Discussion, Exercises, Freewriting
Note: much of the student work here appears as "comments" added to instructor postings. To read this student work, you'll want to click on "comments" under any given post.
Chris Hitchens:Theism=Totalinarianism compares to North Korea religion=barbarism education is not=religion(religion comes from stupidity) Deist-believes in God, Theist-Believes in God of total control, Atheist/Agnostic-Probably no God Theists want to be slaves Religion is restrictive Middle eastern barbarians used religion to control people religion was first attemp at everything,worst since first
Hitchens 2: God is wise beneficial and good for humans and universe we don't know origins-unwise to form certainties questions no non believers can answer morality irrelevant without authority abscence of moral government in "ghetto" control and take advantage of neighbors North korea makes themselves gods(each person) drugs worshipped instead of God if universe has order try to govern selves by order
pro atheism- atheism brings more harmony because if you dont belive in god,then you dont have to worry about all that you eat, what you can and cant do, ect ect.
beliving in god means beliving in being a slave, where you are monitered every second of your life, and you can be condemned to hell for your existance for any little thing you do
beliving in god is like beliving in an cosmic north korea, where your entire existance is completly controlled and if you dont follow many insignificant rules you are doomed to burn.
Pro God- it is unwise to state an atheistic position when humans still have little to no idea about our and the universes true origions.
if you dont belive in devine punishment, you can act and do whatever you please without guilt
atheism is an excuse to behave like a child
when you ignore god, you compensate by trying to make yourself into a god
Christopher Hitchens tries to make the audience feel that a belief in God in unintelligent; appears to be completely convinced and certain of what he states; says that to have a God is to be a slave, and having a religion is subjecting oneself to tyrany; religion was useful at one time, when we were uneducated and ignorant,as an attempt at truth, etc., but it is harmful now; and asks Why would God be indifferent to us for 98,000 years, and then decide to aid us to morality by mass murder, plagues, etc.?
Peter Hitchens uses an eloquent tone and interesting vocabulary, perhaps to appear in understanding and certainty of his arguments; asks Why is there something rather than nothing? If the universe has an order, origin, and law, would it not be good to endeavor to follow it?
Christopher Hitchens: -uses comparisons people recognize (North Korea) -tells them having a need for celestial is an insult to their intelligence (flattery works!) -uses "bad" words such as wicked, evil, and slave -makes the audience laugh to keep them entertained -tells the audience how marvelous they are as human beings -uses a comparison saying that first attempts are always bad which makes sense when applied to medicine, science, and morality -says we, as human beings, are smart enough to survive on our own and have enough moral values to make our own decisions
Peter Hitchens: -says his brother knows little of what he attacks -uses words that are insulting to his brother, doesn't exactly get the audience on his side -says his brother and "luxury atheists" are just taking the easy way out of life -says those who get in fights live in areas where religion doesn't exist, basically says lack of religion creates chaos, which no one wants -since we don't know if there is a God, shouldn't we try to follow him if there happens to be one? -says North Korea is run by atheists and that's why the current situation is the way it is -says atheists make themselves gods
Christopher Hitchens(types of argument and points made) *Gives his own view and theory on religion and why people have it. *Makes jokes(uses humor)an "comical" insults. *Uses target words and phrases. *Degrades belivers Peter Hitchens(types of agruements and points made). *Uses humor *Degrades previous speaker *Makes atheiest appear a certain way *Puts religion in specific light
Presented by Christopher Hitchens: -There is no reason to believe in God. -We only believe because we hoped to be saved. -The Bible or Kuran doesn't allow you to die in a painless way. -Religion is the first attempt to find out the truth. -Since it is our first attempt, it is our worst attempt. -Darwin and Einstein are more lovely than the thought of the burning bush. -Humans were born as a primate species.
Presented by Peter Hitchens: -Believing in God is good and beneficial for us and the universe. -Refers to his brother's religion as "Luxury" Atheism. -We must seek the orgin on the world. -We destroy authority when we do not believe in God.
Christopher Hitchens believes that there is no God and it we only believe in him so that we may be saved. Since it is our first attempt, it is our worst attempt.
Peter Hitchens believes that his brother is a Luxery Atheist. He believes that there is a God and that believing in God in beneficial.
He compares God to totalitarianism which is tied with North Korea. He views everything from an atheistic prospective and almost assumes that it is possible to predict God's actions. How does he know what an all powerful god thinks; it is also possible that our definition of morals is different from gods
hitchens 2: Says that North Korea is the way it is because they do not believe in God and that they view themselves as "God"
I agree that North Korea does not have a good regulation system.
The first Hitchens: * religion is poisonous and barbaric * religion is utilized in history to manipulate its worshippers. * basically, religion is evil.
The second Hitchens: * There are questions about religion that just can't be answered. * basically, religion, god, and worshiping is good and beneficial for mankind.
My response to this entire situation is one of indifference. They both made valid points for their argument, but they were being judgmental and slightly close-minded of one other's opinions. I have never wanted to dig into the topic of religion because it is one of uncertainty. The arguments created around this topic go full circle every time.
