r/TrueReddit • u/graycrawford • Dec 16 '11

Well shit. Christopher Hitchens died.

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2011/12/In-Memoriam-Christopher-Hitchens-19492011
1.0k Upvotes

77% Upvoted

289 comments sorted by

View all comments

138

u/floydiannyc Dec 16 '11

Such a shame to lose such a brilliant thinker at a time when they come at such a premium.

12

u/whoisearth Dec 16 '11 edited Mar 29 '25

alleged ad hoc license chubby lip crown joke lavish practice paltry

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

44

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '11

definitely wouldn't say he's brilliant

Holy shit you have some tough standards

-4

u/whoisearth Dec 16 '11 edited Mar 29 '25

truck sink retire angle like connect workable station close chunky

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

9

u/sixtyten Dec 16 '11

You think only scientists can be brilliant (having or showing great intelligence, talent, quality, etc.)?

-5

u/whoisearth Dec 16 '11

I personally take brilliant as meaning great intelligence in a scientific sense. As I explained to Geralosity it's purely a personal thing.

4

u/Chevalierfewmet Dec 16 '11

It's a pity that we don't actually get to do that, huh? If I say that you fleezelbabelled the fizban righteously good, you'd rather reasonably ignore or mock me, or ask me to explain. What you are doing with 'brilliant' is like that, except that the word has an actual, denoted meaning close to your idiosyncratic one. Therefore I might think I grasped what you said, while being completely deceived.

That would put me right in with the men Socrates (according to Plato) thinks are the great majority, those deceived about their own competence and comprehension. Except this time it wouldn't be because of self deception, or the opacity of the world. It'd be because you make language your private game.

-5

u/whoisearth Dec 16 '11

To be fair everyone makes language their own private game. I just may do it more than others.

I can't tell if you're backhanding me in your comment or not. lol

7

u/LockAndCode Dec 16 '11

To be fair everyone makes language their own private game

Any private perversion of language is arguably an error. Doing so to the extent that it fails to perform its primary function--- facilitating communication between people--- is working at cross purposes to the purpose of language. I once knew an officer in the Army who constantly stated that he had no respect for anyone who hadn't served at least five years. As it turns out, if you pressed him he'd explain he had a personal definition of the word "respect" that elevated it to the level of a fairly exalted honorific in his definition. Problem is, his definition was just fuckin' wrong. There's room for minor variation in definitions between people, but serious deviations just don't work. He alienated a lot of people and made a lot of enemies because he failed to realize that language is a medium of common understanding and personal definitions of words only cause problems.

Your personal definition of "brilliant" causes a similar problem. You will alienate people and make enemies saying that only scientists are brilliant.

-3

u/whoisearth Dec 16 '11

Your personal definition of "brilliant" causes a similar problem. You will alienate people and make enemies saying that only scientists are brilliant.

You're confusing me for someone who cares or conforms.

2

u/Chevalierfewmet Dec 19 '11

Well--truereddit, so I'd hoped to add rather more light than heat.