Would you consider Stefan Molyneux more of researcher than a philosopher?
Here's a random video for reference.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1xf78EltKM
>>780852
I would consider Stefan Molyneaux more of a cult leader than a philosopher myself.
Researcher implies that he's done some research.
>>780852
Neither. I would classify him as a "clown"
One of the many assholes on youtube who parrots opinions to people who already agree with him.
>>780855
But how is he a cult leader?
Sure his advocates virtues, but never impose it on others.
>>780868
He seems to have fucktards commercially advertising for him on /his/.
more of a fraud than a philosopher
>>780868
He encourages people to cut out their non-anarchist family and friends in one of his videos.
![a97cdbee45[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/x1Uu2G0.png "a97cdbee45[1].png")
>>780874
I just did your Wikipedia seach. Any time, pal
>>780852
In the same way that members of Fox News can be considered 'researchers'. Richard Dawkins is legitimately more of a philosopher.
>>780874
>I'm simply asking questions.
Sure. And pigs fart the constitution of the perfect state.
>>780883
>all adult relationships [are] voluntary and discretionary rather than obligatory
How is this wrong?
>>780852
>Would you consider Stefan Molyneux more of researcher than a philosopher?
Neither, he's a joke
>>780893
>Richard Dawkins
I laughed heartily, thanks.
>>780905
Arguing either way is subjective because how binding family relations should be is a valuation. But beyond that, his advise that people leave their families because of some ideal he came up with is, as the Wikipedia article says, a cult behavior.
>>780914
>as an attractive young woman
>>780905
Apart from methodological individualism, an undemonstrated belief in the normative qualities of consciousness, and making a normative statement in direct contradiction of observed social behaviour (involuntary relationships abound)?
Wrong in method.
Wrong in theory.
Wrong in description of empirical reality.
>>780921
According to the article, the BCIC notes that one sign of cults is that they cut people from families. Molyneux advises that they do if the relationship is toxic, so it's more along the lines of a final solution if nothing can be done to remedy the relationship, rather than separating you from a loving family so you can get scammed out of your cash and praise Xenu, all Tom Cruise-like.
So he's not a cult leader. FDR isn't a cult.
>>780952
>Molyneux advises that they do if the relationship is toxic,
Which he defines as having any kind of relationship with someone who isn't an anarchist.
>>780852
Is this game developer cause the name is the same but I have no idea what he looks like
>>780955
Which is strange because he isn't an anarchist.
>>780961
That's Peter Molyneux.
>>780964
I have yet to know of any statist that cries about the NAP as much as he does.
>>780952
>>780955 This, his definition of when a relationship is toxic is ambiguous if not just arbitrary.
Also mainstream therapy tries to remedy relationship issues and not just tell people to get deFOOd over the radio, offering some sort of "pack up and go" self-help to everyone would be malpractice if he had any sort of qualifications to be giving that advise in the first place
>>780852
>>780870
He advertises himself on 4chan for sure, especially /pol/.
3-5 times a day he (or one of his cultists) promotes his videos on /pol/. It used to be a Canadian asking every day "What does /pol/ think of this man?" or "ITT: /pol/ approved Youtubers/Philosophers" with his picture as the OP but people got suspicious. Now I think he's using a proxy, or its one of his cultists.
>>>/pol/66091649
>>>/pol/66011743
>>>/pol/65359320
>>>/pol/66036690
>>>/pol/65892532
>>>/pol/65885076
>>>/pol/66011743
>>>/pol/65471479
>>>/pol/65519274
>>>/pol/65496308
>>>/pol/65454685
>>>/pol/65305887
>>780955
Primary sources?
>>780940
Explain how adults aren't free to chose who they associate with personally.
>>780970
>NAP
Woodcock (1962) Anarchism.
As I said. He's no anarchist.
>>780972
Not an argument.
>>780975
He's an "anarchist" then. Happy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7XJIioZEgQ
>>780974
>adults
undemonstrated assumption
>aren't free to chose
Arendt, Heidegger
>who they associate with
It is easy to physically constrain or kill people, for an example, try the confinement of Edith Bone, she wrote about it in Seven Years Solitary
>>780974
>Primary sources?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN5OjzEfQmI
I won't bother finding the exact time since it's not that long to begin with and it's relatively closer to the start. If you can watch Molyneux rambling on about Frozen for a whole hour, you can watch this for half an hour.
>>780972
And yet another one.
>>>/pol/66093010
If anyone is shilling on 4chan it's him.
>>780972
My fucking sides, what's wrong with him?
>>780988
He's all about assumptions, if you don't take them he stops making cents
>>780868
Because he runs FDR like a cult. Don't believe me? Check out the saga of what happened when he published his book on "Universally Preferable behavior" and someone made polite inquiries about it.
http://www.fdrliberated.com/stefan-molyneux-philosophy/upb/
he is one of these people who can say a lot without really ever saying much at all
Honestly, I think he just has that perceived-to-be-masculine square face that encourages people to trust some one. People of average and lower test just trust high test faces, because of perceptions of dominance or something.
He makes one-hour videos about his own retarded idle thoughts with a tone that implies profundity, and people love it because of the subtleties of his appearance. That's it. He has a charisma that allows him to make ad dollars spouting nonsense.
>>781513
>All the criticism I ever see of him is personal attacks. Nobody ever presents an argument.
That's because you aren't looking anywhere but on an imageboard thread.
A quick google search gave me this critique by the Mises Institute:
https://mises.org/library/molyneux-problem
I'll leave it to you to decide if that's a decent critique or not. I already think Molyneux is at best a naive utilitarian that handwaves away any problems his worldview presents, so I don't feel any particular need to have my thoughts further confirmed by the Mises institute.
>>781513
They are not personal attacks, both posters have explained how Stephen Molyneux filibusters and preaches to the choir rather than addressing the main criticisms of his point of view.
>>780902
Pigs DO fart monads though!
>>780855
Not an argument
>>781544
>Mises attacking Molyneux
Well shit sticks to shit.
probably one of the greatest philosophers of our time(top 15), and like all great men in history he wont be appreciated until he dies.
>>784141
Not everything has to be an intellectual debate. Earlier I identified that he has an appearance that probably plays a large part in his charisma. You have to admit that, regardless of the content of his philosophy, he has charisma. That charisma is why you so fervently adore him and defend him in these threads.
I like the existentialists, but you don't see me starting up pre-emptive defense threads on the daily.
>>780871
>more of a philosopher than a philosopher
