Not losing. Already lost outright. Losing implies that you can recover. You can't. If you level ad-hominem you've already unequivocally lost the argument.
@@DamnDealDone no but why resort to calling me names if you’re right unless you’re worried you’re wrong in some way and hope to make me falter in my counter argument? Your logic is a false equivalence, also known as a straw man argument. In a debate, your arguments are what people base their opinion on and resorting to insults shows you have little confidence in your arguments and believe you have lost or will lose without making the other party lose their own train of thought.
I love how he tries to do the old guy "Hey fellow kids" thing by trying to talk using "why so angry, bruh" as a gotcha retort, and then reverts back to the warbly church pastor voice. What an absolute clown of a huckster.
I think Steven's comment during the debate summed up their opponents. "i think people are going to look back at this debate about political correctness and wonder why we didn't talk about political correctness" fantastic debate.
My biggest problem with the term "transphobe" is that it's an attempt to conflate any criticism of their position as being an "irrational fear" or mental illness. It's gaslighting and an ad hominem, all in one.
Poisoning the Well. The use of that type of sophistry has always been the defining characteristic of the left in my opinion, especially among those who consider themselves the intelligentsia (e.g. pretentious wafflers like Dyson).
@@picnic66 Those individuals which lack proper information, knowledge, ideas, concepts, principles, morals, views, perspectives, perceptions, are also lacking basic, proper human though, thinking, logic, reason, reasoning. So, as seen at least within each of the selected responses by both Michael Eric Dyson and Michelle Ohr [both unknown to me and certainly insignificant] both are unable to convey anything meaningful, points within the intended topic of discussion/debate A. They each refuse to present any ideas, concepts, basis B. They C. Dyson is explicitly recorded with his explicit prejudice, bigotry, baseless internal hatred with his derogatory, deriding, condemning, labels which are certainly unfounded, improper, vile, appalling, despicable, disturbing, arrogant, haughty, egotistical character 'assassination", which is certainly a clear indication, of low self-image, lacking self-confidence, and base within any useful, helpful, beneficial, opposition, presentation, ideas, concepts from which to counter, "debate", thus resorts to using his improper labels D. Note, those with proper basis, ideas, concepts, principles, thoughts, thinking, logic, reason, reasoning, morals, etc. are not negatively affected by the improper, derogatory labels of Michael Eric Dyson, thus also, basically ignore them, thus proceed with the main topic without any shown comment or retort to the improper comments. E. Michael Eric Dyson along with Michelle Ohr are clearly among the media promoted individuals which lack proper human development, basic thought, thinking, logic, reason, reasoning, information, knowledge, principles, morals, thus are actually among the 'low level" within humans, not even reaching 'pseudo-intelliensia" ! 😲
Dyson came across as an ignorant, race-baiting, word-salad bully. Not really sure why she was there. Stephen and Jordan wiped the floor with their opponents. Jordon asking them to describe when the left goes too far..... one of the best questions i have heard
They hardly get questioned at all! The left always dominates the narrative and starts accusing opponents of fascism etc which then has the person defending themselves rather than going after the Leftist
I'm a "Heinz 57" American. I have English, Irish, Scots, Scandanavian, French, and Cherokee in my DNA. I have worked and struggled, I have moved, I have used food stamps, I have done everything and travelled every avenue to provide for my family. I have walked to work rather than take on a loan for a car I can't afford. Where is my privilege? Because I'm an average-looking "white male," I have had white racists assume I share their bigotry and black racists assume it as well. I AM A MAN. I am not a group. I am not a statistic or a stereotype. I can admire Douglas MacArthur and Frederick Douglas in the same sentence and not feels any shame, and I am not required by anyone to apologize for my ancestry, because it does not define me. I am an American man doing all he can, and that is all anyone can do, Black, White, Gay, Straight, Female, or Male. If you can do it better, please come and live my life.
Complaining about Ethnic Privilege, is like complaining about why the sky is blue. Yes, America was settled and created by White Europeans based on their traditions and history, just like many other nations were founded on their own.
