Christopher Hitchens RIP

[Sky]

Incidentally, when I started this thread, I believe that I titled it "Christopher Hitchens RIP." Somebody evidently changed the title. I didn't.

I would have preferred that the title remain unchanged. Notwithstanding our enormous philosophical differences, and despite the fact that I regard god is Not Great as an extremely bad book, I didn't intend the thread to mock Christopher Hitchens's death. I don't mock deaths. And, in some regards, I have considerable respect for Mr. Hitchens.

I believe it was Cinepro who started the thread with the title "Christopher Hitchens might be really surprised right now." The mods then merged your original thread with this one.

[Daniel Peterson]

I believe it was Cinepro who started the thread with the title "Christopher Hitchens might be really surprised right now." The mods then merged your original thread with this one.

Ah. I see.

I haven't been around much, but it seemed really unusual for the moderators here to come in and unilaterally change the title of a thread.

(I'm a bit sensitive on the topic, because I'm being accused, elsewhere, of having launched a thread in order to make fun of Hitchens's death, which is flatly untrue and would be utterly out of character for me.)

[Sky]

(I'm a bit sensitive on the topic, because I'm being accused, elsewhere, of having launched a thread in order to make fun of Hitchens's death, which is flatly untrue and would be utterly out of character for me.)

I believe you.

[Pahoran]

Ah. I see.

I haven't been around much, but it seemed really unusual for the moderators here to come in and unilaterally change the title of a thread.

(I'm a bit sensitive on the topic, because I'm being accused, elsewhere, of having launched a thread in order to make fun of Hitchens's death, which is flatly untrue and would be utterly out of character for me.)

If you're talking about who I think you are, that gang of haters aren't interested in the facts, only in confirming their prejudices; see my current signature as an example.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Daniel Peterson]

If you're talking about who I think you are, that gang of haters aren't interested in the facts, only in confirming their prejudices; see my current signature as an example.

Quite so.

They call me a "goon," a "hack," an egomaniac, a "buffoon," and many other such names, suggest that I'm insane, etc., and then claim that I'm a hater and shed crocodile tears over the way I'm supposedly making the Church look bad. I really, seriously, suspect that some of them are at least somewhat delusional.

[Minos]

I am the culprit, I merged the threads and didn't pay attention to the title. It is now changed to the OP title.

[Sky]

IMHO - a thread about Christopher Hitchens on an LDS-friendly board like this one is bound to generate at least a few less-than-favorable comments about the man, in spite of the fact that he just died. After all, he was somebody who routinely and unabashedly mocked religion (ours included). I was not crazy about him, but I’m really trying to withhold judgment. I have not read any downright mean-spirited posts on here about Hitchens. The nastiness seems to be coming more from his admirers – and directed towards the believers. But I don’t doubt that he was an intelligent man.

[Daniel Peterson]

I am the culprit, I merged the threads and didn't pay attention to the title. It is now changed to the OP title.

Thanks!

[Sethbag]

Oh the irony of this statement coming from a crystal ball gazer.

How am I a crystal ball gazer, Mr. I Interpret Feelings as Promptings from an Invisible Man?

ps: being sort of tongue-in-cheek here, since I'm frankly a little taken by surprise by this comment of Kemara's.

[Sethbag]

Btw Dan, I've never called you a goon or anything like that. You'll recall I once went to a fireside you were giving just to meet you in person and share a book I really liked with you, and never let on to any of the TBMs in attendance that I am an apostate or anything, so as not to make a scene about it.

I haven't been up to Utah for several years, but the next time I go I'm still planning on calling you up and seeing if I can swing by or go have a taco salad at the cougareat or whatever. That is, if the apostatedar doesn't sound the alarm when I enter campus. ;-) If we do end up meeting, I'd like to bring some printouts of some FARMS material which I believe hastened my crossing the line from believer to skeptic, in case you're interested in some honest feedback from a real-life, non-hostile* person about how the FARMS stuff affected my attitude toward the church.

* I'm hostile toward the truth claims of the church, don't get me wrong here. :-) I'm just not hostile toward (at least most) of the people.

[Pahoran]

Btw Dan, I've never called you a goon or anything like that. You'll recall I once went to a fireside you were giving just to meet you in person and share a book I really liked with you, and never let on to any of the TBMs in attendance that I am an apostate or anything, so as not to make a scene about it.

