BOTH impotence AND incompetence be added to His resume?
lostallmymirth 2 years ago 4
He just prefers punishment over good planning, m8.
balkan2k 1 year ago
Religion is the opiate of the people
Iyoulikeyoutoo 2 years ago
The music of Bach, hell yeah
camilocuesta 2 years ago
wow, have been watching each part and until now has been eloquent. then sam harris says at 4:35 "that doesn't presuppose any bullshit" haha
jimidrix5 2 years ago 4
Interesting chat, but so much goes unexamined. We need to think about meaning says Hitchens, yet all depth and meaning needs someone or something to mean it - without God life is redundant of meaning? Atheism can be consistent, but not when it tries to look for any semblance of meaning in life. A final note on the putative violence of religion and the peacefulness of atheism is that man writes his own morality without any idea of God. Communism carries the most skulls of this century.
treeurchin 2 years ago
please put down the thesaurus! lol. you make a good point, and i think that is that is a very high accolade considering how strongly i disagree with you. but communism has never occurred, do not mistake that.
muaythaistrong 2 years ago
Comment removed
Alfonzoagogo 2 years ago
Nobody is advocating Communist-style atheism with its violent repression of belief and other thought-crimes, not to mention the inherently stagnating effects of communal ownership and central planning. As a theory that idea is abhorrent to anyone who didn't grow up under the brutal yoke of a totalitarian regime or pre-regulated capitalism-gone-wild. At the most, atheists today advocate pointing out the ridiculousness of religion and praising skepticism as a higher virtue than faith.
darkmiles22 2 years ago
Ok I'm not sure why Alfonzoagogo's comment was removed as I think that was my boyfriend saying that I didn't know who had left the comment.
I must have left my profile switched on or be watching debates in my sleep as I did not leave that comment. Nor have I watched this video.
I've a feeling it will have been one of my friends leaving it under my name by accident.
So I appologise I can't carry on.
It might have been a friend I holidayed with, when I see him again I'll try to remember to ask!
treeurchin 2 years ago
It's staggering that theists take Stalinist Russia and say "aha, see what a world we would get if the state was athiest"
Just stop and think for a moment of all the horrors carried out in the name of the religion for as long as religions have existed.
The BIG difference is that Stalin wasn't butchering hundreds of thousands of people in the NAME of atheism (unlike the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, the endless wars of religion in Europe, the suicide bombers of Islam, etc ad nauseum).
ryko26 2 years ago 3
Durham cathedral is brilliant, no question. By extension therefore religion is true. Behold, logic.
ichimonji1988 2 years ago
I'm surprised they beat around the bush in this video. If ever anyone complains that with religion we wouldn't have Bach, Michelangelo, or whatever there is a VERY obvious way to answer them; is the comissioning of artwork/music really the best possible use of the people with incredible talent in our society? Thank god (irony intended), that we don't misallocate resources like that anymore. I can't believe that's not obvious.
ambigera 2 years ago
Well before Bacon was born to even contemplate induction,there was a severely-limited range of experiences or occupations to be conferred inspirationally to the masses per resource.Art and music touched them in ways Sunday sermons then only could.
djnross 2 years ago
I have to say, as I've grown older, more informed, and more atheist, I've lost my ability to create abstract art, to appreciate music as much as I did, or even enjoy fantastical cinema. It doesn't upset me though, however if everyone was more like me that might be a bane to the world at large.
TheFortressMaximus 2 years ago
Reason being?:the sphere of your mind which embraced Atheism as objectively solvent-solvent keelhauled all that was subjective as feeble,puerile and disposable...Such trade-offs are common sandtraps of those who once solely trusted FAITH.
djnross 2 years ago
Well, I want there to be abstract art, and fantastical movies, at least sometimes. I think it makes life a little more colorful. Kind of like Hitchens' saying he wants Christians around to argue with (which he says in this discussion) I'd still like there to be abstract art even if I don't appreciate it that much, and I'd still like religious people around to create religious music because I doubt as a secularist I have that same ability.
TheFortressMaximus 2 years ago
All of which is understandable to THIS Atheist,Maximus...There's a distinction to be made between hegemonic Fundamentalism and the mere extant 'ding an sich' of spiritualism.Some would tar both with the same brush.
djnross 2 years ago
I don't think this is univeral. I find the more informed and, as a result, the "more" atheist I become is currently correlating to my ability to more easily create music, abstract art, and appreciate the abstract.
Muchodelcrazy 2 years ago
???????????
That has nothing to do with atheism
This is a personal problem
EvilBeatsmith 2 years ago
That might be just because you've grown older, not because you've grown more informed. I don't understand how any correlation could exist between being atheist and appreciating music.
MentalSentinel 2 years ago
I'm not saying I have a great explanation for it. I'm just saying I could see an Atheist society being a very sterile society because in a way taking a very materialistic stance and engaging in critical inquiry can discourage overactive imaginations...but then again, maybe many have both.
TheFortressMaximus 2 years ago
This DVD starts out good, and gradully gets less impressive as it goes on, perhaps the alchohol. Harris raised a good point about the inability of science to truly represent love and other human first hand human experiences that Hitchin toally hijacked and led of in another direction
Dann7000 2 years ago
I would enjoy drinking Scotch with Hitchens. Not sure I would want the ensuing conversation to be recorded.
klard 2 years ago
Hitchens is definitely drunk.
xephyr1000 2 years ago
Hitchen's is drunk. That's why he doesn't want to see a world without religion.
zorbatheok 2 years ago
Looks like this video got votebotted... Remember to rate 5 stars, people.