3 месяца назад
At least we can all be misogynistic thanks to modern f m nism. ;). Sucks though doesn't it.
3 месяца назад
Just to be clear that was a joke because of the assumption of shared racism piece.
Stephen Fry and Jordan Peterson is the tag team you do NOT want to go up against. It was an excellent debate and Stephen Fry was brilliant. He is a very well educated and genuinely lovely human being.
Man, I physically cringe when people flounder and embarrass themselves like that lady did. It's so uncomfortable to see them build the plank, walk to the end, and then dive headfirst into the ocean. All while reciting the many benefits of seawater for your lungs.
She was floundering because she was extremely concerned about her words, because she has been conditioned by the intolerant left and subsequent cancel culture online. She is quite literally, unconsciously, afraid to be misinterpreted and afraid to take big swings with her opinions. And ultimately, it meant that she didn't really say anything of substance at all. I do think it's unfair to say she embarrassed herself. We have no clue if she felt embarrassed. Anything else is just your personal interpretation.
10:36 I've met a few people in my life who talk like Dyson. They can go on and on sounding extremely educated and philosophical, using complicated arguments and advanced vocabulary, but there is nothing that is actually being said. It's baffling to me how they can be using so much brain power but not able to grasp or accept the most basic truths that the average child understands.
Dyson's use of idiom is almost always incorrect and illiterate and he's just uttering these things because he heard them once and thought they sounded erudite. But, hey, when in Rome.
Agreed! On the whole. However, ‘advanced’ vocabulary’? Hmmmm. He just seems to throw in a bunch of additional, meaningless, syllables. Appears unable to use the correct grammar necessary to deliver, perfectly good, existing words. Absolute tit.
When I heard about this debate I originally thought it was Fry vs Peterson and I thought “this will be interesting.” When I realized they were together I thought, “omg, they’re gonna murder these guys!”
@@jasonwatterson5739 Yeah, that was where Fry cut Peterson off at the end because he knew he was talking absolute garbage. Peterson asked for a follow up which Stephen will never do as he knows it will be a complete waste of time talking to Peterson again. Fry knows that Peterson is part of the problem and not the solution.
This is what happens when one has no argument and their perspective is indefensible. Debate is where truth is flushed out. Free speech is necessary! Censorship (political correctness) is the domain of the tyrant and truth is his enemy.
@@chrisfelouzis7195 free speech absolutism doesn't work. Coercion is language and subjective. There is no objective social solution to the threat of violence
Yesterday I asked a friend if he had read the Twitter Files. He said no. I asked why. He said "It's all bs and not worth my time". I said fine, but there's a lot in there, and written by former NY Times journalists (he reads NYT regularly). He said " Stop! Just stop!". He then said " I knew I lost you two years ago.". We argued over Bidens vaccine mandate, I opposed, he didn't. He is so utterly obsessed with his hate for Trump that no matter what, he will see ALL non liberal narratives instantly as b.s. he then accused me of "going down rabbit holes". Crazy division and so many captured minds. I was like him too, and we used to agree politically, but the past 5 years truly opened my eyes.
That the problem with most indoctrinated people, they’re told anything outside of what they were taught to be “good” is inherently evil. Liberal = Good, Conservative = Bad. This way they don’t have to listen to the argument because “hear no evil” in their view. It’s pathetic, frankly.
@@littlecatfeet9064I have to say, I hadn't thought much about it before reading your comment but indeed, I am now curious myself........ However I am also wondering why you wouldn't be curious as to the writer's race as well?? For deeper context when visualizing the scenario he's described I would need to know the race of both parties, js 😉
I didn't know about Dyson before watched this debate, but afterwards I had to look him up. Turned out he also did the foreword for White Fragility. It all just clicked.
He’s a peach for sure. The good part, once you hear him speak, you know what he’s going to say on everything. So you only have to endure him a single time.