I haven't been up to Utah for several years, but the next time I go I'm still planning on calling you up and seeing if I can swing by or go have a taco salad at the cougareat or whatever. That is, if the apostatedar doesn't sound the alarm when I enter campus. ;-) If we do end up meeting, I'd like to bring some printouts of some FARMS material which I believe hastened my crossing the line from believer to skeptic, in case you're interested in some honest feedback from a real-life, non-hostile* person about how the FARMS stuff affected my attitude toward the church.

* I'm hostile toward the truth claims of the church, don't get me wrong here. :-) I'm just not hostile toward (at least most) of the people.

May I make a request? Next time you drop in at the "other forum," would you be so kind as to gently disabuse them of the notion that Dan started this thread in order to make merry over Hitchens' death?

Thanks,

Pahoran

[Sethbag]

Sure.

[Daniel Peterson]

Btw Dan, I've never called you a goon or anything like that. You'll recall I once went to a fireside you were giving just to meet you in person and share a book I really liked with you, and never let on to any of the TBMs in attendance that I am an apostate or anything, so as not to make a scene about it.

I haven't been up to Utah for several years, but the next time I go I'm still planning on calling you up and seeing if I can swing by or go have a taco salad at the cougareat or whatever. That is, if the apostatedar doesn't sound the alarm when I enter campus. ;-) If we do end up meeting, I'd like to bring some printouts of some FARMS material which I believe hastened my crossing the line from believer to skeptic, in case you're interested in some honest feedback from a real-life, non-hostile* person about how the FARMS stuff affected my attitude toward the church.

* I'm hostile toward the truth claims of the church, don't get me wrong here. :-) I'm just not hostile toward (at least most) of the people.

I recall your attendance at the fireside and appreciated the gift of the book. You were civil, polite, and pleasant; I'd be happy to have lunch with you. And, I confess, I would be interested to get your feedback about those FARMS materials. To be fully frank, I regularly encounter the claim that FARMS in general, or I in particular, caused or hastened somebody's loss of faith. I typically regard the claim with some suspicion, and especially so when the person making the claim purports to summarize my position, or the position of FARMS, and does so in an utterly unrecognizable way.

Go ahead, though, and call me a "goon," a "hack," insane, an egomaniac, a bigot, a slanderer, and a "buffoon," and dismiss my professional career as "pathetic." (I take those characterizations from a "discussion" currently going on about me elsewhere.) Then, if I object, announce that I'm a "drama queen" with a persecution complex. That, i think, is the way the game is supposed to be played.

[One Clear Voice]

R.I.P.

[emeliza]

I am sorry to hear of Christopher Hitchens death. I read his articles and although I didn't agree with him on much, I thought he was a good writer and an intelligent man. My thoughts are with his family and friends as they grieve.

[Scott Lloyd]

I recall your attendance at the fireside and appreciated the gift of the book. You were civil, polite, and pleasant; I'd be happy to have lunch with you.

Sethbag perhaps was less guarded in this comment from a November 2007 post on the MD board:

I'd like to thank the Mighty Scholars at FARMS for helping push me over to the Dark Side by their innane, overtly partisan, and ultimately unconvincing reviews and apologetic tripe. It would not be an exaggeration to say that it was the FARMS and Hugh Nibley response to so many of the historical problems, as much as the problems themselves, which ultimately made clear to me the fact that the LDS church was on the losing side of these arguments. Nothing says desperate, last-ditch, hold onto the faithful at all costs, intellectually dishonest mental gymnastics defense of the indefensible like a good FARMS review or apologetic article. This realization actually helped tip me over the threshold from being on the side where I could continue finding ways of defending against the bad history, to the side where I gave up such defense, and the opposing view began to take hold.

[Daniel Peterson]

Ah. Sigh. Well, maybe it would be a waste of time to discuss this topic with him. His viewpoint seems less interesting to me than I would have expected.

[Glenn101]

Hitchens, or any other person who does not believe in a life after death who dies, should have some kind of "what's going on?" moment when they realize that their body is dead but they yet exist and maybe meet other individuals in the spirit world they knew in mortal life.

Glenn

[blackstrap]

The troubling thing is,even if they were right,they won't know it.

[Glenn101]

The troubling thing is,even if they were right,they won't know it.

