Christopher Hitchens vs Alister McGrath (2/11)

The debate was held on October 11, 2007 in Gaston Hall, in Georgetown University's Healy Hall. For more videos, updates and info on Christopher Hitchens, please visit http://www.dailyhitchens.com

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• 2007
• Christopher Hitchens
• Alister McGrath
• atheism
• religion

[KatanaRapierCombo2]

@uruson I agree

[uruson]

@KatanaRapierCombo2 (reply to: "I was just asking") Be the better person--the hardest, but most rewarding stance, in my view.

If someone gains more than I lose, I'll help.

One incredibly relativistic view that I will gladly plead guilty to.

[uruson]

@KatanaRapierCombo2 (reply to: "I was just asking") I see, well in that regard I disagree.

I think everyone should be treated as humanely as possible, no matter what their offense.

Faced with the trial of Adolf Hitler, I would say that as a human being he would deserve food, water, clothing, and a decently sized bed where he would be deprived of movement and be presented with a gag to prevent suicide until sentence.

[uruson]

@KatanaRapierCombo2 A scientist who was a Christian.

He discovered something that the Vatican disagreed with, in a time where such things were not allowed.

Indeed a great man.

[uruson]

@KatanaRapierCombo2 (reply to: "biased logic") That's an example of... well, not logic.

Logic takes presuppositions and derives the logical conclusion.

If a 7 minute audio file takes 10mb, two 7 minute audio files of the same quality should logically take 20mb. (assumptions: same quality & encoding)

Your example is a question, to which the logical answer would be "yes".

It says nothing about the quality of britain, therefore the answer given is not logical.

[KatanaRapierCombo2]

@uruson i was just asking you to think about it, maybe some people don't deserve the respect of others, and maybe some people deserve more respect than others. not everyone is decent, so to say "like any other human being" is somewhat worthy of caution (in my opinion).

[KatanaRapierCombo2]

@uruson i accept, and thank you for being clear and decent to argue with.

[uruson]

@KatanaRapierCombo2 (reply to: "my point") I'm not sure what you want me to say to this. "go get them"?

If someone is dangerous and you pursue them, one should be armed to the extent necessary.

In your two examples, one would need armies. (or many assassins)

[uruson]

@KatanaRapierCombo2 (reply to: "I'm not") If you truly think what I say is close to "pure logic", then I take it as a compliment, and apologize for any inconvenience.

I value being succinct and clear when writing, so it's just the way things turn out.

And you're right, I don't think I'm very high and mighty.

[KatanaRapierCombo2]

@uruson okay, fair enough. keep up the good work then