Was he right to say that philosophers are nothing more than creative essayists?

Was he right to say that philosophers are nothing more than creative essayists?

Attached: images.jpg (299x168, 6K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=vZiIU3u3e6I
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

"No."

yeah, thats all philosophy is

Dunno, what I know for sure is that he was a fag and not the cool kind of fag.

Yes, and God was right for giving him cancer.

Is it camus cosplayer or some fag idk?

Christopher "Brainlet" Hitchens?

>dude sex, LMAO
>solution to poverty is the 'empowerment of women' dude
>the holocaust dude, the church did this because the anti-semetism, but they didn't renounce their beliefs till le 1964!
>you're against homosexuality and want to ban it???? WTF, i love homosexual, my friend right here is a homosexual. DUDE i would leave him alone with my kids and let him baby sit them whenever he wants to!
>dude let me prescribe my 21st century morality to assessments of slavery, because DAE bad? WTF, why the fuck would any ancient culture have any literature or anything accepting slavery dude???? SLAVERY DUDE

youtube.com/watch?v=vZiIU3u3e6I

Attached: 1548182494130.jpg (577x465, 20K)

>Later in life, Hitchens discovered that he was of Jewish descent on his mother's side and that his Jewish-born ancestors were immigrants from Eastern Europe (including Poland).

I love the lack of actual arguments (minus your last point). Hitchens apparently still has the power to make people like you absolutely SEETHE from the grave, and I love it.

Why so much hatred towards Hitchens? I think he was well informed and usually witty or funny. What posted may be kind of lame, but his debates are generally entertaining, although most of the people he debated with were merely religious people and often misinformed.

Considering how surface-level Hitchens' views on morality were, I'd venture to say he knew next to nothing about philosophy and is therefore to be taken with a grain of salt on the topic.

Attached: quote-morality-comes-from-humanism-and-is-stolen-by-religion-for-its-own-purposes-christopher-hitche (850x400, 58K)

Tell ’em. give them the HITCH SLAP. Theists Btfo

based

This. Hitchens is like a puddle of molten gold. Shiny and beautiful on the surface, but stick your finger in and you'll find it's less than an inch deep. Watch Hitchens try to hold his own against people who actually know what they're talking about, the sophistry and lack of insight that comes out of him is something to behold.

That's why Peter is the superior Hitchens.

Attached: _60927761_hitchens.jpg (640x360, 26K)

Same. Hitchens wasn’t that ‘deep’, but he was a very entertaining man, and usually knowledgeable of his subject and articulate. He’s a great intro, especially for younger people, into more complex subjects, like he was for me.

wtf they are the same person

>usually knowledgeable of his subject and articulate

Attached: cringe.jpg (750x542, 157K)

I generally agree with Christopher's assessment of religion and its various absurdities but when it came to ethics/morality/any serious philosophical discussion he was clearly out of his depth. The debates he had with William Lane Craig exemplify this: Craig was undoubtedly the superior philosopher but would nevertheless be defeated because all Hitchens had to do is attack literalist Christianity, while Craig was arguing deism. In a sense, the 'intellectuals' of the New Atheist movement are severely overrated in this regard. They endlessly inveigh against the easy target of fundamentalist religion, without addressing the deeper points.

Attached: 1536861423371.png (1024x832, 297K)

imagine being pro iraq war. What a brainlet

he was against theocratic nihilish and fascism

which is why he broke away from the left that were championing or otherwise justifying islamic terrorism

Your right, Hitchens had no valid arguments in that entire video.

William "the universe has a cause" Lane "therefore the God of the Bible exists" Craig

No, he was just a dumb liberal.

Yes, and that should tell you enough about the type of response Hitchens was capable of when WLC can wipe the floor with him.

>Was he right to say that philosophers are nothing more than creative essayists?

Considering that's all he did it sounds like he had a massive inferiority complex.

Oh yes, the Bible is the "eternal word of God" but also condones immoral, shortsighted and temperamental social structures like slavery, which a future human can't obviously remark on, and erode the validity of the scripture by.

*You're

Are there any new atheists that lit takes seriously?