Stephen Fry is a literal hero of mine, and one of the reasons I came out all those years ago. He showed me that being gay wasn’t determinative if who I am, but a facet, that I can be an autonomous will in a world of unrestrained sentiment. Here’s to you Stephen Fry. The world could use more of you in it.
@JesusLovesMe But There's no scientific fact that being gay is anything remotely associated with a mental illness. Being a rabid bigot, on the other hand, can be given to psychosis, just like being a religious extremist can. P.S. Genetic 'coding' has little to do with alcoholism or drug addiction. And it's yet unclear to what extent it determines likelihood of mental illness. I appreciate you're a moron - that may or may not be genetically determined - but assuming you can read - can you? - you shoud go read a textbook on genetics before coming on here to spout your nonsense.
@Detective L I did. And I also have a problem when I need" to get my point out, even as they keep evolving in my mind. It's worse when I seize on a point and need to interject. This is where I had to learn to put my tongue to the roof of my mouth....now what should I do with my typing fingers....
@Detective L - listened to it all - but still felt his internal battle with the topic caused him to talk over his opponent. Its clear, his command of the language outstripped hers but that would dictate more patience on his side....just my observation...its all good
Stephen Fry is proof that calm, rational and reasonable heads will always prevail, I'm glad we have left leaning people like him pointing out the flaws in PC culture, as I feel like we don't have enough (well known) left leaning people who stand up to it.
He's on his own, he's not hard left because he's always been round money. If Stephen fry was master of the universe then I'd be happy at rationality winning, all I can see is more depravation and irrationality prevailing
Well were Stephen Fry falls short (whom I deeply admire btw. ) is where this cancel culture debate is coming from. People who know youtube and internet culture know about gamer gate and how the right and the sceptics created this big spectacle of the offended left. With every game-review of a gamer who said "it would be nice if you could play a female character that is less objectified to the male gaze" ten videos sprung up with outrage that feminazis want to ban the said game and on and on. It became youtube culture and youtube money to make videos on over the top feminist outrage and it found it's way to even serious newspapers. Well in fact, where there are clearly some terrible twitter storms (augmented by trolls and bots), in real life, cancellation was mostly about not giving a platform to hate speech or scientific lies. (Do we need a climate-change denier on every panel when we know by fact that he's in the wrong, or can we talk about different ways to deal with it?) Which is valid. Civil discussion on the left is alive and well, it's the right who claim victimhood while simultaneously working on taking away womens rights and rights of racial and sexual minorities away.
@@martinae8601 If you want to convince someone you need to use facts and not opinions. “10 videos sprung up with outrage” Where is your evidence of the ratio of such videos. Capitalism doesn’t discriminate against sex or race, only against the poor. If you don’t hire the best people or sell to as many people as possible or explore every niche market there is then you will fail. Yes we do need a climate change denier on climate change panels so that he/she can be well and truly demolished in a civil and rational evidence based discussions and debate. Cancelling people breeds further dissent and divisions from mainstream culture. Trump arose from a complete lack of trust in institutions, it’s time we demolish pc culture and bring back respect in those institutions.
@@martinae8601 I can see you really believe that, and there is no doubt that right, so to speak, (left and right are such over used and simplifying terms in a current western cultural debates) does its fair share of demonizing and sensationalising and looking for left wing tyranny where none may exist specifically, but the way you see it is very unbalanced and equally slanted to your leftist perspective. Everything you just mentioned regarding what the right rails against are genuine and valid criticisms and objections. Unfortunately on both the left and the right there are too many impassioned people motivated to point towards and
hyperbole ... ironically mr fry would defer i do concur but i suspect the act would offend him morally with a shy wave of the emotional fan he is ...for me ... perfect for the role as he has no embodiment of righteousness rather one of nervous doubt nonetheless backed up almost to a point on his emphatic moments with solid common sense which i applaud deeply
Richard Wightman…….well, so much for kicking PC in the pants! You have just (consciously and willingly) licked the boots of this man who is attempting to ‘save us all’ from the unsavoury grip of the frequency of society’s use of political correctness!
The fact that he has to say such basic common sense shit to academic institutions is just disgusting. There is no point trying to educate people at this point. Everyone should just stop breeding and turn to anarchy, destroy the retarded species that we have obviously become.
It's so rare nowadays to see someone approach a political debate as a chance to have a genuine interesting conversation rather than a point scoring sport-like contest
Thats partly the fault of debating itself, which is exactly that. THis is why post secondary education is so imporant, people who have never been there, or only exposed to BAD ones, think that MORE indoctrination goes on there, but its in fact where the indoctrination of public school is broken down.
