I am an atheist, and am studying to be a physicist. Politically I am a leftist and an Anarchist, I believe it is the best for Humanity and think Capitalism is leading Humanity to death and destroying the essence of Humanity. Intellectual property is theft! You cannot claim random assortment of shapes, nor can you claim human thought!
Why is that 7 out of 10 Wikipedo users are always both atheists, pro-antifa and communists yet pro-islam and "pacifists"? I know they're mostly into it because politics and smugness, but with the last ones it feels like a contradictory conflict of interests.
Why is that 7 out of 10 Wikipedo users are always both atheists, pro-antifa and communists yet pro-islam and "pacifists"? I know they're mostly into it because politics and smugness, but with the last ones it feels like a contradictory conflict of interests.
It's ironic he says his mission to add more images to wikipedia to yet his bio contains none. He needs to learn to summarize, he easily could have said
wiki guy said:
"I'm a atheist, anarcho-communist, and amateur physicist"
So I've been watching a lot of William Lane Craig debates lately, and I just stumbled across this. I figured that Chris Hitchens would be able to do a good job handling Craig's arguments but when they got to the Cross examination point of the debate it seems to me that Hitchens was trying to stall for time and dodge Craig's questions, since he didn't seem to want to commit making a argument that proves god doesn't exist, and to play word games with the definition of Agnostic. Admittedly, I'm a Christian so I might totally be seeing something isn't actually there because of bias.
So I've been watching a lot of William Lane Craig debates lately, and I just stumbled across this. I figured that Chris Hitchens would be able to do a good job handling Craig's arguments but when they got to the Cross examination point of the debate it seems to me that Hitchens was trying to stall for time and dodge Craig's questions, since he didn't seem to want to commit making a argument that proves god doesn't exist, and to play word games with the definition of Agnostic. Admittedly, I'm a Christian so I might totally be seeing something isn't actually there because of bias.
This is one of Craig's best debates IMO. You can definitely tell Hitchens is desperate because he resorts to pilpul, trying to weasel around definitions like you pointed out. Ultimately the majority of atheists Craig debates end up having to do that because Craig argues from a firm position of interdisciplinary knowledge (he's quite adept at understanding physics for example) so when it comes to the hard sciences and defending his Kalaam Cosmological Argument he can bring in work from naturalism and materialism to help him overcome the superficial understandings of his opponents and appeal to his educated, STEM student audience.
IMO these famous Atheists seem not to value a broad spectrum of knowledge so they can't reach to other disciplines as easily to defend themselves. That ends up showing the weakness of their arguments if they're confronted by someone who does reach across the aisles, so to speak. When Craig debated Lawrence Krauss, for example, Krauss stumbled all over himself when it came to defending materialism and that's supposed to be the core of his belief system.
If you aren't already listening, I highly recommend Craig's podcast Reasonable Faith. It's an interesting insight into his mindset and how he approaches apologetics.
Christopher Hitchens was a textbook pseudo-intellectual who was merely more witty and well-kempt than a typical fedora tipper. It also helped that his smug euphoria was at a time when it was more novel and you had the Religious Right running around and pissing everyone off. He died in late 2011, just as the culture wars with the Woke Left were just beginning.
The only outspoken atheist that I'd consider a genuine intellectual is Richard Dawkins. He could be a bit of an asshole at times but he stuck to his principles regarding Islam and he's also an actual scientist with a PhD in biology.
Christopher Hitchens was a textbook pseudo-intellectual who was merely more witty and well-kempt than a typical fedora tipper. It also helped that his smug euphoria was at a time when it was more novel and you had the Religious Right running around and pissing everyone off. He died in late 2011, just as the culture wars with the Woke Left were just beginning.
The only outspoken atheist that I'd consider a genuine intellectual is Richard Dawkins. He could be a bit of an asshole at times but he stuck to his principles regarding Islam and he's also an actual scientist with a PhD in biology.
The funniest part is that his brother, Peter Hitchens, is one of the greatest High Church apologists alive today and a towering figure in public debate.
It's been said before that humanity is a naturally religious species, and that we will always try to find something to worship. Most atheists simply replace God with something else, especially the State. And just like other religious zealots, Statists have a tradition of resorting to violence against "heretics and unbelievers" when they become a dominant force. They have even taken to using education as a bully pulpit in the name of demoralization and conversion, just like they accuse religious schools of doing.
James Randi passed away at age 92 yesterday. The tears and cum are flowing among euphorics. Like they lost a prophet. Remind you of anything? View attachment 1680651
"Reality based". Get the fuck over yourselves.
Reminder that it was either a dictatorship or a civil war, since a good portion of the military was pretty open about refusing to accept to serve Allende if he took command. That is to say, they'd try to overthrow him anyway as is the wont of the average Latin American or even Spanish military.
But then these stupid motherfuckers don't even seem to know their own constitution, let alone understand that their dad's religion (FUCK YOU DAD) isn't the only religion that can be shitty.
I know of one guy who used his atheism as an excuse to mildly disrespect Christian beliefs by refusing to say his graces at the dinner table. The guy was also an all around douche from what my friend's been feeding me from him, there was shit like just treating people poorly and others I'll have to remember later.
So I know that people have mentioned Quora euphorics on here, and I’m really surprised that no one else has come across this guy yet: https://www.quora.com/profile/Ian-Sawyer
He’s one of the bigger named users on Quora and his entire profile just oozes of smugness and pretentiousness. He stands out from other euphorics in that he didn’t really become atheist and was rather one his entire life, and how confident he is about his atheism. He’s 100% certain that no God or afterlife exists, that everything he states is fact, and that everything remotely having to do religion is just pure fairy tales and fantasy, and that anyone who believes in anything other than a material world is deluded. I’d probably be fine with his beliefs if he didn’t go around flaunting them and posting them on every single Quora question that has to do with religion.
This guy keeps claiming that where he lives nobody gives his atheism a second thought but I’m starting to wonder how true that is given he makes a huge parade about it on the website.