Hitchens sucks
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-02-2014, 12:40 PM
RE: Hitchens sucks
I changed my mind Hitchens rocks.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes donotwant's post
10-02-2014, 12:43 PM
RE: Hitchens sucks
(10-02-2014 12:24 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(10-02-2014 10:23 AM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  ...
Or at least, watch the part at the end where they reveal the pre-debate views and the post-debate views.
...

That was odd Dodgy

Did you look at the post two above yours?

Oh, you mean that post I quoted. Blush that'll teach me to look more closely

Yeah, I, uh, was, uh, totally just reinforcing that post. Yeah, that's the ticket. It's not that I didn't look closely at the picture, it's that I wanted to reinforce the post by showing the whole video. Yup. That's my story and I'm stickin to it.

Excuse me, I'm making perfect sense. You're just not keeping up.

"Let me give you some advice, bastard: never forget what you are. The rest of the world will not. Wear it like armor, and it can never be used to hurt you." - Tyrion Lannister
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes itsnotmeitsyou's post
10-02-2014, 01:04 PM
RE: Hitchens sucks
Wasnt it Sam Harris that came right out and called WLC a liar during a debate ? Or maybe I'm thinking of Lawrence Krauss and WLC.... gotta look it up now. Blush

Hitch was the greatest, I admired his style and ability to speak from memory. Anybody getting in to a debate with him was doomed.

If bullshit were music some people would be a brass band.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes War Horse's post
10-02-2014, 11:09 PM
RE: Hitchens sucks
(09-02-2014 10:48 AM)donotwant Wrote:  I watched debate of Craig vs Hitchens and hitchens got owned because of lack of ability to form arguments which sound good and logical attacks. Dawkins suffers from same thing. Atheists should train their rhetoric skills. Because until they do people like Craig will win simply because they know how to talk properly.
Also more confidence would be good thing to have.

The theists usually win these kinds of debates for two reasons.

1. They are highly familiar with their opponent's positions and have honed counter arguments. They've learned this through necessity. People like Dawkins, have a hard time taking arguments from magic seriously, and so don't have good specific counter arguments prepared. The stronger position thus appears weaker. This is not uncommon in debates of any kind, where one side has a fringe position (even if popular).

2. They are arrogant twats and never express any doubt. Their opponents, like Dawkins or the late Hitchens, generally do. To an unsophisticated audience (pretty much all audiences interested in this sort of thing), the unequal expression of doubt appears as weakness of the scientific position.

Softly, softly, catchee monkey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-02-2014, 11:18 PM
RE: Hitchens sucks
(10-02-2014 01:04 PM)War Horse Wrote:  Wasnt it Sam Harris that came right out and called WLC a liar during a debate ? Or maybe I'm thinking of Lawrence Krauss and WLC.... gotta look it up now. Blush

Hitch was the greatest, I admired his style and ability to speak from memory. Anybody getting in to a debate with him was doomed.

That was Harris, as he called WLC out on it twice. For quote mining Harris' earlier rebuttal in the debate to create a strawman, and for quoting people that Harris quoted in his book and trying to play off what they said as instead what Harris actual said or wrote; complete misrepresentation.

This is why WLC is an absolute hack.




[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
11-02-2014, 01:32 AM
RE: Hitchens sucks
(09-02-2014 10:58 AM)Youkay Wrote:  When you have a great mind like Dawkins has or Hitchens had, it is more difficult to communicate your ideas to people with lesser capabilities (I'm speaking of religious people). Nevertheless, I think Dawkins is doing a better job at simplifying things to a degree that everyone can follow than Hitchens used to do.

When a scientist goes beyond science, their "great mind" is childlike.



Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2014, 07:54 AM
RE: Hitchens sucks
Ah, NOMA rears it's ugly head.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2014, 08:00 AM
RE: Hitchens sucks
At what point does using truthful and valid arguments become "rhetoric"?


I've heard a few believers call our oft-used arguments "rhetoric" as of late, and it seems to me to be little more than an attempt to marginalize or invalidate those arguments.

Through profound pain comes profound knowledge.
Ridi, Pagliaccio, sul tuo amore infranto! Ridi del duol, che t'avvelena il cor!
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2014, 02:10 PM
RE: Hitchens sucks
The devout atheist has prepared his response for everything. How to address the question, commit to nothing, and claim objectivity in one go.

It's so contrived, yet so appealing to the simple minded. Pop philosophy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2014, 02:11 PM
RE: Hitchens sucks
(11-02-2014 02:10 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  The devout theist has prepared his response for everything. How to address the question, commit to nothing, and claim objectivity in one go.

It's so contrived, yet so appealing to the simple minded. Pop philosophy.

Fixt

I'm not anti-social. I'm pro-solitude. Sleepy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Anjele's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: