Tag Archives: misotheist

About Christopher Hitchens…..

Image

“Since Hitchens evidently dosen’t take himself seriously, there’s no reason for anyone to…” Noam Chomsky

How many of you know that Noam Chomsky was the mentor to Christopher Hitchens?  I will say this about Hitchens, I respect him for his honest portrayal in “THE RIGHTS OF MAN” of Thomas Paine.  In a way Hitchens kind of falsifies his own perspective in describing the journey of Paine from vehement atheist to deist. Paine helped in the French Revolution and he was almost killed in the French Revolution by Atheists, he was saved by an accident as a matter of fact.  You see, Paine was sitting in his prison cell with the door open, the stupid person that was to mark the door for the order in which he was to be executed painted the number on the inside of the door, and then the door was closed later, since he was to be executed he might try to abscond, so it would be prudent to close the fucking door.  But when they started chopping off everyone’s heads they got to him and his door didn’t have a number and for some reason Thomas Paine, like the chicken shit he was didn’t tell him, “HEY GUISE, I AM NUMBER 13, ITS IN HERE IF YOU WANT TO SEE!”So the dickless wonder survived and came to the united states and realized that a modicrum of grace was needed in the American revolution, he blamed the godlessness of the atheists in France for the violence of the revolution over there and wanted to prevent a repeat in the good old United States.

Hitchens hints at a subject that I myself have discovered.  There is no way to use science to make a positive rational assertion for why human beings should have inalienable rights, likewise there is no way to use evolution to do the same.  In fact it is quite possible to use both to do the opposite.  The only way that you can make a positive rational assertion for why human beings should have inalienable rights is if you posit god in some form.  You have to assume some authority some universal law to which all people are beholding and then you can have human rights.

https://thoughtuncommon.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/liberty-tree-thomas-paine/ http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/positive-rational-assertions-definition-by-joxuashivah/

Image

Image

RICHARD DAWKINS IS AN IDIOT

Image

I don’t hate the guy, I hate what he is doing and why he is doing it.  First of all let me explain something to you…

Image

There are things that as a scientist Dawkins can’t say, because science has a praxis and he can’t say anything that isn’t provable and peer reviewable.  So he can’t speak with the authority of science and say that he is absolutely certain that god doesn’t exist, but that is his conceit.

I know how emotional antitheists are so let me just say I am not a theist, I am a deist, I believe in god as the faculty of reason in man.  Before the misotheists turn into raging poop throwing monsters and do something stupid.

Going back to this concept of what can and cannot be said, Dawkins cannot knowingly make a logical fallacy, but apparently he can invite his disciples to do it.  And lets make no mistake, they are disciples.

Image

He uses the Scarlett Letter as a tacit conflation of the relationship between religion and science, feminizing science and inviting his histrionic cult to feel victimized, persecuted, and ostracized by religion.  So you see, he is making a covert emotional appeal and he is not trying to indoctrinate his congregation to understand logic or debate.  He is perfectly ok with them making logical errors as long as they are in his own favor.

Image

Earlier in his career Dawkins was much more animated in his interviews, flashing microexpressions of contempt and disgust until he went on Bill Maher with Neil De Grasse Tyson who reminded him assuming  he  knew it in the first place that science is done analytically, not emotionally.  So when he was screaming with his face like he was beheading a gorgon he was misrepresenting science and acting like a fool.  Which brings up a salient point.

Image

Dawkins is also trying to conflate religious thinking with insanity.  That is the hidden subject in the “the god delusion“, which yes, I have read.   Belief is required in knowledge to.  In order for it to be knowledge it has to be justified, true, and believed, and you can try to tell me that the justified, true, and believed rubric isn’t used anymore but let me ask you this, When was the last time you tried to walk through a wall?  You believe the wall is solid, you don’t keep trying to prove it to yourself,  belief shapes our world.  You believe in scientific authority so you listen to it and obey it.

Secondly, am I delusional if I believe that god is the faculty of reason in man?  Lets see how Richard Dawkins sets up his defence and offence in his arguments.

Image

Hmmm,  it seems I have lost the debate before it even began because I have to argue for the stupidest religious people in order to win and all he has to do is humiliate the stupidest religious people, which brings us to our next case in point…..

Image

I feel like I slam dunked that one.  Lets move on.

Image

http://atheistfallacies.wordpress.com/

Ouch!  Kind of a one sided victory.  I feel like I am having a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

Dawkins would lose a debate with me, badly.  As a matter of fact, he has lost debates, and there are people that he refuses to debate because he knows he will lose.  I heard a female british philosophy professor say it succinctly, and I can’t remember her name, “whether god exists or not is a question for philosophy not for science.”  and yes she was speaking specifically about Dawkins.  Dawkins is not a smart man, he is a greedy stupid man, he is trying to set himself up as a rockstar of science as a martyr for science, he is in relationship with his legacy and he is turning science into a religion.  He is evangelizing and proselytizing science.  Science wasn’t meant for stupid people, stop selling it to them.  Science is for the people that are logical and rational and come to it.  It isn’t for the cheer leaders of science.

Dawkins is the smartest man that stupid antitheists and misotheists are capable of understanding.  He is not considered smart in any other part of the world.  There are over 10 french philosophers that would rip him to shreds, and we don’t even have to go out of our way to find someone much smarter than Dawkins.  The problem is that the smartest person they are capable of sympathising with is the authority.  But you forgot to factor something into your interpretations and judgments, the fact that you are a complete imbecile.  You can’t evaluate a person that is much much smarter than you which is why Noam Chomsky doesn’t have a huge american following….

Image