Is he the most prominent philosopher of our time?

This. If he was a professional he wouldn't be doing fucking YouTube videos.

reminder that moly got btfo by an undergrad student

Google "Danny Shahar Stefan Molyneux). It won't let me paste the link here

Ok explain how Kant is an amateur psychoanalyst to me

Can anyone link me to something insightful or profound he has ever told or done? I've seen some of his videos but they haven't really impressed me yet other than sharing information I wasn't exposed to before in terms of relating to recent events.

Those pictures he does of him straining in thought has made me realize the link between intellectualism and constipation.

Refining anarchocapitalism and creating the FOO theory is more than zizek has done

Sounds retarded

You called Stefan unprofessional first. Explain why.

many of his ideas stem from his model of human consciousness, autist

Considering he's as pretty far from a leftist as you could get and despises academic culture I don't think he would take a job like that even if someone offered it to him.

He honestly reminds me of Jim Jones

molyneux is obv so fucking insecure it's ridiculous

he literally barks at europe on his video blog and tells them to wake up

anyone who sincerely believes they are an intellectual doing the world a service and writing The Truth About is having a midlife crisis

he probably feels guilty about his love of pegging and the inside of his head is an empty white room full of fluorescent lighting

people like this deserve sympathy more than subscriptions

That looks like projection more than anything user. Is there anything you want to discuss about your family?

Not an argument.

Not everything has to be an argument user, sometimes posts are just humorous little observations about someone/something.

this is fucking retarded though

Hehe, why not both?

>when you're apparently for limited/no state and the NAP but you're also a colonialism apologist

Natives are savages. They should be thankful for being able to partake in European civilization.

You being an idiot is not an argument, brainlet.

>FOO
>deFOO

Nah but he is the most prominent cult leader of our time

He didn't invent the term idiot. It's a common psychology terminology.

Not an argument. How is he a cult leader besides some shitty abusive parent complaining that their child left them?

No, he claims he's an-cap but completely supports a huge government. Also he's always arguing with complete retards so he seems smart by comparison.

In times of great strife when leftists have begun to take over every aspect of society, it is not unprincipled for a libertarian to support a strong right wing government.

He's not a philosopher.

Also he got BFTO on AGW recently:
youtube.com/watch?v=LiZlBspV2-M

>muh models
Top kek, you watching this idiot and thinking he is btfoing anyone?

>muh peer review
>none of the alarmists wanted to publish my paper

>it's not unprincipled to abandon one's principles

>t. I've never read any libertarianism

lolol because "not an argument" is a meaningless discussion-ending catchphrase I've seen repeated countless times from Molyneux fans. it's not something you would have independently thought to be an acceptable or meaningful response unless you learned it from a fucking youtube blogger

the fact that you think you're engaging in your own independent discussion here when you're just parroting someone else's memes is pretty cultlike imo

>implying I'm not just doing it because I think it's funny

He was bfto because as a 'philosopher' he claims that it's important to be a sceptic, and be open to different points of view. Yet he follows the olde classic 'do as I say not as I do'.
Also
> muh X
Not an argument.

Nobody wanted to peer review moncktons paper because he's a hack and his paper has numerous very basic errors anyway. Although imo someone should have reviewed it just to point out all the errors and publish said errors.

>he thinks libertarianism is a real ideology
kek
americans smdh

is authoritarianism also an ideology
is mayonnaise an ideology

...

>not thoroughly familiar with the great mayonnaise thinkers

>implying it's not Plato

He's a conman like Alex Jones.

That really violates my NAP

He's a youtuber, not a philosopher. His slow and measured delivery makes you believe that he is somehow making you discover things, but he really pushes his own ideas only. He has a slow cold anger that is somehow interesting to watch, but after a few videos i got bored.

>don't spread on me

The most prominent? Not even close. Slavoj Žižek is far more prominent than him, and specializes not only in philosophy but also psychoanalysis. Considerably more educated than this hack. Self-studying philosophy is by far possible, but for Molyneux, the marks on his work which indicate such unprincipled self-study are prominent.

Who won?

Agreed. I think he is completely dishonest to the point of psychopathy.
I watched that video where CopperCab? recently called in and Stefan really exposed himself. Stefan knows that he lies, misdirects and incessantly interrupts in arguments but he doesn't care. He will even accuse everyone else of doing it or call his caller 'rude' when he is losing a debate.

You can watch him on the Joe Rogan show where he cannot stop lying about his wife's medical misconduct with DeFooing. Something is not quite right with the man...

He's a sophist, not a philosopher.

Yes.

Wanna give us a link to that video?

Could someone who has watched this tell me whether it's worth it? Normally his videos are way too long

Nevermind, I just had a dose of that ginger. It seems highly doubtful that any video with him in it would do much in the way of exposing the shortcomings of his interlocutor.

In the era of dogmatic left academia, being educated is hardly an accomplishment. I can understand getting a degree in order to improve your job prospects, but actually BEING an academic? Takes a real loser to do that in this day and age.

I explicitly said self-education is not INHERENTLY bad, and that it is indeed possible. I said Molyneux's is so obvious that even though I haven't personally watched and read enough, I can see the obvious marks of self-education, and a type of self-education which is unprincipled. Would prefer you actually reply to what I say, if you bother to reply to me. Because I agree with you for the most part.

Would you be kind enough to tell us what those obvious marks of unprincipled self-education are?

He's a mildly prominent demagogue.

All education is unprincipled. Also Slavoj Žižek is a hack. Which is a well known fact in his home-country, his entire audience is basically American undergrads.

Pseudo-psychoanalysis and pseudo-philosophy which doesn't actually borrow from or critique the greats which came before is perhaps the most definitive one.

Are you stupid? I'm not even American. Slavoj has international recognition, especially for 'Less Than Nothing.' You can go watch his talks done in Slovenian, if you so choose.

He has openly admitted to being disliked in nearly every left circle because he's controversial. But his merit doesn't end at controversy.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. His "international recognition" are American undergrads and a couple of other marginal philosophers. He's also a known hack in Slovenia.

>He has openly admitted to being disliked in nearly every left circle because he's controversial

Ah yes the classic "even my own folks don't like me" line.

His content has been heavily focussed on current events and real world application for at least the past year, if not longer. Why would he need to deal with Nitch&Co. any more than he already does for this purpose?

This is so thoroughly incorrect. A couple of other marginal philosophers? Like Fredric Jameson? Ian Parker? Stefen has influenced nobody except the actual fringe. The underbelly of the unknown.

You can see their active dislike by actually reading what they have to say, in Slovenian, which I doubt you can do anyway.

This is incredible, how people can be so insufferably stupid that they can't even pretend to be Google heroes anymore, and instead spout false information. Is this the age of no trying for Veeky Forums?

What leftists have rejected Zizek in Slovenia? Go on, I'll wait.

A marxist being recognized by other marxists is the definition of marginal.

You don't realize this because you're living in the marxist bubble of FF or FDV. Cretin.

Yes.. yes.. leftists have surely embraced him despite constant and consistence denouncement of all former communist and socialist models, and instead a push for a new era of leftist formulation and thought.

Will you then present me with a name of somebody Stefen has influenced? One within the field of capitalism and then one outside of. Good luck with the outside of one, because it hinges on the same leg your argument does -- none.

sarcastically saying a point that could be valid is not an argument

>denouncement of all former communist and socialist models
You mean like living in a totalitarian bureaucratic regime with more inspectorates than real sector jobs? With the former communist/socialist caste getting comfortable state jobs through nepotism? Back to FDV kid.

Also names of leftists denouncing Zizek please surely you have them as you said you read them denouncing them, so I am very curious who these leftists of prominence denouncing Zizek actually are?

What are you babbling on about? It's the legitimacy of it. You can proceed to read what Slavoj has to say himself, he speaks decent English and I believe most, if not all, of his books have English translations. I don't keep up with Slovenia or whatever their prominent left happens to be, but I have spoken with many other leftists from Slovenia which dislike him thoroughly. I'm a first generation Australian which immigrated from Slovenia.

Still waiting for you to provide names of Stefen's influence, in and outside capitalism. Recognized scholars.

I have spoken with those leftists online, I should denote.

I'm not arguing for Stefen idiot. You brought up Zizek as if its some kind of an argument.

Yet you claim we should just read what they have to say.

In a private corespondence with alleged leftists. Where we can't verify who they are or what they said.

The fact that you don't even live in Slovenia and claim "denouncement of all former communist and socialist models" actually happened is hilarious too.

Riveting.

I think people have called and said, "I used to be X, buy you changed my mind." I can't think of anyone famous really that has been converted to ancap or libertarian from anything else and specifically cited Molyneux as the culprit. I think outside of certain circles like ancap and /pol/ Molyneux isn't really that well known.

>Stefen's influence, in and outside capitalism.
This sounds so peculiar to me

I still proceeded to prove his influence extends outside of American undergrads by listing two people from varying fields which have been influenced by his work. And I'm certain more exist, some I do not know though.

If you want to learn Slovenian and read about what Slovenians have to say yourself, by all means. And yes, it was private correspondence, I cannot change the fabric of reality.

I said Slavoj denounced all former communist and socialist models. Which is true, he pushes for the 21st century to be a time of reformulation.

I figured such was the case. I haven't heard any prominent scholars make mention of his work, or attempt critique thereof, nor have I seen him make critique of actual psychoanalytic, philosophical, cultural, etc, scholarly work either. Which vilifies the opening as incorrect, of his prominence.

It's peculiar to me too. But these were the conditions of presented by the other correspondent. As you can see here:

None of his important ones, read more retard

>there will never be a james bond movie where the villain is stefan molyneux performing as himself

He's a hack with literally nothing valuable to add to the conversation.

>conversation
>implying philosophy is anything but an irrelevant dead end

What do you guys think about based Bill Whittle?
Is he the greatest philosopher of our time?

>>>/ebinmemetrashcan/

prove that philosophy has any relevance now that we have science

The fact you're asking such a philosophical question shows it has so relevance to you

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

Such a question is not answerable by science, because science doesn't understand its own methods. The solution to the replication crisis is philosophical.

>he doesn't understand that science is a form of philosophy

How can you infringe on someone's property when they completely oblivious to the very notion of it?

I can't speak for Slovene leftist philosophers - I don't know any - but the general consensus is he's that guy who makes weird sounds and gesticulations and goes off on diatribes about toilet bowl flushing.

You can't. That's why communists aren't people either.

He's a pleb who still jerks off to Aristotle like Ayn Rand did without having any conception of how Logic or Epistemology has developed the past five centuries up until now.

wow. no arguments to be found

not an argument

Worth what? The guy's an ancap who supports Trump. That should tell you everything you need to know about him. He's a hack.

>philosophy
I think you mean cult leader

He supports Trump because the alternative means US war with Russia. He's not even an American citizen anyways, though his business partner Michael is.

not an argument

By that logic so is Zizek
>Dad voice: Don't answer that