Jordan is a man of empathy which no doubt helps greatly in his profession but it also leaves him vulnerable to cruelty and he was hurt at Dyson's remarks and Dyson was almost preening himself thinking he'd scored some sort of point. Fortunately there was another man of empathy there and nothing on Earth will anger that type of man more than seeing someone being deliberately hurt for no reason but cruelty...........................so Stephen ripped the race-baiter a new one! I was almost cheering at that point since I was enraged myself. Jordan did not deserve that. But by God, that was a fantastic rebuttal on Jordan's behalf! The audience didn't like what Dyson said either but appreciated Stephen's retort.
I recently (finally) read Mill’s On Liberty. One of the arguments for freedom of speech that hit me the hardest is that those who would censor have to think they are 100% correct…and what has history taught us, except how many times we, and especially governments, get it WRONG. Therefore, we MUST allow freedom of thought and speech, because we also must (if we claim to be honest) admit the possibility (and probability) of being wrong in some point. Therefore, it follows that we allow freedom of speech, if only for the reason of finding out where it is that we are wrong.
I'll definitely have to purchase and read that, thanks for sharing. This is basically my rationale for being against all the net-zero climate agenda. We all have plans, and we all have failed plans. Even if everything they claimed about the coming climate apocalypse were true (it isn't), the solution still would not be to put all of our resources and energy into this single plan dreamed up by politicians, effectively cutting off every other avenue for innovation. It's a simple question at the end of the day: is it more sensible to trust entirely in the plan of our current leaders, or ought we trust in the collective brilliance of all humans? It's a lot like the great horse manure crisis of 1894. Everyone was convinced that the problem would continue to grow exponentially and make things completely unlivable. And then the automobile took over and the problem vanished overnight. Imagine if instead of allowing citizens to innovate, the government had simply spent all the nations resources and energy on restricting economic growth, and actually pushed for reducing productivity and freedom? Which is exactly what we're doing now. And that would just be on the local scale, or the national scale at most. Today they're forcing this on a global scale, which is the epitome of elitism with regards to developed nations demonizing undeveloped nations for trying to improve their nations and the lives of their citizens. It's climbing up the rope to comfort and then cutting it for those that follow. We all need the freedom to be wrong in order to find out what's actually good, what's actually right, and what actually works. That last one is perhaps the most important, and why the free market is our single greatest boon for improvement.
Agreed for me it's just like human rights. If there are human rights they have to be for everyone, even those who took the human rights away from others. It could be very easily decided by those in charge who does and doesn't deserve human rights and that's just dangerous. It's like a bite inhibition, once you know you can do it is it so easy to stop yourself? Or the kinds of people who enjoy taking the rights from others. Instead of being in the prisons they'd be in the police force
Yes! That's the absolute essence of the social importance of free speech. It is the only way for a group of people to improve the way society functions - to freely share ideas, vigorously challenge every idea, and eventually, EVENTUALLY figure out which ones work best. I also appreciate Peterson's argument that, on an individual basis, speaking freely is essential to thinking clearly. The minute we shut down our verbal expression, we have reduced our ability to think. Everyday, we can see the chilling downward spiral these two effects are creating.
The perfect example of that is American slavery. Freedom of speech gave us the ability for a minority voice to gain amplification through merit and reason, to become a majority voice, and at many times unpleasant and hateful, in order to realize a moral wrong and correct it.
I’d say international! Or at least, he’s someone I look up to and aspire to be more like despite being from the US. I’ll never be as eloquent, but I hope to be as understanding.
@@saeveth His books on Greek mythology are fantastic and written in such a way that's a fresh take on the stories (well, same stories but modern wording). Well worth checking out.
I watched this debate years ago (in part) and couldnt sit through all of Dyson's word salad and bullshit to save my life. Some of us are built for this and some are not.
That woman did NOT belong on stage she offered NOTHING of value. The word salad king Michael "Windbag" Dyson has never proven to be a person who speaks with wisdom. Dr. Peterson and Stephen Fry outclassed their opponents easily. This was a non-debate.
