What do we think about this kind of literature?

What do we think about this kind of literature?

Attached: 43369.jpg (308x475, 117K)

One rung above self-help, one rung below real literature.

The wrong brother died.

uh bro it is straight up ignorant of philosophy. hitchens new atheism rejects out of hand (on no evidence) the possibility of a first principle. religion is not without cause for criticism, but brainlet fedoras are not the ones to give it.

Attached: wew.jpg (640x336, 32K)

Trash. Uninformed. Ignorant. Infantile. Lacking complete awareness and disregard for history, philosophy, theology, science, sociology. To say nothing of it being bad writing.

The premise of the book is fine but out of all Hitchen's books, that one is terribly written.

By charlatans, for the mediocre.

okay now who in this thread has actually read the book

>we think

therefore we are

DEVO

Agree. I've read more than half of his published works and this was probably my least favourite.

He was good to comment and debate on the god question, but in writing, he should've stuck to literary criticism and historical and political commentary, at which he was exceptional.

rude

not great desu

Wasn't the image obvious enough? You really had to explain it, like you're fucking genius and no one understands your subtlety.

/thread

not my tattoo but yeah i think so. the explanation was necessary. without the text it could be interpreted as some kind of christian scientist image, or support the idea of science through faith, or deism. it's a really bad design desu.

this

Read Peter Hitchens instead

Leddit

It's true though, we cannot meaningfully say anything about God, including that God is great. To apply any predicate to God is to limit God, right?

factual and seemingly triggering for the christcucks and faggot le Veeky Forums club alike.