STEFAN MOLYNEUX: THE ART OF THE ARGUMENT

minimum donations of $2

youtube.com/watch?v=8CM_--di7L8

Dude was an anarchist before he saw all the /pol/ shekels.

*reccomended
JFC how did I even manage that

Jesus this is beautiful

Is this real? It's almost like a 'the argument is love, the argument is life'

libertarian is far right

there's no such thing as a "left-libertarian"

What a piece of shit

>gives all his content for free
>OMG WHAT A PIECE OF SHIT ASKING FOR DONATIONS FOR HIS ******************F R E E****************** CONTENT

you have no argument

>reading a book written by le no argument man

Molyneux is honestly not that bad. He's a good entry point if you want to get decent historical perspectives on controversial events and/or people.

As a philosopher (self-proclaimed), he's very mediocre and often downright terrible. He cherry picks his philosophical opponents and questions prior to his shows, typically picking the most easily refutable or even absurd positions and/or viewpoints and then spergs out.

Honestly, I can't watch him debate. He becomes such an insufferable asshat.

>Stefan: "Well can you explain what you mean further?"
>Guest: "Sure, what I'm saying is that--"
>Stefan: "H-H-HOLD ON I WASN'T DONE TALKING ARE YOU GONNA LET ME FINISH"
>Guest: "Well I was trying to answ--"
>Stefan: "SO YOU'RE NOT GONNA LET ME FINISH! I CAN'T HAVE A CONVERSATION IF YOU'RE GOING TO TALK OVER ME IT WON'T GO ANYWHERE"
>Guest: "Ok, I'm sorry go ah--"
>Stefan: "OK MIKE, CUT HIM OFF! WE'RE DONE HERE! YOU CAN'T REASON WITH NONSENSE!"

He's become increasingly worse at it too. His early interviews and/or 'debates' were a lot more civil. Now every time he has a 'debate' he immediately gets angry and defensive.

Yes, that in itself is a proper argument. Someone who truly "fears" the demise of the western civilization, would not bother with all that and try to make his book as accessible as possible, but considering he is a dishonest hack he is doing what he does best, begging for money.

i only read books written by the youtube community

...

It's his magnum opus forsure

It's probably shit. I can't stand Molyneux. Something about him reeks of sociopath, possibly serial killer.

The whole "not an argument" thing was done by Macintyre in After Virtue.

THE MADMAN
he literally said fucking nothing

If this is made up, it is brilliant. If not, it is Not. An. Argument.

Don't mind me I generally like Molyneux all right but Christ what a gaudy, pretentious cover. As if this book will actually prevent such a scenario.

>That is not the argument
Really, Molyneaux?

>haha, it's le "not an argument" guy
>buy his book or you're a cuck! XD

this has to be fake

It's not.

amazon.com/Art-Argument-Western-Civilizations-Stand-ebook/dp/B0756QYZ26/

No way.

you are a moron

t.politically illiterate

whoa...... this really bobbled my dingles

I don't yet, poast the mobi

So it's for toddlers?

you can buy it ONE DOLLAR

Actually yes it is. His stated intent was to write a logic book for the unwashed masses. So he's trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator (or at least that's what he claims).

What about the fact that he has absolutely no training in logic?
In his master thesis (he admitted that he specifically bothered an assistant so that he would give him an A if he promised to not bother him anymore) he equates logic with semantic syllogisms, I mean, that's not even close to what people define as logic.

Seriously, why are we talking about this book?

What about the fact that he is part of the unwashed masses?

>Seriously, why are we talking about this book?
Because it's written by le not a argument man.

>I mean, that's not even close to what people define as logic.
Not gonna argue with you, but that's a seriously shitty sentence. We're on a literature board, apply yourself.

holy shit this is gold

This is what Molyneux define as logic. Get ready, and then tell me if I was wrong.

"1) Philosophy requires values
2) Values cannot exist without life
3) Therefore the highest value of philosophy must be the existence of life.
1) The highest value of philosophy is life
2) Life cannot exist without the body
3) Thus physical health is the highest value of life.
1) Physical health is the highest value of philosophy
2) Physical health requires the consistent identification of external physical substance
3) Therefore the highest value of philosophy is the consistent identification of external physical substance."

He is oblivious of what logic is at even the most basic level. I'm willing to speculate on the fact that he has in fact never actually studied a logic textbook, nor has he ever contemplated it enough to trascend the equivalence logic=common sense.

Yeah, I'm not reading that. Post ending in 6 decides what I read.
my point is your original sentence reads like it was written by a nervous thirteen year old girl. I could not give less of a shit about what you're trying to say when the form is all fucked to hell.

My post does not read like anything, I've just mentioned that he has no training in logic, and I've mentioned a writing of his in which he proves my point. Also, a little advice: stop thinking in stereotypes.

holy fuck lmao

are you retarded?

>Molyneux defender
>nitpicks style and ignores substance
I see you've learned about arguing from the master

Oh, you're ESL, gotcha. Carry on.
Again, not gonna argue the content here. I don't know anything about molymeme other than "le argument man" and I don't intend to read this book. I saw a poorly written sentence and called it out.

What the fuck

>The Art of the Argument
>or, how to avoid not making an argument

Protip: if you have to describe something as 'the art of' then it is not an art

Stop shilling your shitty book. We already have another thread in the catalog for it.

