Don't forget Daniel Dennett. Brilliant man.
The more he smokes and drinks the better Hitchens gets.
2007-08-18 12:02:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Gawdless Heathen 6
·
6⤊
0⤋
I haven't read Hitchens yet. And what I have read of Sam Harris, I like... though I don't agree totally with him. Dawkins is turning into too much of a Fundie for my tastes.... he's using his Scientific knowledge to try to go against Theology which really doesn't have anything to do with his personal field to begin with. I can't take someone like that too seriously. It's like watching this Creationism Museum go up near me (yes, I live in KY, about 10 minutes from that museum)... They are trying to appear as if they are scientists and mixing it with theology. Dawkins is doing the exact some thing, just from the opposite side. Maybe they'll meet in the middle and come up with something a little more persuasive, but as it stands right now, they're both just Fundies looking to gain some kind of prestige among their particular groups. But I will say I liked Dawkins theory on Meme's. It lends a lot of evidence as to why all people recognize superstition for what it is, even though they still do it. Like when salt is spilled... I've seen people I would call very reasonable and logical picked it up and throw it over their shoulder. This lends a lot of evidence to a "collective" consciousness that is passed down through DNA... we do it without really thinking about it unless we train ourselves to watch for it.
2007-08-18 13:47:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by River 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Actually I would have said Friedrich Nietzsche, but...
Dawkins is not a compelling TV personality, but a most eloquent and convincing writer. Hitchens is great fun but since his weird spell of being a Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz fan, I don't trust him; I feel like tomorrow he might have one too many G&Ts, have a heart attack and wake up with religion.
Maybe the most compelling atheist author of all is Charles Darwin, who seems to have experienced the most pain in giving up his faith but for whom it was a matter of plain intellectual honesty. After all, Darwin started off as a clergyman.
2007-08-18 12:10:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sam's good for sound bites - Richard's the better lecturer - Chris falls somewhere in between.
But hey; all three can use words and logic much better than I.
[edit]
I forgot about Hitchens on Falwell - he's good. LOL
2007-08-18 12:05:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
I love the upfront style of Hitchens, but Dawkins, Harris and Dennett are way up there too.
.
2007-08-18 12:05:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by par1138 • FCD 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
They each have some unique traits...
Dawkins is well spoken...
Hitchens has a sharp irreverence that I enjoy....
Sam Harris makes sense...
I guess Hitchens kinda got me with his remarks about Jerry Falwell... he's my fav right now...
2007-08-18 12:01:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
I always liked Ayn Rand...a very compelling philosophy of individualism and rational thought. Of course, I'm a Christian and I managed to make incorporate much of her philosophy into my own system of beliefs in a way that would probably make her turn over in her grave (if grave spinning is even possible).
2007-08-18 12:15:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by KAL 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Christopher Hitchens is my favorite. He is very intelligent, knowledgeable, and entertaining to listen to or read.
2007-08-18 12:03:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
The late Kurt Vonnegut Jr.
2007-08-18 12:01:52
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
0⤋
Logic based on a wrong assumption can (and according to Scripture will) give you another holocaust! In fact logic without humility and healthy fear of God is deadly.
2007-08-18 12:04:24
·
answer #10
·
answered by Mutations Killed Darwin Fish 7
·
0⤊
4⤋