So, we will be the only ones who can say "I told you so?"

Glenn

[thesometimesaint]

If the Atheists are right no one will know it.

[Sethbag]

I've been working on my car and making merry with family members for several days, and not looking at message boards, but Scott Lloyd's comment about me was brought to my attention, so I suppose I should say something.

I've been an unbeliever now for around 5-6 years. That first year was a sort of continuum from still-believer to unbeliever, and how strongly I leaned in either direction would have depended on what part of the year you caught me in. So four years ago, when the comment Scotty quoted was made, I had only been on the full-on unbeliever side for a year or so. The feelings were a lot fresher, and also the frustrations inherent in discussion about Mormonism between certain types of folks. If I had it to say over again, I'd be more diplomatic about it.

That said, I do think that some things I read from FARMS really did help put things into perspective for me in a way that helped me recognize, and accept, that the LDS Church in fact was on the wrong side of the argument. And it was these things that I indicated in an earlier post in this thread that I was interested in discussing with Dan at some unknown future time when I'm next in Utah and am able to go down to the Y for a visit.

Anyhow, way to go Scott for your attempt to poison the well. I'll leave it to you to decide whether you "won" or not.

[Scott Lloyd]

I've been working on my car and making merry with family members for several days, and not looking at message boards, but Scott Lloyd's comment about me was brought to my attention, so I suppose I should say something.

I've been an unbeliever now for around 5-6 years. That first year was a sort of continuum from still-believer to unbeliever, and how strongly I leaned in either direction would have depended on what part of the year you caught me in. So four years ago, when the comment Scotty quoted was made, I had only been on the full-on unbeliever side for a year or so. The feelings were a lot fresher, and also the frustrations inherent in discussion about Mormonism between certain types of folks. If I had it to say over again, I'd be more diplomatic about it.

That said, I do think that some things I read from FARMS really did help put things into perspective for me in a way that helped me recognize, and accept, that the LDS Church in fact was on the wrong side of the argument. And it was these things that I indicated in an earlier post in this thread that I was interested in discussing with Dan at some unknown future time when I'm next in Utah and am able to go down to the Y for a visit.

Anyhow, way to go Scott for your attempt to poison the well. I'll leave it to you to decide whether you "won" or not.

Call it well-poisoning if you like, Sethbag. Or do as Dan's Malevolent Stalker and the other members of your cheering section did on the other board: Characterize it as a "smear tactic."

But let's be realistic: What I did -- with minimal commentary -- was nothing more than to draw my friend's attention to Internet content accessible to anyone with a computer and search-engine capability. I did it as a courtesy, by way of forewarning. Judging from his response, I note that he found the information surprising, perhaps even useful.

Ah, well, have no fear. According to one of the contributors to the thread on the other board, she engaged Dan in email correspondence and elicited from him a stated intention still to accept a future invitation from you, despite what alleged mischief I have wrought here. So your prospective luncheon engagement, at least for now, is not in jeopardy. That doesn't surprise me in the least. Daniel has never been one to dodge criticism or evade intellectual confrontation expressed in a civil manner.

I do still wonder about your intent. Though you acknowledge having been more bellicose in that post four years ago than you would be today, I note that you announced on the other board your intention not to "disown" any of it. I take it from this that you still regard the content in the FARMS Review as "inane" "unconvincing" "tripe," "intellectually dishonest," and "defense of the indefensible," a "desperate, last-ditch attempt to hold on to the faithful at all costs" (emphasis mine). That is to say, you see "the Mighty Scholars at FARMS" -- perhaps even Dr. Peterson himself -- as arguing and writing in bad faith.

Were I in his position, I would want to know that before making a lunch appointment.

And now that I have your attention, let me alert you to the fact that I have challenged an insinuation you made on the "Smithmas" thread over on the "General Discussions" forum. I now see the reason you have not responded. I hope your car is now running well now, that your Christmas observance with family was delightful, and that you have a happy New Year.

[Shelama]

It's been reported that Christopher Hitchens, who was suffering from esophageal cancer, has died.

He was a very talented polemicist and writer, and will be missed.

I trust that he's already had a very, very big surprise, and I wish him well.

I trust he hasn't.

[Shelama]

I put odds on his first thoughts in the afterlife being "I don't believe it!"

Rest in Peace - prayers for the family.

I'll take those odds.