“The liberals are illiberal in their demand for liberality, they are exclusive in their demand for inclusivity, they are homogenous in their demand for heterogeneity. They are somehow undiverse in their call to diversity. You can be diverse but not diverse in your opinions and in your language and in your behavior. And that’s a terrible pity”. I’m at a loss of words for how articulate this man is.
@@seanmoran2743 I don't agree with anyone 100%. What he said in this debate though was spot on, comment on what he said here not on his other beliefs. Do you disagree with anything he said in this debate? Your statement epitomises exactly what is wrong in today's society IMHO.
Dyson calls upon Foucault for reasons of authority only, Fry calls upon philosophers to introduce ideas into the discussion. Dyson wants to be right, Fry wants to have a nice chat.
Stephen Fry is humble, intellectual, honest and correct, in equal measure. I have a lot of time for JBP but Stephen was the MOTM and rightly so. How can you not agree with him, no matter what your politics?
*"One of the greatest human failings is to prefer to be right rather than to be effective and political correctness is always obsessed with how right something is without thinking of how effective it might be. "* Stephen Fry
Reminded once again that Stephen Fry is my absolute favourite person on the planet. What an absolute gem. He saved this shambles of a debate and I'm saving this clip to keep forever, don't need to listen to the other ones ever again.
Dyson ruined the whole debate by attacking Peterson. I would have loved to hear Jordan and Stephen discuss their views the whole time. They are both spectacular speakers.
@@toxicpositivity9341 I could just listen to Jordan Peterson and Stephen Fry swapping cooking recipes for hours, never mind an actual intellectual debate. They should do a round table talk like the one they did with Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennet, and Harris. I don't agree with all their points, but the constructive back and forth advances mankind, as opposed to the Dyson characters destructive race hate mongering.
I regard myself as 'left wing ' in economics, I see myself pretty much in line with Fry. Left wing, but I hate sjw's. The idiot above(eddiewinehosen) is a moron imo. Peterson's politics, I also agree with in about 80% of what he says and I'm on the 'left', as I said.
Jordan Petersen doesn't often applaud a fellow speaker, what a thoroughly deserved compliment for Stephen Fry that was. Wonderful hearing such common sense, so eloquently and gracefully delivered
Fry was sensational, at times almost debating three others simultaneously, trying to converse with the other side while also trying to dodge Peterson's political sleight of hand. His arguments are razor sharp and efficient, no intellectual faff, just straight to the point and full of good humour and humility. Long live Stephen Fry
@@johnnycharisma162 I disagree, I saw the full debate and while I do think he could have elaborated his ideas further, he managed to clearly contribute/respond to the other debaters. I think the only one who came off as waffling was Michael Dyson, when everyone else was questioned or challenged they were able to actually respond to what was being said, Michael started alright, but around the mid-point it felt like he was less interested in the discussion and more interested in challenging Peterson. I don't agree with all of Peterson's views, but I do think he does a good job of communicating his thoughts and reasons
Stephen Fry is so very well educated and an absolute breath of fresh air. He puts everything across so eloquently and with perfect accuracy. Top man, top gentleman.
"Huckstering snake-oil pulpit talk. It is a mode of discourse, it is a rhetorical style that I find endlessly refreshing and vivifying". That is euphemism in practice.
I watch this, on average, once every year or so. It remains one of the greatest examples of oration, wit and humility I have ever seen. Stephen is a global treasure - we need more true progressives so wonderfully standing up to the nonsense of the regressive left (as, it must be noted, we need those true conservative voices standing up to the nonsense on the regressive right). Let wisdom, and doubt, prevail.
I watched the whole debate. I was so angered that the panel wasted Stephen’s time. He came prepared to discuss political correctness and the rest of the panel barely discussed it. To be fair Peterson had to defend himself from that idiot Dyson. Stephen Fry is amazing.
it's such a shame: Fry was on fire that night & absolutely up for a real earnest debate, & you can only imagine how wonderful it would have been if the opposition had been willing to actually discuss things rather than just strawmanning Peterson. Still... he was still amazing: people will be quoting the things he said here for decades whenever political correctness is discussed... an incredible performance of forbearance mixed with steel.
Thanks for the upload, Stephen nails it! Always loved the guy and he's just reinforcing my decades of adoration. Who gives a crap if he's straight or gay it just makes no difference at all either way.
This is so pleasant to listen to without Dyson. When you could start hearing his mumbling at some point after Stephen finished talking i felt a sudden sense of "Oh no, oh no no no-" but then it cut to the next clip, such relief.
