Hitchens

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Chad Olsen

unread,
Sep 13, 2025, 2:59:28 PMSep 13
to Lakeside Freethinkers
545559976_1228128302663050_2396299556678086800_n.jpg
Most (all?) of you have undoubtedly seen this quote before.  It is my favorite for many reasons-faith/god/logic, for starters. I just wanted to share it.

Chad

Felix Billingsley

unread,
Sep 13, 2025, 3:07:20 PMSep 13
to lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com
I love that quote!

Frosty

From: lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com <lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Chad Olsen <lakesidefr...@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2025 11:59:15 AM
To: Lakeside Freethinkers <lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [lakeside-freethinkers] Hitchens
 
545559976_1228128302663050_2396299556678086800_n.jpg
Most (all?) of you have undoubtedly seen this quote before.  It is my favorite for many reasons-faith/god/logic, for starters. I just wanted to share it.

Chad

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lakeside Freethinkers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lakeside-freethi...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lakeside-freethinkers/CAGaWurkbHDnsGbMmNSN5u_f%2BsD8pmc0x5MT4kGfACkWKF%2BCJrg%40mail.gmail.com.

Donna Steadman

unread,
Sep 13, 2025, 3:36:56 PMSep 13
to lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com
This assertion seems logical to me.   Will have Rich put it to the test on Thursday!

Thanks, Frosty,
Dab

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lakeside-freethinkers/BN9PR14MB50980B2BF49EB1A019664D96BF0BA%40BN9PR14MB5098.namprd14.prod.outlook.com.

Stephen Segall

unread,
Sep 14, 2025, 12:20:17 PMSep 14
to lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com
It has a name: Hitchens' Razor

What is a razor? "In philosophy, a "razor" is a principle or rule of thumb that helps to eliminate unlikely explanations or unnecessary assumptions when evaluating phenomena or solving problems." 

I'd modify that to say a way to order ideas in terms of likelihood rather than eliminate options.

Most know Occam's Razor - unnecessarily complicated explanations are less likely to be correct. 

And most know Hitchens' Razor even if not by that name: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." Of course, dismissed doesn't mean ruled out, just disregarded despite not being rebutted.

Sagan's pronouncement that, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence," can be called Sagan's Razor. 

Popper's assertion of falsifiability can be called Popper's Razor: "For a theory to be considered scientific, it must be possible to disprove or refute it." The implication is that ideas not considered scientific can be disregarded, but they also cannot be ruled out, either. They go to the bottom of the list, like claims involving supernaturalism, but not off of it.

There are a few colloquialisms that do the same kind of thing. "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence or stupidity" has been called Hanlon's Razor. 

"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck" can be considered a Razor (the Duck Razor?). 

And we had one in medicine for evaluating symptoms - "When you hear hoofbeats, look for horses, not zebras," zebras being rare diagnoses. Rare things occur rarely, so rule out likelier (and also more time-sensitive) diagnoses first.

Anecdote: There used to be a site called Pete's Pond set in a game reserve in Botswana that was a real-time camera (now defunct) of wildlife drinking at a pond. One night, I was watching and heard clop clop clop, and thought to myself, that's odd - horses in Botswana. Then I saw them when they came into the light. Zebras. Of course. I was embarrassed at myself and had a good laugh recalling the medical razor. I wonder if African medical students are taught that when they hear hoofbeats to think zebras, not horses. Context is everything.

Stephen

Philip Rylett

unread,
Sep 14, 2025, 2:11:11 PMSep 14
to lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com
HE IS RISEN!

And on the third day, Hitch ascended to Nirvana and his tomb was empty.  And now, looking down from his Lay-z-boy throne, sipping on some Johnnie Walker's Ambrosia Black Label, he has shared some of his unmistakably Hitchine thoughts on current affairs.