XionXi 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
4 people who desperately need to "get a life" lol
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
For a real testimony, the truth:
A Glimpse Of Eternity Re-enactment Part 5 of 9
greatsinailove 2 years ago
Hitchens doesn't make any sense at all. First he says all religions are in nature totalitarian. Then he sais, he wishes the persistence of faith. ... He knows that everybody is going to object to him,. This is a cheap shot for being at the centre of attention.
bhigr 2 years ago
that's what Hitchens is all about.
kpirooz92 2 years ago
"This is a cheap shot for being at the centre of attention. "
Yes, He certainly enjoys it. This video is a clear illustration of that.
Twicebakedtaters 2 years ago
Dont you think he is trying to encourage debate? although in an argumentative way??
ledburyrfc 2 years ago
...I wonder sometimes what would happen if someone asked Hitchens if drinking and all the harm it does should be ended...?
DrunkenBlowhort 2 years ago
...Perhaps point to studies that laud the benefits of phytosterols contained in hops and barley that act as potent antioxidants?Like xanthohumol?---Counterfactual speculation at best,Blowhort...
djnross 2 years ago
I think its more simple than that... If the denial of said freedom could be realised...It would surly come to blows!
DrunkenBlowhort 2 years ago
I wonder what they're all drinking.
cornwallace 2 years ago 2
I can't help but notice what a meme has been made of the Hitchen's whiskey glass,it's chic on a par with the lip-dangled cigarette that deified James Dean.I wish to lambaste these flippant references as nugatory,but cannot;Hitchens has brought the stigma on himself.
djnross 2 years ago
ahahhahahahaa all these guys in the same room? im surprised it didnt go up in flames.
there is no god. and even if there was i would suggest we overthrow him
alx90x 2 years ago 8
Hitchens is fucking hammered by this point.
Vladimirwlr1234 2 years ago 33
@Vladimirwlr1234
hahaha! Indeed. Check it out at (07:45) geez!
Domzdream 1 year ago
three stooges and a tidy bowl man.
plato rules
reaguirre 2 years ago
These Christians that post attacks at atheist vids are so funny, they really just prove the point!!!!!!!
qaplatlhinganmaH 2 years ago 9
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wordonfire video describes Richard Dawkins best: "He is analogous to a 6th grade primary school science student presuming to debunk the whole of science". Virtually NO serious scientist , or even atheist, agrees with his RIDICULOUSLY POOR SCHOLARSHIP. Read "DISMANTLING THE NEW ATHEISM" by Dr Scott Hahn and Benjamin Riker: Once you examine the detail of Dawkins' arguments they are a joke, as confirmed by famous atheists who at least try to propose RATIONAL arguments instead of biased rhetoric.
kinghitter1 2 years ago
Please provide examples i.e., proof of what you are saying. I'd love to see your point.
ultranom 2 years ago
" as confirmed by famous atheists "
source this, or it means absolutely nothing.
these guys are THE famous atheists.
fontfont 2 years ago
kinghitter1: Are you drunk?
Skindoggiedog 2 years ago
i like hitchens nose(i know, i know, its a pointless comment. n so what?)
stagesix6 2 years ago 4
Interesting discussion about Donne.
regularjoeback 2 years ago
having irrationality weeded out of human ritual is a very powerful concept to me. great idea.
sylence7 2 years ago
Since the very raison d'etre' of ritual is rooted in primal needs to either sublimate vanity or assuage fear,how might one go about weeding the greenhouse composed entirely of weeds?
djnross 2 years ago
well it seems you speak in relation to the superstitious element, but instead be reminded of the morale we inherently created that was childishly placed on a deity, hence the negativity placed along with it. the greenhouse as you put is not entirely made up of weeds i would say, but the only thing i see in real pursuit of lasting change is open dialogue, intellectual discussion and free speech with religion being criticized like any other.
sylence7 2 years ago
A rather wise rejoinder to bear in mind,sylence----thank you!
djnross 2 years ago
no problem. ^_^
sylence7 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The only real value of truly believing in God is the morality love and peace that results which is the whole point of believing the truth of God's word.
There are historical reasons for believing in Christ too... beginning with the fact that Adam and Eve were told about Christ and every word after that was based on that fact that Christ would be born of a woman and would crush the serpent's head.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
you do know that Adam and Eve didn't really exist.
necrotictransversal 2 years ago 2
Adam and Eve told about Christ??? Where was that???
oneki 2 years ago
Yes, Adam and Eve were told about Christ. That shows how much you and others don't even know.
That's what happens when you don't get a decent education.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
Please can you let me know the book chapter and verse thanks. And this has nothing to do with a decent education.... If you had all the knowledge in the world, you would not have made the comment about noah you made below. If noah had 3 sons awho were married to 3 unrelated women, then the diversity of diseases and heredatry traits you have in the world would have been largely classified into 6 pools and as you know that is not so. i await the book, chapter and verse(s).
oneki 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Your speculation does not constitute a scientific basis. The gene pool is always getting thinner. That is an observable fact no matter how much it is ignored. The conclusion then is that 6000 years ago, the gene pool was much richer and we know that the people that were buried by the flood were larger and had a larger brain capacity.
Seekmosttoprophesy 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"We call Japanese soldiers fanatics when they die
rather than surrender, whereas American soldiers who
do the same thing are heroes." -- Robert Hutchins
procommenter 2 years ago
Hutchin's knee-jerk analog may fail to take into consideration a contrast in how the 2 deaths are precipitated,Kamikaze suicide is construed as devaluing Life,as opposed risking it in conflict to defend an ideal presumed noble enough to engage in combat.
djnross 2 years ago
It's not a contrast, just semantics. Neither method is more admirable.
crackwad420 2 years ago
Well,at least to me,cessation of existence ,period! is not admirable.Submitting one's life to an ideal perceived as noble,however,with respects ,even 'semantics' invokes a moral relativism.
djnross 2 years ago
that's what I'm saying moral relativism is hypocritical
crackwad420 2 years ago