Why Judge? Particularly; ‘post mortem’. Hitchens walked in his shoes. . .as does each individual. Some things are still free; as in one’s own conscience and self-determination. Whether by our own short-sightedness or otherwise.
I don’t think Ransom’s mention of Hitchens is central to the piece at all.
The point of the article is these sentences:
“What atheists would have you believe is the improbable multiplied by infinity by accident.
That’s why I think increasingly advances in biology and physics suggest that an accidental creation is the most improbable faith of all.
For example, the theory in quantum mechanics called the Uncertainty Principle- which so far is consistent with what has been observed in physics- increasingly suggests that everything remains only a probability until it is actually observed. Without observation, nothing actually exists.
If that’s true- Einstein rejected the possibility of the Uncertainty Principle- none of us really exist nor does the universe exists without an all-seeing being. There is just no other explanation for the universe.”
Ransom sums up the question (and gives the opposite answer) that Hitchens struggled with in his controversial book.
We judge things. That’s what we do. That’s what you’re doing, what prompted you to leave a comment. You “evaluated,” and felt the need to leave your opinion ...
And he is talking to G-d now.
I always love the “Why Judge?” or the “Who are you to Judge” type statements. We make judgements all the time about people. We could not make it through one day without this ability. Hitchens judged and did so with a LOUD often times harsh, hateful voice. Who indeed was Hitchens to JUDGE??