Yes, and it means the white people who created this civilization mud people are flooding in to enjoy the fruits of are under attack, mainly by jews. If whites don't reverse the demographic situation, we will become minorities in our own countries and have to fight our way out. This is a serious problem, but Moly is a blueballer so don't expect any real answers from him. Molyneux isn't bad actually, good for people who are new to the problems whites now face.

This thread was posted first though. Are you new here?

The white people who actually have talent don't feel attacked though.

>What does western civ mean

Western Civilization means a foundation that is equal parts Greco-Roman and Christian, upon which Europeans and European-descended colonials have built for the past 2,000 years. Many elements, including much that is only cosmetic, of Western Civilization were spread to non-westerners through colonialism, or appropriated and built on independently into a distinct branch by such as the Japanese.

Skyscrapers, buttoned trousers, automobiles, airplanes, assault rifles, printed books, regard for individualism and fairness, capitalism, communism, classical music, the western Canon of philosophy and epic poetry, comic books, film, modern medicine, etc. etc.

You personally live either within Western Civilization, or quavering beneath its shadow, taking advantage of its achievements every single day, and still ask the question.

>Is it really in danger

I'm sure the 12th century Byzantine and 4th century Roman asked the same. The difference is that globalism has created the threat of a much more apocalyptic and total destruction, by enabling the migration over distances which were unimaginable some centuries ago of barbarian hordes which have proven themselves genetically incapable of resuscitating what they destroy.

That's not true, plenty of them do. But even if they can't see beyond their own short-term interests, it's still their children and their own that will feel it the most. We're still at the beginning of this.

If you suggest Western philosophy can't withstand a migration of people who don't or can't understand it, you're saying it should give up its claims to truth. Either that, or you agree with Derrida that the philosophical ideal is contingent on historical (and cultural) context thereby canonicalising the Jew as a Western philosopher.

It's like some sort of reverse colonialism. Funny.

...

Why is that funny?

Holy... I want more

Replace the word Argument with Spectacle and you leftists would love it.

kek. Other leftists make me ashamed to be one.

the cringe

Don't get me wrong I'd consider myself on the left as well and I think Molyneux is retarded, but posting one paragraph out of context and saying "haha look how dumb this is" is a specious argument especially when we wouldn't bat an eyelid if it was referring to Spectacle or Capital or Ideology or some shit

it's not out of context you idiot. it's the first sentence. it's creating the context. it's not about left or right. the guy is a fucking comedian.

i do love it

yeah if you just change the word "argument" to "dialectic" (which means basically the same thing) then it magically becomes good

This might be the most sensationalist cover for a book I've ever seen.

Mein Gott!

This sounds even sillier if you pronounce the word "argument" in his weird accent

You guys do realise that this faggot is a (((jew))), right?

Because dialectic exists and can be used for things, for all the flaws of that approach, while "The Argument" is just some bullshit he made up for clickbait

lol

Are left-libertarians retarded? I think yes

>a (((jew)))
The echoes around "jew" cancels it out and means non-jew fyi.

How jew is Molyneux btw? Isn't he 1/8 or something?

the inhabitants of colonized countries did not become ethnic minorities within their own homelands. say what you will, but its a fact that if the trend continues as it likely will, Europe(Western Europe at least, maybe East EU, who knows what the future holds) will not be majority European. At the end of the day those 'colonized countries' get to live in a spiritually, ethnically, and culturally intact society, not the spiritual hellscape that is America and much of the EU.

His disciples are ordered to buy multiple copies to put the book on the bestseller list like L Ron Hubbard does.

He has a Roux de Poux name which inflates the Jude quotient.

I'm waiting for the sequel "How to de-feux from your Family in 3 Steps"

>post opening paragraphs of the book
>somehow this is taking him out of context
what did he mean by this?

op wasn't asking for an argument

>3) Thus physical health is the highest value of life.
So why is Molymeme fat?

Cause he is a libertarian. Or was. Either way the weight gained may never be lost.

Except the Americas, Australia, New Zealand?

Its shit, but he didn't literally say nothing. He's oviously just refeering to how the state which is inherently evil does not use arguments to enforce their power, but instead use force, where as what we view as good parts of life are the parts that rely on argumentation

yo can you upload the ebook?

No argument to be seen

Whats with this front cover? It has nothing to do with the title or premise of the book.

You can argue your way out of anything, even streets burning and the Statue of Liberty underwater.

>reading a book by a professional youtuber

really dinks me dink

HellooOOoo!!

Somebody give me a quick rundown on this guy

Went insane arguing with idiots, while believing he was becoming less of one. Very inflated ego.
Occasionally right and interesting to see, but not so much on a personal level. He's essentially Hitler. This is his art.

>huge ego
>thinks he is right about everything
>claims to be an anarcho-capitalist
>a sophist who begs for patreon money
>disconnects people who disagree with him
>puts out a book called Art Of the Argument, never seriously argues with anyone because people who are deep thinkers destroy him
>deflects, goes on tangents
>his videos demonstrate poor understanding of philosophers
>brainlets and people who do not have real confidence in their opinions love him because his arrogance and wonky arguments at a first glance seem somewhat plausible

>claims to be an anarcho-capitalist
?