Nietzsche Vs. Hitchens: The Founder Of Modern Atheism
God Is Not Great Christopher Hitchens is the perfect example of an Atheist, and the perfect orator for it as well. Hitchens is extremely radical with his arguments and he has no problem telling other philosophers that their theories are wrong. Comparing Hitchens to those who have been called, “the founders of modern atheism”, is no easy task. Feuerbach, Marx, Freud, and Nietzsche do not hold views that are as radical and morose as Hitchens appears. When referring to the radical style Hitchens encompasses, the founder who holds the most similarities is Nietzsche. At a glance, it would appear that that Hitchens is in no way like the founders of modern atheism, as he is the only one to declare himself an actual atheist. However, as one
…show more content…
Ludwig Feuerbach, author of The Essence of Christianity, is one of the four founders of modern Atheism. It is a difficult task to compare and contrast Feuerbach and Hitchens to one another, because Hitchens does not mention Feuerbach in his book. Yet, a common theme that can be drawn from both texts is the projectionist theory of religion. Feuerbach is undoubtedly a firm believer in the projectionist theory of religion, which allows him to place materialistic value on certain elements in nature that are directly connected to man. Hitchens renders views that are both for and against this theory. Hitchens quotes his teacher, who had spoken about how powerful and generous god is, “He has made all the trees and grass to be green, which is exactly the color that is most restful to our eyes” (God Is Not Great, 2). Hitchens’ teacher was comparing God and nature together, than bridging the connection to humans. Hitchens goes on to say his teacher is wrong to connect those three entities together, because God had not created neither nature nor man. Contrarily, Feuerbach would likely have agreed with Hitchens teacher on the matter of nature being connected to man. For example, Feuerbach wrote about …show more content…
Freud thinks that man created religion to keep order from chaos. Contrarily, Hitchens thinks religion creates, and actually is, chaos. Hitchens points out all the wars that were caused by religion in his book in order to support his theory. Freud’s general viewpoint of religion is that it was there to help people to go about their daily lives, in a moral and ethical way. Freud believed that without religion in place people would go around committing crimes, because if there was no fear of the possibility of hell, or a losing a chance at heaven, nothing would stop them from doing unmoral things. Throughout the book, God is Not Great, Hitchens talks about Freud, and clearly holds him in high regard; much like he does with Marx. “Freud made the obvious point that religion suffered from one incurable deficiency: it was too clearly derived from our own desire to escape from or survive death.” (God Is Not Great, 103). Hitchens seems to agree with Freud, further supporting the fact that religion was human mad. So Freud believes that religion has done its work and has helped people, but it is now ready for a transition to a next step. The next step in Freud’s eyes is psychoanalysis. Furthermore, Freud never comes out right and says that he is an atheist, nor does he recognize the statement throughout his text. Contrarily, Hitchens openly states that he is an atheist.
Ludwig Feuerbach, author of The Essence of Christianity, is one of the four founders of modern Atheism. It is a difficult task to compare and contrast Feuerbach and Hitchens to one another, because Hitchens does not mention Feuerbach in his book. Yet, a common theme that can be drawn from both texts is the projectionist theory of religion. Feuerbach is undoubtedly a firm believer in the projectionist theory of religion, which allows him to place materialistic value on certain elements in nature that are directly connected to man. Hitchens renders views that are both for and against this theory. Hitchens quotes his teacher, who had spoken about how powerful and generous god is, “He has made all the trees and grass to be green, which is exactly the color that is most restful to our eyes” (God Is Not Great, 2). Hitchens’ teacher was comparing God and nature together, than bridging the connection to humans. Hitchens goes on to say his teacher is wrong to connect those three entities together, because God had not created neither nature nor man. Contrarily, Feuerbach would likely have agreed with Hitchens teacher on the matter of nature being connected to man. For example, Feuerbach wrote about …show more content…
Freud thinks that man created religion to keep order from chaos. Contrarily, Hitchens thinks religion creates, and actually is, chaos. Hitchens points out all the wars that were caused by religion in his book in order to support his theory. Freud’s general viewpoint of religion is that it was there to help people to go about their daily lives, in a moral and ethical way. Freud believed that without religion in place people would go around committing crimes, because if there was no fear of the possibility of hell, or a losing a chance at heaven, nothing would stop them from doing unmoral things. Throughout the book, God is Not Great, Hitchens talks about Freud, and clearly holds him in high regard; much like he does with Marx. “Freud made the obvious point that religion suffered from one incurable deficiency: it was too clearly derived from our own desire to escape from or survive death.” (God Is Not Great, 103). Hitchens seems to agree with Freud, further supporting the fact that religion was human mad. So Freud believes that religion has done its work and has helped people, but it is now ready for a transition to a next step. The next step in Freud’s eyes is psychoanalysis. Furthermore, Freud never comes out right and says that he is an atheist, nor does he recognize the statement throughout his text. Contrarily, Hitchens openly states that he is an atheist.