In honor to Christopher Hitchens who died two days ago, I'm posting an interview of his which I found very inspiring.
Didn't agree with everything that Christopher said, neither always with his style in saying it, although it was often very entertaining. Still, I learned a great deal of important lessons thanks to his work. I admired him for much, mainly his clear thinking, the breadth of his knowledge including knowlege of himself, his interest for humanity's well-being and, most of all, for his courage and intellectual honesty. By the way he faced his death he proved that he deserved every bit of the high expectations I had grown to have from him. It's the high profile example of the way I would like to face mine.
Hitchens did not "pass" or "pass away", he did not "exit" or "go", he did not "perish" or "decease", and he most certainly did not "move on to the afterlife". He just plain died.
Hitchens did not "pass" or "pass away", he did not "exit" or "go", he did not "perish" or "decease", and he most certainly did not "move on to the afterlife". He just plain died.
I, for one, will remember and miss him.
First posted the same interview link on FB, on 28/1/2011.
How did he face death? More courageously than a Cristian martyr for example?
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφή@Spiros Kakos
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφήThanks to modern medicine he was spared, I guess, extreme physical pain, unlike martyrs of all kinds. Psycologically, on the other hand, I believe he was more courageous, yes, in the sense that he faced death without resorting to the wishfull thinking comfort of an eternally blissful afterlife.
If you think you are nothing more than a "complex rock", why is it so agonizing that you will die?
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφή@Spiros Kakos
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφήNoone thinks that, that I'm aware of. And most certainly Hitch did not.
Let me rephrase then: if you believe that you are just matter (a set of bones, blood etc) why would it matter (matter...matter, you know) that you will die? :)
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφή@Spiros Kakos
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφήThe rephrase left the original problem intact. Noone thinks that.
I would be very happy to know that we all think we are more than the matter from which our bodies are consisted of...
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφή@Spiros Kakos
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφήBut you already know that. Complex systems are invariably more than the sum of their parts.
In what sense? In what way is a computer (complex enough) more than the sum of its parts? Is it because it entails an immaterial part? (the idea which created it, the algorithms it uses etc)
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφή@Spiros Kakos
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφήSeems to me like asking why a car without wheels together with four separate wheels, is less than a car complete with its four wheels.
It's so obvious it makes me think I did not understand the question.
We talk about consciousness. So the question could be something like: How can something lifeless (e.g. an atom, an electron etc) can become conscious if it is connected with other atoms / electrons.
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφή@Spiros Kakos
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφήWe don't know yet, but it can well be by a process similar to the one that transforms useless car parts to a comfortable, safe, reliable and fast operational car. Or the one (and the same?) that transforms inanimate stardust to living bodies.
Still, this post is about Hitchens' death.
Whether we know how or not, there is no doubt that Hitch was alive before ... his death. We all knew that and so did he, right? This fact does not change just because you cannot imagine a human without an immortal soul. Some can and Hitch was one of us.
So "alive" and "dead" are terms you use just like... that! Right?
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφήAnd since this is a thread concerning the death of Hitchens, my point from the beginning was pure and simple: If you can imagine someone WITHOUT a soul (which I suppose you can), then why do you feel sad that a complex set of bones and blood has stopped functioning? Do you feel the same sad when your computer stops functioning?
@Spiros Kakos
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφήAs no soul has ever been detected entering or leaving a human body, you "infer" these "events" by the fact that the body is alive or dead and not the other way around. Therefore your use of "alive" and "dead" is identical to mine.
Your "pure" and "simple" point, was understood as such the first time. And answered.
@Spiros Kakos
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφήHitch is well known to have been very easily bored. In his honor, please let's avoid useless repetition and keep the rest of the discussion strictly about him. I am happy to discuss soul and consiousness in the relevant thread ( http://crispost.blogspot.com/2011/12/scientific-theory-of-consciense.html ) to your heart's content.
I hope that's alright with you...
Any comments you may have regarding him personally, positive or negative ones regardless, are welcome in this thread.
I do not honor the man who was in favor of Iraq war. I do respect though the administrator of this Blog. :)
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφήPS. Even though repetition is the mother of learning...
@Spiros Kakos
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφήHis position regarding the war in Iraq is one of the main issues I did not agree with him myself.
Salman Rashdie's obituary for Hitchnens.
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφήExcellent and moving!
http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/02/rushdie-on-hitchens-201202?fb_ref=social_fblike&fb_source=profile_oneline