​Phil
From: 'Stephen Segall' via Lakeside Freethinkers <lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2025 10:19 AM
To: lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com <lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [lakeside-freethinkers] Hitchens
 

Donna Steadman

unread,
Sep 14, 2025, 4:32:20 PMSep 14
to lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com
This is a brilliant analysis about the cognitive dissonance of American mentality as shaped by social/ media...but who actually wrote this insightful diatribe (or was it psychically sent by Hitchens from Above-?  ha, ha!).     
I didn't see any ownership of this video.

Thanks to whomever solves this mystery!
-Dab

Philip Rylett

unread,
Sep 14, 2025, 5:53:56 PMSep 14
to lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com
It could be that AI has analyzed everything Hitch has ever said and wrote, his way of speaking, his philosophical evolution, his actual voice and intonation and has let it speak for itself - rather than a human author impersonating his voice using a cloning device. 

The next step going forward is the neuroplasticity of AI, so our AI avatars continue to mature after death and evolve with the processing of new information they receive as a result of their latest post-mortem diatribe.  Then we will have true immortality until the batteries die.
As an example of the need for our AI avatars to continue to mature as we do, I am considering that cows' genes "strategy" for survival was to evolve tastier, more tender meat, so any dabbling in vegetarianism on my part might not be in the cows' best interest - or at least its genes.   If I would have come to believe this after my death, I would like to think that my afterlife avatar would inevitably reach that conclusion and spread the word.

​Phil
From: lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com <lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Donna Steadman <dab...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2025 2:32 PM

Vijay Nilekani

unread,
Sep 14, 2025, 8:01:13 PMSep 14
to lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com
Good thoughts Phil.

I personally have a grim view of the future of humankind. We could not even mature and digest digital social media as societies and have fallen victim as a species to charlatans, conmen and dictators. They will probably have a perpetual stranglehold. George Orwell and Aldous Huxley were very and uncannily prescient.
 
Imagine the degree of manipulation and bending of "truth" that the future is throwing at us via AI. 

I am relieved that I am in my 70's, and not in my teens & 20's. I totally share Yuval Harari's concerns about the future.

Donna Steadman

unread,
Sep 14, 2025, 11:33:47 PMSep 14
to lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com
That's a reasonable explanation, Phil-  thanks!   I'm among those who are having a hard time identifying AI creations.

However... I must take exception with your thinking about the cows' gene strategy...as better-tasting meat would only create more demand for beef, thus killing more cows than before.   Yes, that does ensure a continued existence for this species but a tragic, short-lived one for the individuals animals in that genre.
 A better bovine strategy might be to opt for stringier tasteless meat ...chancing that at  least some "useless" individual  cows  would be released into the wild where they could multiply and live free. If not, then that species would probably go extinct, but the Earth (and human health) might be better for it.   Of course, I'm thinking from a vegetarian point of view!

Our personal biases definitely do affect our thinking!!  

-Dab





Philip Rylett

unread,
Sep 15, 2025, 6:28:53 PMSep 15
to lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com
I would argue that a domesticated animal that offered no more than tasteless stringy meat would be headed for extinction.  I would also argue that the cow's genes cares little about the cow's feelings and only that it survives long enough to propagate.  Domesticated animals, without intention, use our genetic interests to feed them, protect them, care for them and all they have to do in return is passively allow humans to eat them instead of worms when they die.  Cows with the juiciest, tenderest, tastiest meat will have won the genetic lottery.  
And it is hard to deny the success of this strategy.  Livestock make up 62% of the world’s mammal biomass; humans account for 34%; and wild mammals are just 4%.
Regardless of how many are killed (all animals die), the salient number is how many more live to reproduce and what favors that? 
 
​Phil
Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2025 9:33 PM

Donna Steadman

unread,
Sep 15, 2025, 9:01:19 PMSep 15
to lakeside-f...@googlegroups.com
Hey Phil,

I'm sending you a private reply to address your comments on this subject.

Thanks for your  response,  
Dab







Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages