Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7aiBbA8_Fg
Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29HxzgqlWrM
What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.
Join the discussion
Yahoo! News
Wikipedia
Search results
Recent Comments
Popular Posts
-
Mr Steve Wasserman, Christopher Hitchens' literary agent, kindly replied to my query about a possible memorial. Posted with permission. ...
-
The iconoclast Christopher Hitchens loved life and delighted in "doing and thinking and writing all the things that he had always don... -
Pitt professor Colin MacCabe talks to his longtime friend about the subtle influences of Pittsburgh over the years. "In April of la... -
By Peter Hitchens I can’t really claim that I never notice the extraordinarily spiteful attacks on me which come from one particular qua... -
Vanity Fair | January 2012 By Christopher Hitchens When it came to it, and old Kingsley suffered from a demoralizing and disorienting fal... -
Time has come to publish the last post on this site. I've been posting links and articles for three years, and it's been great. I a...
-
Australian Broadcasting Corporation "Carol Blue, Christopher Hitchens' widow, talks candidly about her husband's dying days.... -
Why Evolution Is True has a great post on Hitchens encounter with 8 year old Mason, who wanted to know what books she should read. Read... -
Carol Blue, Christopher Hitchens' widow, talks about his legacy, his illness and life without him. Listen here . (abc.net.au) -
At reddit.com there are comments on Hitchens having breathing issues at the airport. This would explain the cancellations. Hopefully it'...
Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Paine
Baruch Spinoza
George Orwell
Bertrand Russell
Leon Trotsky
Rosa Luxemburg
Socrates
6 comments:
A very worthwhile watch... Hitchens confronts a real foul-mouthed playground bully type who would rattle any lesser debater with his ferocious and unceasing ad hominem attacks. Hitchens keeps cool, never loses his sense of humor or his faculty for finding the flaw, noting the irony and dispelling the fallacy. He had to know he was setting foot in enemy territory by debating Donohue in a Catholic church.
Very instructive if you wish to be prepared to argue with someone who mainly throws rocks and will concede no point - you must win the audience. Hitchens manages to elicit significant tracts of applause from Donohue's constituents.
Sample some other YouTube videos with Donohue in them - old age has not mellowed him at all. I'd say Hitchens handled him as well as anyone could have.
You said it all. A perfect example of someone being completely outclassed on every level
What's I like about this one is it's the earliest CH religion debate I've seen. This is pre-Letters to a Young Contrarian.
Almost all of CH's later familiar arguments are laid out in nascent yet still biting form.
CH wrote up a review of the debate for Free Inquiry's Summer 2000 edition, describing his experience of "a real whiff of old-style Francoism, rather as I imagine it would be to argue with Patrick Buchanan when he was on acid."
Thanks Rodney, here's the link
http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=hitchens_20_3
I agree with the prior comments and would add that the priest "moderator" failed miserably in making no effort to curb Donahue's vitriol even after boasting that the debate's namesakes conducted themselves with "civility and gentlemanly charm" and never uttered a single word in "acrimony or animus."
Ken
Post a Comment