Hitchens right or wrong!

Posted on December 20, 2011


What a mind… what a provocateur?

His central themes seemed to be: the right to speak freely, to believe strongly and to change his mind, ( for instance from being a committed communist – (devoted and arrogant left winger) to backing George Bush  (committed and arrogant right-winger)  and his invasion of Iraq.

Hitchens is probably best known for his strong stand against religion on its blind belief in an authority, and  it’s irrationality – rising from the dead, immaculate conceptions, angels, invincibility, etc.

It’s Hitchens arrogant belief in his own  rationality that I have trouble with … as if rationality was enough.

What do you do when rationality fails? When you need support it can’t provide?

Some people seek that support in “God.”

When Hitchens rationality fails he eschewed God and  instead gained his reassurance in Booze.

Freud claimed that religion was the opiate of the masses. Booze and drugs are the opiates of the sophisticates… when rationality is not enough they put the mind to sleep with irrational but reassuring substitutes.

Hitchens would probably claim that addiction to booze and cigarettes  was a lesser evil than addiction to religion. It would make an interesting accounting to compute the physical, psychological and social  damage done by the one and the other?

When the reach of rationality and science fails we all rely on one irrational bridges of one kind or another to sustain us, to provide bridges into the unknown and unknowable.

What’s your particular non-rational bridge or opiate.

Figure: Hitchens: www.flickr.com/photos/32006902@N00/367653945

Posted in: Sciencing