@@perspectiveiseverything1694 Clearly, certainly within this video compilation, the improper, incorrect, invalid, disgusting, appalling, despicable derogatory, deriding, condemning labels which Michael Eric Dyson stated about either or both Jordan and Steven indicate certain improper, invalid, mindset, prejudice, bias, bigotry, baseless hated !! 😲
Stephen Fry is the dogs bollocks mate. True intellectual. Proper brilliant. And he's funny as fuck too. That whole debate was eye opening, the fact he is left winger, and is opposing the modern left is pretty telling.
I feel exactly the same the same. This debate changed my wavering confidence making me realise I wasn’t wrong to think the way I did. Pivotal moment in my life. Thanks for giving it a platform again. ❤️
My aunt was a debate judicator and always made clear at the onset that, "Any use of supposed intelligence or use of flamboyant language in an attempt to make idiocracy appear intelligent I will immediately call BS on."
I always found it amazing that the public scrutiny for political correctness is almost entirely one sided. Of course being politically correct always reminds of ‘The Emperor’s New Clothes’. If you’re smart, wise, good, and pure you’ll see the King’s clothes. No one wants to appear otherwise, so of course they agree and never tell the truth of themselves. They just agree and add to the lie. Brilliant debate. Thank you.
I remember this debate from way back. My favorite part was Stephen Fry's closing statement. He had just followed Michael Eric Dyson, who is truly a moron. Fry began his statement referring to Dyson's debate style as "huckstering, snake oil, pulpit talk," but in the most passive-aggressive way. It was glorious.
and if I remember correctly, said what I thought was the most poignant words of the whole debate 'we have lost the ability of being playful with ideas' or something similar
Rowan Atkinson? Monty Python? Not sure they've achieved the status of national treasures.... that title is for the likes of Steven Fry and David Attenborough.
and all have said similar things about freedom of expression being stifled by the modern "liberal" political ideas on what's acceptable and the mob mentality which goes with it. When the Monty Python Crew, Stephen Fry and Rowen Atkinson started out in comedy they had to fight against the likes of Mary Whitehouse and her listeners and viewers association, a conservative organisation with a small c, but probably also mostly Conservative with a big C bunch who would protest about anything they found offensive, it was those on the left who demanded freedom of expression, but now they are the people who stand outside events protesting or run media campaigns against a certain act or speaker.
The moment you were cancelled - from your work place - knew you're going to be a force. congratulations at 100K - looking forward ⏩ when you reach 500K subs
Mine was Christopher Hitchens opening argument against censorship and for freedom of speech. “Don’t take refuge in the false sense of security. And the feeling you are bound to be okay because you are in the safely moral majority.”
let's not overlook how when Peterson makes the point about making a "white privilege tax" Dyson unironically agreed saying "You talking some good shit right here." the sudden shift from the sanctimonious word-salad tells me that was the first and only time he was honestly speaking his mind the entire debate.
Great point. I guess I didn't hear him say that. What struck me about his rant is that at the height of it, he was talking to the audience; I think looking for that "reaction" as opposed to making a real point for a debate.
@@pinetree5489 are you talking about Peterson? Either way, the point of a public debate is to make your case to both your opponent and the crowd. Peterson often looks across the crowd to see how they react to what he says before focusing on his opponent during debates.
@@kellyevans3254 I was talking of Dyson. I had considered adding in a caveat to my statement that the clip I was speaking of was short and didn't show all of his rant from one angle AND that the others would also look at the audience at times too but just didn't include it. That may 'ruin' my point, but I'd still say his rant was more 'for' the audience.
That's because American leftists co-opted and castrated the term. They have done the same to "progressive", now they are debasing "democracy". Soon, "freedom" will equal "slavery".
@@sanniepstein4835 I think it's time to reclaim it. I just call goons like Dyson leftists and Marxists. There's nothing liberal about the modern left.
