03 Jun 20
@fmf saidI wasn't able to access the link as it was posted here, but I was able to search on YouTube and listen to about 3 1/2 minutes of what I think is the same video.
[youtube The 10 Commandments]c770umxdU_YZ[/youtube]
Fry and Hitchens are thoughtful, informed and probably right in certain ways. As is Widdecombe.
Why call her a "mad witch"?
And why the vehemence and, to me, rather out-of-place and maybe even manufactured outrage on the part of the two atheists?
In my opinion, all three of them were "thoughtful, informed and right in certain ways" as you said until there was a point that was brought up that sparked emotion leading to Hitchens' leaving the room and Fry's excitable diatribe that he caught himself in and in which he was able to find momentary amused self reflection. For all three, I think the tipping point is when they realize that they aren't going to win the other to their side of thinking but have a need to continue with the argument (as opposed to the debate)--of course, that is such an embodied very short example of what happens in this forum on a nearly daily basis in some threads...for an observer (and sometimes participant), such as myself it is both amusing and uncomfortable all at once and yet I keep coming back to re-read and to see what will happen next. The exchanges are extremely telling about human nature, especially when the participants are all possessing of fine and thoughtful intellect.
On a more humorous side of things, the first thing I though of when I saw the title of the thread was, "Mad witch? Oh! You rang?"
03 Jun 20
@FMF...your original post asked, "why the vehemence"...I probably danced around it in my first reply, but I think quite simply, both of them do not like her and cannot seem to get past their disdain. Hitchens was all too eager to get out of his seat to make his escape. I think he was formulating a plan before he stood up and opened the book and Fry's response was personal and heated. The discussion had less to do with debating or sharing beliefs and more to do with a display of (or lack of) interpersonal relationships.
03 Jun 20
@hakima saidIn British culture, Widdecombe and Hitchens are both 'Marmite', while Fry is ~ as far as I am aware ~ a bit of a national treasure. What interested me was that, as far as I could make out they were not really bickering about "God", but about the ten commandments instead.
@FMF...your original post asked, "why the vehemence"...I probably danced around it in my first reply, but I think quite simply, both of them do not like her and cannot seem to get past their disdain. Hitchens was all too eager to get out of his seat to make his escape. I think he was formulating a plan before he stood up and opened the book and Fry's response was personal and ...[text shortened]... bating or sharing beliefs and more to do with a display of (or lack of) interpersonal relationships.
@hakima saidHitchens has wrestled with much more formidable thinkers than Widdecombe [and I've seen her acquit herself better] so his retreat was certainly not a capitulation: he was probably just not interested in a soundbitey type exchange.
Hitchens was all too eager to get out of his seat to make his escape.
03 Jun 20
FMF the video clip your OP is referring to is unfortunately not available in the UK due to a copyright of Channel 4 apparently.
I did however find a related short clip where Widecombe tries to interview Fry and Hitchens after the debate, and I have to say they were both somewhat rude and behaved petulantly. Seemingly they were both borderline appealing to the obvious; Hitchens just got up mid sentence and walked out huffily and Fry became emotional, animated and a little accusatory.
03 Jun 20
@divegeester saidClipwise, that's the one.
FMF the video clip your OP is referring to is unfortunately not available in the UK due to a copyright of Channel 4 apparently.
I did however find a related short clip where Widecombe tries to interview Fry and Hitchens after the debate, and I have to say they were both somewhat rude and behaved petulantly. Seemingly they were both borderline appealing to the obvious; ...[text shortened]... t up mid sentence and walked out huffily and Fry became emotional, animated and a little accusatory.
05 Jun 20
@fmf saidthe person/persons who created the content have a vested interest in getting multiple views of the content
Why call her a "mad witch"?
or the effort is wasted
nobody, including me, would click upon a link headlined by,
"boring discussion of archaic views'
in short,
the headline was created to generate interest in an uninteresting conversation
06 Jun 20
1 edit
@divegeester saidIs this Anne Widdecombe, Stephen Fry, and Christopher Hitchins? If so, Anne Widdecombe was a senior British politician and Minister of State for Employment during John Major's ministry, shortly after the pound fell out of the ERM and everyone was unemployed, and then minister for Prisons. She famously, at least in Britain, described Michael Howard (who was the then Home Secretary) as having "something of the night about him" (or words to that effect). Stephen Fry is a comedian, whose early career was a collaboration with Hugh Laurie, and Christopher Hitchens was a Journalist and former member of the Socialist Workers Party (International Socialists in the US, not Trotsky's group). It's kind of a weird group of people to get together to have a debate about religion.
FMF the video clip your OP is referring to is unfortunately not available in the UK due to a copyright of Channel 4 apparently.
I did however find a related short clip where Widecombe tries to interview Fry and Hitchens after the debate, and I have to say they were both somewhat rude and behaved petulantly. Seemingly they were both borderline appealing to the obvious; ...[text shortened]... t up mid sentence and walked out huffily and Fry became emotional, animated and a little accusatory.
I'm saying this as I'm guessing they aren't all that well known outside the UK. In fact the only one anyone under forty will have heard of in the UK is Stephen Fry.