What an intellectual heavyweight Stephen Fry is, the only time I have seen his equal on a discussion was Christopher Hitchens. Those two together was scary!
Christopher Hitchens was a BBC and Establishment boy. He was extremeley intelligent but was paid to argue views that he would never in a thousand years waste time discussing, let alone believe in himself. He got very rich by doing exactly as he was told. I have zero respect for him, the man was a disgrace.
@@TheVanillatech That comment makes me question whether we're talking about the same Christopher Hitchens. Hitchens, who was a famous contrarian. Hitchens, who stood shoulder to shoulder in solidarity with many resisters and not asked anything in return. Do you even know anything about the man?
@@TheVanillatech I think Hitchens has emotionally scarred you more than you should have let someone do so. Hitchens was wrong on quite a few topics but to call him as part of the establishment is a considerable error on your part. One can be wrong and have a skewed perspective without having to be paid off. Or that the default stance you take against anyone you disagree with ?
@@slutbunwallah He practically admitted taking money to read scripted arguments before he died, explaining himself with financial security for his children as his excuse. Not that he needed to come clean, anyone with a brain could blatently see him repeating the same agenda for months on end all over American talk shows and news channels. The "WAR ON TERROR", right? Or are you telling me that a learned man like himself, able to go toe to toe with practically anyone in a debate, simply believed everything that the tabloids were spewing out? Give me a break. Robin Cook resigned the instant he realized parliament were being roped into that dupe. Hitchens made a KILLING off it. All credibility gone. Zero respect.
Stephen he is renaissance man whose arguments make total sense... The word Belief come from Germanic, the basis meaning is to be gentle with your truths.
I'm not gonna lie, I think Fry v Fry would result in a tie. Perhaps only the late, great Christopher Hitchens could hold his own, or better, Sir Stephen Fry in debate.
If I walked out onto that stage and saw I was up against Jordan Peterson I would be worried. When I saw Stephen Fry I would have just shook hands and left.
Is there anything more beautiful than a highly educated wealthy person who remains compassionate and patient and intellectually generous in these difficult times? "It's how we are treated that matters." We're all such a traumatized bunch. We should be screening things like this in High Schools and teaching conversation not debate.
“Huckstering Snake-Oil Salesman preaching from the Pulpit” was directed RIGHT AT Michael Eric Dyson. Absolutely beautiful and applicable to that fool of a man.
Stephen is the personification of what he talks about. Doubtful, humble, and humourous with a lightness of touch. His talks and lectures are filled with rolling qualifications and anecdotes to bolster his arguments. His intellect gives him the advantage of having an overarching view, all of which is augmented with a formidable memory, a superior command of languages, and remarkable oratorical skills. He is a man I admire immensely for what he has taught me.
If you want to see more of Stephen Fry - click on the link where he & Christopher Hitchens debated “If the Catholic Church is a force for good?” ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-JZRcYaAYWg4.html
Stephen Fry is absolutely fixating with his eloquence. He has such a fantastic ability to generate relevant and effective responses to any retort or argument. As others have said, he is a national treasure.
Watching this in 2022 as a lifelong leftie and a few things he said nearly made me cry. Mostly when he said the success of the right is mostly down to the colossal failure of the left. I agree. For the last two elections in the UK I have canvassed for the Labour Party in the north of England in some pretty working class traditional Labour areas. They look at the left and what they see is people who are passionate about telling them that they're all racist, sexist and that it's wrong to even discuss whether or not an adult with a penis and testicles and who experiences sex as a male is actually literally a woman. By closing down the discussion we appear to them to be just lost in a fantasy world they can't relate to. By using the expression 'toxic masculinity' they believe we're actually saying masculinity itself is a toxic thing so poorly have we explained ourselves. By talking about 'white privilege' they believe we're saying they're 'privileged' as they struggle to survive in their poverty stricken lives. Instead of openly and honestly discussing what we mean and choosing our words more thoughtfully we dive into clichés and slogans which are almost certain to lead to misunderstanding. Is it any wonder young straight, white males look at the left and think we don't care about them? The other thing is his point of people losing touch with the ability to laugh at themselves and instead they take themselves too seriously demanding often quite aggressively never to be offended. Often an intelligent piss-take which is over the top but with a dash of truth in it can get a point across wonderfully well. "Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly". Have those days gone? For those who say we never had those days just watch an episode of 'Little Britain' or indeed Monty Python.
Jordan Petersen looked humbled, I support Mr Petersen and I think Stephen Fry has given him a lot to think about/think over. I would like to know about the real differences between the pair and their opinions..
