Hitchens - The Portable Atheist

adamd164

Just reading this now; it's absolutely brilliant -- Hitchens' introductions and little quips on the authors are informative and witty, and the pieces themselves literally are essential reading. Anyone else reading/read?

(dunno if there's another thread on this, couldn't find one)

Tim Robbins

adamd164 wrote: »

Just reading this now; it's absolutely brilliant -- Hitchens' introductions and little quips on the authors are informative and witty, and the pieces themselves literally are essential reading. Anyone else reading/read?

(dunno if there's another thread on this, couldn't find one)

I read "God is not Great" and thought it was absolute rubbish. I wonder is that any better.

Pompey Magnus

I haven't seen it any bookstores that I look for it in. I was in Dublin recently and nowhere had it, similarly in Cork.

905

I haven't heard of it. Your tantalsing descriptions intrigue me. Could you say a little more (without spoiling the end of course)? Is it a reader?

markyedison

was browsing in Chapters on Parnell street (dublin) the other day and saw a copy there. defo on my list to buy.

Is it a reader?

yes , hitchens does the intro and is editor, if i remember correctly, and it has a decent selection of texts from various others. pretty hefty tome but then it wouldn't be a cover-to cover read.

Cheers,

marky

p.s.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Portable-Atheist-Essential-Non-Believer-Non-believer/dp/0306816083/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205326462&sr=8-1

adamd164

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I read "God is not Great" and thought it was absolute rubbish. I wonder is that any better.

Well you should be aware that this isn't actually a book by Hitchens, he has just gathered what he considers to be the essential atheist writings historically. He weaves them together, so to speak.

However, if you hated God Is Not Great, you might not agree with much he says on them!

DionysusReborn

Only a person you hates snippy slightly rude and trecnhant examination of religion and who has theistic leanings could hate that book

adamd164

DionysusReborn wrote: »

Only a person you hates snippy slightly rude and trecnhant examination of religion and who has theistic leanings could hate that book

Yep, it truly was fantastic, wasn't it?:)

adamd164

More info here on The Portable Atheist for those interested.

Hero Of College

Hitchens is a piss and alcohol stained arsehole. Why is it the imperative of every anti-God self styled "Prince Of The Enlightenment" to be a piss stained Alko???

adamd164

Why is it imperative for every agenda-ridden petty, obscurantist, archaic fallacy subscriber to come onto an atheist board and hijack threads, showering freethinkers and others generally better than them with expletives? I suppose some questions will never be answered, and we can only speculate.

An Fear Aniar

adamd164 wrote: »

Why is it imperative for every agenda-ridden petty, obscurantist, archaic fallacy subscriber to come onto an atheist board and hijack threads, showering freethinkers and others generally better than them with expletives? I suppose some questions will never be answered, and we can only speculate.

It's good for debate. It's good to be challenged.

I see lot's of you heathens over at the Xtianity forum.

.

Hero Of College

adamd164 wrote: »

Why is it imperative for every agenda-ridden petty, obscurantist, archaic fallacy subscriber to come onto an atheist board and hijack threads, showering freethinkers and others generally better than them with expletives? I suppose some questions will never be answered, and we can only speculate.

Wow....you consider yourself a free thinker when you think "piss" and "arsehole" are expletives???:eek:

You ain't better than me.....now go back to your Dan Brown books.

eoin5

adamd164 wrote: »

Why is it imperative for every agenda-ridden petty, obscurantist, archaic fallacy subscriber to come onto an atheist board and hijack threads, showering freethinkers and others generally better than them with expletives? I suppose some questions will never be answered, and we can only speculate.