I absolutely love listening to Stephen Fry. He is able to make even the most mundane topics, like grass growing or paint drying, utterly fascinating. I could listen to him for hours. Such a gentleman. Thank you for this video; I shall now sit back and enjoy :)
I don’t understand how every time I watch one of your posts I check I am subscribed and sure enough I am not . How can RU-vid constantly cancel my subscription ? Love your sane sensible commentary.
The thing I remember best about this debate was Dyson wandering off topic and Jordan Peterson let himself wander as well. Then Stephen took his turn to speak and mentioned how people watching this in the coming years will be surprised that the original subject hadn't been discussed. He did it in an amusing wording much better than I have paraphrased here. Always enjoy hearing Stephen speak, because he really does believe in free speech, and working things out in the free exchange of ideas.
As a traditional conservative and a huge Dr. Peterson fan, I really appreciate and enjoy Stephen Fry. I don't agree with him on everything, but he seems to mostly be a good-faith seeker of truth, and those are hard to come by.
Stephen Fry is of course known for frequent collaboration with fellow comedian Rowan Atkinson (Mr. Bean). Did you see Rowan Atkinson's speech on free speech? It's about 8 minutes long, and it is EPIC. That's the kind of speech that turns people around on an issue.
"Mr. Peterson"? Really? He earned being called "Dr." Please respect that. I remember watching this when it aired. It was brilliant and it definitely inspired me. Notice that Dr. Peterson and Stephen Fry continue to respect their opponents. This was a smart debate and Peterson and Fry nailed this debate. The other side got so emotional and irrational. There was a lack of relaxation and common sense. The word salad and racist comment was uncalled for. That was the turning point.
Technically, he is "Professor emeritus". I know a few people who would consider being called "Dr." at this stage of their career extremely disrespectful.
Saw this when it was originally posted. JP and Fry are both people you don't want to debate. The woman was just sad. Dyson came off as genuinely filled with hate.
The Left goes too far. The Right goes too far. People like Stephen Fry are well-respected because they are willing to challenge their own side without pretending all societal issues are caused by the other side. I wish more people were like Mr Fry.
@@sanniepstein4835The Right goes too far when they begin to act like everyone the Left hates is automatically good. Also, in this day and age, when they start to think conspiratorially. That’s when the Right goes too far.
Ten commandments in classrooms which violates the constitution.......that seems too far....banning books seems too far.....if you read project 2025 fully I think you will be horrified by some of the things and will agree they go too far. But that's just the right ..the left are asking for women's spaces to be open to anyone who professes themselves a woman. Peeping toms used to have to hide on the bushes but under this lefty madness they just have to buy a pant suit then they can stroll through ladies changing rooms at will. Both side have glaring mistakes and foolishness. A pragmatic person realises this and doesn't allow themselves to be indoctrinated to the extent that they become blind to their own failures.
Omg....what an amazing duo ( Fry and Peterson). They singularly are riveting to listen to, but as a team they are formidable ! No word salad, no confusion,, just clear, logical argument. Bravo gentlemen 🎉
Should have included some links to the full debate and the audience polling results. The video misrepresents the audience poll. The question the audience was asked was, "Be it resolved, what you call political correctness, I call progress". Before the debate, 36% agreed with the statement and 61% disagreed. After the debate, 30% agreed and 70% disagreed. So, they started with a strong majority in Stephen Fry's camp, and the debate moved another 9% into Stephen Fry's side (from 61% to 70%).
Kudos. "My words exactly" won't cut it because you've kicked it up a notch. No smart-assery, no emotional mumbo-jumbo. Straight to the core. Stay healthy, because the world needs You. Cheers!
I see that you saw this in 2019, but do you know... is that when it was delivered? Things have become so unhinged in recent years, and would love to see a debate like this again! Thanks for posting.
I watched that debate when it first aired and was utterly fascinated and enthralled by that debate. In my experience, most young people are 1 dimensional and are unwilling to entertain any view that disagrees with their own or their tribes.
That Dyson guy can definitely serve up a word salad of esoteric words like no other. Problem is that it’s clearly a compensation for lacking in intellect.