I think that basically they diverge on the point of view of values, even though their fields of interest are slightly different as well. I mean, JP is a psychologist, he goes deeply into the crisis for he assumes that the main point in our society is a misconception about life due by the ruins of a Marxist ideology, which ignored what religion and ancient human instances had always pinpointed. On the other hand, Stephen Fry claims that the core matter is just - as I think, but who am I? - a lack of cultural sensitivity. Their common trait, though, is that there's something to face, to fight, to overcome, to evolve from, to work on, and it's just up to us. The huge thing is that the whole thing is so urgent, fundamental, deep and meaningful that no answer can be given, except the one that each of us chooses as his own proper. This morning I was keeping thinking of a quote by Eduardo De Filippo, one of the most important Italian playwright in history: "Theatre is the timeless, desperate human effort to make a sense with his life" I think not only is it about theatre, or art, but also does involve life itself.
Ultimately Stephen fry as a homosexual means he’ll have different motivations as Peterson regarding family and motivation which is why Peterson connects with young men so much
‘One of the greatest failings is to prefer to be right, than to be effective’ - a succinct description of many zealous political movements, obsessed with ideological purity, even if it’s at the expense of achieving anything in the real word.
Wow, he speaks so eloquently and conveys for me true ideas of humanity. I found it interesting what he said about the personal and political perspective. I also liked how he referred to what works in practical terms. The Native American who was ok being called an Indian because he was more concerned as to how he was treated
Stephen owns them all doesn't he. You can see the fear of his intellect and vocabulary in the rest of the panels faces. What a national treasure he is.
Watched a snippet. Fry is a giant and I could see his opponents disease in the clips I saw. Peterson, having spent his life studying evil, still wants to win husargument rationally. Fry knows better - sweet and hesitant
@@dabbler2071 The funny thing is that when Peterson and Fry had a personal interview, found here on RU-vid, Fry cut him off at the end, as he knew he was talking crap. Peterson said that he would like to have another follow up interview. That will never happen as Fry knows the real limitations of Peterson's ideas.
Stephen Fry is a master of the English language and he uses it so well here. Such a talent. Are we not going to mention how good he was in QI and as General Melchett in Blackadder?
I respect Stephen Fry more than ever! His comment about the Eskimo saying, call me Eskimo it is easier for you - reminds me of a childhood joke. Call me what you like, just don't call me late for dinner. This embodies, for me, human decency. Kindness and respect for your fellow humans will always work.
You just have to listen to this man for a mere few minutes to understand how calm and rational discussion should be conducted. Add to that, he is just about the most intelligent and eloquent person living today
Mr Fry is such an erudite man. I could listen to him for ages. I obviously only heard his part of the debate and can hear his disappointment. From listening to him, I suppose I class myself as softly leaning to the right, ( I was a Police Officer and I think a fair one. I looked at the job as being a uniformed social worker) but in any conversation that you hear involving him, you know that he is correct. He isn't forceful or demanding. Just absolutely right. Here is something that I realised more as I got older. There are no grey areas. There is right and wrong and although my parents brought me up with that in mind, somehow I let it slide.
I think Fry would be the first person to disagree with you on this topic. The world is hugely complex and binary positions are ineffective, if not plain wrong. I liken the world, and reality, to a giant badger. Sure, there are parts that are clearly black and white, but the vast majority of it is grey. This is my badger hypothesis of universal verity.
I really loved what he quoted from his hero. Bertrand Russel: “One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision.” I don't feel particular intelligent or special. But I do have some degree of imagination and understanding. And I've always had doubt with people who always display a great deal of certainty talking about trivial matters.
Stephen Fry is who I aspire to be in terms of eloquence and supreme articulation. Unfortunately, I'm not. I wish I was 1/100th as well read as he is. Perhaps one day.
stephen fry stole the show. i have watched this entire debate about 10 times and stephen fry completely stole the show. this is coming from a jordan peterson fan.
I agree with the term "catastrophic failure of the left". I used to consider myself left and green but ive realised ive crossed the line to conservatism now
The "Left" too often fail to debate the actual issue and too often focus on the morality of the person raising the issue. I am not conservative but often listen or attend conservative speakers - but I've had to face insults or protest for attending. Too often those on the Left have tried to act as my moral guardians or even censors in trying to prevent me from hearing whom I choose to listen to, or even worse - try to disrupt or cancel the event. When I try to point out I may agree or disagree with the speakers, but I should be able to go without being harassed they see this as their right to do this because THEY deem that the speaker should NOT be able to speak. And even more outrageously - they don't see anything wrong with that..!
