My new favorite person: Christopher Hitchens

[Dilznoofus]

I'm not sure I know what you mean. Do you mean he's wrong about the smoking ban in Britain?

[Blarg]

Yes. He's very vituperative toward the anti-smoking supporters, and presupposes daft motivations and personality characteristics for them. All very entertaining, but pretty trite for all its passion and enjoyable pissiness.

[Boris]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes. He's very vituperative toward the anti-smoking supporters, and presupposes daft motivations and personality characteristics for them. All very entertaining, but pretty trite for all its passion and enjoyable pissiness.

[/ QUOTE ]

He doesn't pre-suppose any motivations and personality characteristics. He analyzes words and actions and reaches a conclusion about the motivations and personality characteristics.

What part of the essay was trite? It tells me something about your personality that you can find something to be both trite and entertaining at the same time. It means you have no taste.

[Dilznoofus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes. He's very vituperative toward the anti-smoking supporters, and presupposes daft motivations and personality characteristics for them. All very entertaining, but pretty trite for all its passion and enjoyable pissiness.

[/ QUOTE ]

He doesn't pre-suppose any motivations and personality characteristics. He analyzes words and actions and reaches a conclusion about the motivations and personality characteristics.

What part of the essay was trite? It tells me something about your personality that you can find something to be both trite and entertaining at the same time. It means you have no taste.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it would only prove a person has no taste if he/she were unaware of its triteness. A person can have good taste and still enjoy guilty pleasures.

[cbloom]

[ QUOTE ]
Basically the liberals were Hitchens fanbois until he wrote the book about the Clintons. Then the libs got offended and started attacking Hitchens on a personal level since they couldn't refute any of his positions.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's absurd. Hitchens intentionally attacks sacred cows on both sides. Party line liberals liked him because most of his attacks in the early days were against conservatives, so he went the other way to break that role.

Smart people are bored by Hitchens because attacking absurdity without a moral basis is both easy and pointless.

He's basically the smart depressed guy who likes to get in arguments and make others feel stupid and he's found a way to turn that into a career. Good for him.

[Boris]

Hitchens attacks absurdity without a moral basis? WTF does this mean?

[TheRover]

Also, I'd like to know what about having a moral basis makes it difficult and worthwhile to attack absurdities when not having a moral basis makes it easy and pointless.

[Dilznoofus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Basically the liberals were Hitchens fanbois until he wrote the book about the Clintons. Then the libs got offended and started attacking Hitchens on a personal level since they couldn't refute any of his positions.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's absurd. Hitchens intentionally attacks sacred cows on both sides. Party line liberals liked him because most of his attacks in the early days were against conservatives, so he went the other way to break that role.

Smart people are bored by Hitchens because attacking absurdity without a moral basis is both easy and pointless.

He's basically the smart depressed guy who likes to get in arguments and make others feel stupid and he's found a way to turn that into a career. Good for him.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the central issue for him for the last few years -- Islamofascism -- Hitchens' positions seem to be quite consistent, and they haven't been "easy." He's been talking about Islamic extremism for like two decades, since Salman Rushdie had a fatwa issued against him.

No offense, but plenty of people much smarter than you think quite highly of Hitchens. This doesn't mean they're necessarily correct, but it definitely means you're wrong when you say that smart people in general are bored by him.

edit: I should clarify. Yeah, there are smart people who think highly of Jerry Falwell, too. What I mean is there are intellectually honest smart people, at least some of whom you would be aligned with politically, who respect Hitchens. Michael Kinsley is one, if his review of Hitchens' book linked to at the top end of this thread is any indicator.

[ZeTurd]

It somewhat amuses me that people accusing Hitchens for being a hack, almost always point out his alleged fondness for alcohol before trying to refute any of his arguments.

Anyway, here's 20 minutes of Hitchens on the subject of free speech that you won't regret watching:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes. He's very vituperative toward the anti-smoking supporters, and presupposes daft motivations and personality characteristics for them. All very entertaining, but pretty trite for all its passion and enjoyable pissiness.

[/ QUOTE ]

He doesn't pre-suppose any motivations and personality characteristics. He analyzes words and actions and reaches a conclusion about the motivations and personality characteristics.


[/ QUOTE ]

By which you mean you agree with him and were happy to give him a pass. Either that, or you really ARE unobservant. I'll peg you as smarter than that.

[ QUOTE ]
What part of the essay was trite? It tells me something about your personality that you can find something to be both trite and entertaining at the same time. It means you have no taste.

[/ QUOTE ]

One thing for sure is that you don't know much about me, and your remark shows you know less about way too much else than I thought. I only throw this in because you were the first to address this subject by going on a personal attack against a poster. Great going, sport.