Thanks for highlighting this event again. It was such an imbalance of intellect, simultaneously brilliant and excruciating, that perfectly illustrates the current state of our public discourse. Your assessment was spot on as always.
Stephen Fry showed absolutely the form of English resistance, not soft, not forceful but passive and resistant. The absolute show of a gentleman. Nobody else, including Petersen, actually showed the capacity to understand the humanity behind the debate.
Not only is Fry an obvious liberal, Peterson has been considered "on the left" for decades. It wasn't until the 2010s, when "the left" shifted an octave, that he was considered conservative
The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity. The Second Coming by WB Yates (1920) The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure, while the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell (1933)
Bad news: Government will fire you for thinking on your own. Good news: The thirst for someone that speaks with reason is a online business model in and of itself. Congrats on 100k subs
Warren, excellent work here. I have noted the Munk debates for further videos. Good luck going forward. I also note that you must be ‘over the target’ due to the number of people telling you to shut up. 🇬🇧👍
I'm impressed that you considered this to be very powerful debate. I saw the original debate probably more than 4 years ago. Jordan Petersen and Stephen Fry won the debate by a slim margin. The opposite side Dyson was so typical and still is the same. The opposite never learn like dead wood. I hope this will add to every one's confidence.
Thank you for this video. I watched the original debate and, since, had almost forgotten how I felt listening to some of the things that were said and things that, very diligently, very intentionally, were skirted around by select parties. With your video, you have rekindled the memory of the lessons, which I learned watching the debate - memories which should always be remembered.
Always worthwhile to revisit a debate like this. By the way, i cant help but see that you're not only due a hearty congratulation for the 100k benchmark but for shattering it, which is just a stepping stone to even greater reach. Cheers
Stephen Frye is a great example of what “well educated” can demonstrate. Frye played chess with Hugh Laurie at Oxford (correction Cambridge, thanks…) and started a friendship, growing into a collaboration of like interests….and wonderful comic legacy.
This was a great debate and Fry was exceptional in his eloquence but since then he's often back on the side of PC.... The debate was over the moment the opposing 'Race Grifter' Dyson made mention of 'Mean Mad White man' when that wasn't in any way applicable to the debate or to either Dr JP or SF.
STEPHEN FRY: I would like this quote from Bertrand Russell to hover over the evening: "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. Let doubt prevail." MICHAEL ERIC DYSON: You are a mean mad white man! Michael Eric Dyson, a professor at Vanderbilt University, is emblematic of the process that caused Bertrand Russell to also opine that "Men are born ignorant, not stupid. They are made stupid by education."
I grew up with Stephen Fry playing various figures from history, the hilariously clever, Blackadder. I dont always agree with his views, but wow, can that man articulate. ❤
5:23, James Damore did not engage in extremely serious misbehaviour. Maya Forstater didn’t engage in extremely serious misbehaviour. The guy who was fired for teaching his class a Chinese filler word that sounds like the N word wasn’t fired for extremely serious misbehaviour
More than that, the thousands of everyday people who have lost jobs, relationships and more are the victims of that lady's ideology that she will never hear about and never see. All she sees are the few instances where either someone had the leverage or resources to fight the accusation, or the people in the public eye who she believes were rightfully punished, all the while ignoring the true victims of her worldview.
Couple of minutes in but want to say, not knowing what’ll come next, you got me hooked. Fantastic. Can’t wait to hear /watch this one. Thanks for presenting this video.
The "left" uses emotions to gain power. That's why it devolves into name calling to "win" an argument. The problem being that any problem solved through an emotional response is often the wrong answer and more often than not detrimental to the problem at hand. I don't think this was always the case with the left. I personally don't like being in any political classification as being a "team" member often means that you're beholding to the ideology of that team. I believe it's far better to judge any issue on its' merits.
Both sides use emotions to gain power, but they are often different emotions. Emotions are part of the human experience but can be manipulated by bath-faith actors.