Chris Hitchens:Theism=Totalinarianism
ReplyDeletecompares to North Korea
religion=barbarism
education is not=religion(religion comes from stupidity)
Deist-believes in God, Theist-Believes in God of total control, Atheist/Agnostic-Probably no God
Theists want to be slaves
Religion is restrictive
Middle eastern barbarians used religion to control people
religion was first attemp at everything,worst since first
Hitchens 2:
God is wise beneficial and good for humans and universe
we don't know origins-unwise to form certainties
questions no non believers can answer
morality irrelevant without authority
abscence of moral government in "ghetto"
control and take advantage of neighbors
North korea makes themselves gods(each person)
drugs worshipped instead of God
if universe has order try to govern selves by order
pro atheism- atheism brings more harmony because if you dont belive in god,then you dont have to worry about all that you eat, what you can and cant do, ect ect.
ReplyDeletebeliving in god means beliving in being a slave, where you are monitered every second of your life, and you can be condemned to hell for your existance for any little thing you do
beliving in god is like beliving in an cosmic north korea, where your entire existance is completly controlled and if you dont follow many insignificant rules you are doomed to burn.
Pro God-
it is unwise to state an atheistic position when humans still have little to no idea about our and the universes true origions.
if you dont belive in devine punishment, you can act and do whatever you please without guilt
atheism is an excuse to behave like a child
when you ignore god, you compensate by trying to make yourself into a god
Christopher Hitchens tries to make the audience feel that a belief in God in unintelligent; appears to be completely convinced and certain of what he states; says that to have a God is to be a slave, and having a religion is subjecting oneself to tyrany; religion was useful at one time, when we were uneducated and ignorant,as an attempt at truth, etc., but it is harmful now; and asks Why would God be indifferent to us for 98,000 years, and then decide to aid us to morality by mass murder, plagues, etc.?
ReplyDeletePeter Hitchens uses an eloquent tone and interesting vocabulary, perhaps to appear in understanding and certainty of his arguments; asks Why is there something rather than nothing? If the universe has an order, origin, and law, would it not be good to endeavor to follow it?
Christopher Hitchens:
ReplyDelete-uses comparisons people recognize (North Korea)
-tells them having a need for celestial is an insult to their intelligence (flattery works!)
-uses "bad" words such as wicked, evil, and slave
-makes the audience laugh to keep them entertained
-tells the audience how marvelous they are as human beings
-uses a comparison saying that first attempts are always bad which makes sense when applied to medicine, science, and morality
-says we, as human beings, are smart enough to survive on our own and have enough moral values to make our own decisions
Peter Hitchens:
-says his brother knows little of what he attacks
-uses words that are insulting to his brother, doesn't exactly get the audience on his side
-says his brother and "luxury atheists" are just taking the easy way out of life
-says those who get in fights live in areas where religion doesn't exist, basically says lack of religion creates chaos, which no one wants
-since we don't know if there is a God, shouldn't we try to follow him if there happens to be one?
-says North Korea is run by atheists and that's why the current situation is the way it is
-says atheists make themselves gods
Christopher Hitchens(types of argument and points made)
ReplyDelete*Gives his own view and theory on religion and why people have it.
*Makes jokes(uses humor)an "comical" insults.
*Uses target words and phrases.
*Degrades belivers
Peter Hitchens(types of agruements and points made).
*Uses humor
*Degrades previous speaker
*Makes atheiest appear a certain way
*Puts religion in specific light
Arguements of Atheism (Hitchens vs. Hitchens):
ReplyDeletePresented by Christopher Hitchens:
-There is no reason to believe in God.
-We only believe because we hoped to be saved.
-The Bible or Kuran doesn't allow you to die in a painless way.
-Religion is the first attempt to find out the truth.
-Since it is our first attempt, it is our worst attempt.
-Darwin and Einstein are more lovely than the thought of the burning bush.
-Humans were born as a primate species.
Presented by Peter Hitchens:
-Believing in God is good and beneficial for us and the universe.
-Refers to his brother's religion as "Luxury" Atheism.
-We must seek the orgin on the world.
-We destroy authority when we do not believe in God.
Christopher Hitchens believes that there is no God and it we only believe in him so that we may be saved. Since it is our first attempt, it is our worst attempt.
Peter Hitchens believes that his brother is a Luxery Atheist. He believes that there is a God and that believing in God in beneficial.
The first hitchens:
ReplyDeleteHe compares God to totalitarianism which is tied with North Korea. He views everything from an atheistic prospective and almost assumes that it is possible to predict God's actions. How does he know what an all powerful god thinks; it is also possible that our definition of morals is different from gods
hitchens 2:
Says that North Korea is the way it is because they do not believe in God and that they view themselves as "God"
I agree that North Korea does not have a good regulation system.
The first Hitchens:
ReplyDelete* religion is poisonous and barbaric
* religion is utilized in history to manipulate its worshippers.
* basically, religion is evil.
The second Hitchens:
* There are questions about religion that just can't be answered.
* basically, religion, god, and worshiping is good and beneficial for mankind.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMy response to this entire situation is one of indifference. They both made valid points for their argument, but they were being judgmental and slightly close-minded of one other's opinions.
ReplyDeleteI have never wanted to dig into the topic of religion because it is one of uncertainty. The arguments created around this topic go full circle every time.