This is why:

Chomsky wrote:

There’s no way of responding to it. If someone calls you an anti-Semite, what can you say? I’m not an anti-Semite? If someone says you’re a racist, you’re a Nazi or something, you always lose. The person who throws the mud always wins because there is no way of responding to such charges.

stevejazzx

I've always liked Hitchens although from time to time he does embarass himself, like in the four hoursemen debate when starts to argue for the existance of religon purely because he enjoys debunking it!...to the general bafflement of his colleauges..
He has some brilliant momnets though, where purpose and reason seem to overcome him and he just can't help himself...although again his incessant rhetorical ranting style is altogether too overbearing almost to the point where he does himself an injustice and gives ammunition to his opponent by hogging the limelight..he has also made some extremely odd political stances recently by supporting the Iraq war while in the same breath admonishing Bush as per the norm.. for all his faults though he's is always entertaining and has proven himself as a worthy opponent to any religous debater...the man is after all, it should be said - and made clear - an immense scholar.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

like in the four hoursemen debate when starts to argue for the existance of religon purely because he enjoys debunking it!...to the general bafflement of his colleauges..

I think you might want to watch that again...

adamd164

Hero Of College wrote: »

You ain't better than me.....now go back to your Dan Brown books.

I wasn't offering it for discussion, it was a factual statement.

And Dan Brown? Never 'eard of him.

adamd164

Mordeth wrote: »

I think you might want to watch that again...

He says that he enjoys "sharpening his wit" in debates with the religious. I don't think it's entirely off-the-wall, but I do disagree with the sentiments.
Like Richard Dawkins, I'd rather engage in bone fide academic debate in a world rid of superstition and pseudoscience.

adamd164

stevejazzx wrote: »

for all his faults though he's is always entertaining and has proven himself as a worthy opponent to any religous debater...the man is after all, it should be said - and made clear - an immense scholar.

This is it. He's possibly one of the most brazen and entertaining of public intellectuals around. There are those with whom I have far more in common ideologically, but few express my feelings about religion more forcefully and eloquently.

stevejazzx

Mordeth wrote: »

I think you might want to watch that again...

having read all his books and watched the vast majority of his debates and even read the transcriptions and having posted this defense of him here (post no. 12) I think I got it...thanks very much!

Pompey Magnus

eoin5 wrote: »

This is why:

Originally Posted by Chomsky
There’s no way of responding to it. If someone calls you an anti-Semite, what can you say? I’m not an anti-Semite? If someone says you’re a racist, you’re a Nazi or something, you always lose. The person who throws the mud always wins because there is no way of responding to such charges.

Ironically enough Noam Chomsky and Hitchens have been in a war of words and, in a written rebuffal to an article Hitchens wrote, Chomsky labelled Hitch a racist.

adamd164

Hitchens a racist? Impossible, he consistenly states that race is a human construct (which it is), and has absolutely no biological basis. As a matter of interest, where/when did Chonmsky claim this?

Pompey Magnus

Link

Chomsky wrote:

That Hitchens cannot mean what he writes is clear, in the first place, from his reference to the bombing of the Sudan. He must be unaware that he is expressing such racist contempt for African victims of a terrorist crime

eoin5

Depeche_Mode wrote: »

Ironically enough Noam Chomsky and Hitchens have been in a war of words and, in a written rebuffal to an article Hitchens wrote, Chomsky labelled Hitch a racist.

Haha, hes doing a bit of mud slinging himself. Hes worded it really well though, by basically saying Hitchens didnt mean what he wrote because if he did it would make him a racist. I didnt think Chomsky could be so acrimonious and hypocritical though.

Hero Of College

adamd164 wrote: »

I wasn't offering it for discussion, it was a factual statement.

And Dan Brown? Never 'eard of him.

You are from Cork. You're better than nobody.:D

Hitchens is a smelly, pro-war sweaty git who needs more of these.......

Dades

Hero of College, stop being a twat or your next post here will be your last.

S+G

Hero Of College wrote: »

You are from Cork. You're better than nobody.:D

Hitchens is a smelly, pro-war sweaty git who needs more of these.......

Some of the greatest minds in human history in literature/art/music and sciences have had dreadful personal problems of some shape or form and yet they continually churned out wisdom, insights and creations regarding the human condition that absolutely eclipsed anything their peers had done before them. Hitchens is one such person.

Now what was your point again? Oh that's right, there wasn't one.