Is he the greatest philosopher to ever live?
N
Literally who
First "Not an argument" of the thread goes to ME
Not
an
argument
>>74436757
He's just a bitter racist prick. He hates women too.
>>74436840
not an argument
>>74436875
>>74436855
>>74436840
>>74436830
>>74436783
>>74436757
NOT AN ARGUMENT
>>74436757
>be lolbertarian
>be great
pick one
>>74436855
not an argument
>>74436757
>philosopher
>>74436855
>nigger woman detected (possibly single mother too)
>>74436917
>you
>an argument
Pick one
>>74436931
What is a philosopher aside from a lover of wisdom?
>>74436855
not an argument
are you guys tired to post the same memes?
in before a faggot that replies not an argument
>>74437035
not an argument
>>74437035
not an argument
>>74436783
>>74436830
>>74436840
>>74436855
>>74436875
>>74436914
>>74436917
>>74436921
>>74436931
>>74436946
>>74436955
>>74436994
>>74437007
Not an argument
ot an argument
t an argument
an argument
n argument
argument
rgument
gument
ument
ment
ent
nt
t
>>74436757
IMHO: Great political commentator; perhaps not the greatest logician.
See:
https://mises.org/library/molyneux-problem
>Molyneux is by no means stupid: quite the contrary. Therein, I suggest, lies the source of the problems of his book. Because of his facile intelligence, he thinks that he has a talent for philosophical argument and need not undertake the hard labor of learning how such arguments are constructed. Unfortunately for him and his book, he is mistaken.
All that said light years ahead of the mainstream media and worthy of some support.
So what was his answer to what should be the maximum land you can own to maximise liberty?
He went on this awful vagina comparison and he was so sure of himself with his smug face that I couldn't bring myself to finish the video.
>>74437069
When you reclaim your country you need to change flags. That one is tainted, every time I see it I get angry
ban for viral marketing
>>74437141
not an argument
What do you guys think of based Bill Whittle?
Is he red pilled?
>>74437035
You didn't post an argument. Try again
>>74437035
An argument this is not.
>>74437169
>Zionist
Get the fuck off of my /pol/ you literal JIDF member.
ONE
The post above me is an argument
certainly the most prolific
name one other philosopher that has literally thousands of hours of philosophy online and in print
pro-tip: you literally cant
And this is where I'd put all your arguments...
IF YOU HAD ONE!
(This is top level meming, step it up, kiddos)
On really want Steph to go on Howard Stern
What do you guys think of based Bill Whittle?
Is he red pilled?
>>74437137
Ironically, while all this is true, it's not an argument.
Though Molyneux is by far not the only one to be guilty of this, or the worst abuser of the pretense of philosophising, just more visibly guilty of it. Probably because he wants to put his ego across more than he's invested in the actual specifics of each argument, it comes across as phony.
I will warn all /pol/acks that sincerity isn't a preventative measure against pseudo-philosophy. A lot of people are sincere enough in belief of a position to make pseudo-philosophy work as arguments for bad positions, usually moral relativist positions. Look to the type of people who say sexual deviancy is okay, or who excuse racial predation against outgroups while decrying racial predation on their pet ingroup. Those people are the opposite of "useful idiots", they're useless idiots who only obfuscate things.
>>74437141
So does yours, American pigdog!
Though Ireland's does too, as does Germany's and Canada's, for completeness.
Oh, and France too.
Not this thread again!
>>74436757
That would be Ayn Rand
>>74437715
Admittedly it's hard to see past the mainstream positions on the Jewish question when Israel removes so much kebab and the average GTKRWN commenter is a meme-spouting faggot who can't do anything but build up the "white privilege" boogeyman of the Jews.
Shouting memes and prattling on about the shoah converts morons. Real education about the way things stand relies on the understanding of inter-group competition, and following that, a pointing out and noticing of the patterns of representation in left wing movements.
>>74437286
~Argument
>>74437237
!Argument
I'm convinced that everything that goes through this memelord's ears passes a filter. If it doesn't pass this filter it is deemed a non argument regardless of what the context is
>your change is 5.19
>not an argument
>>74437892
>this
</thread>
>>74437718
> A lot of people are sincere enough in belief of a position to make pseudo-philosophy work as arguments for bad positions, usually moral relativist positions. Look to the type of people who say sexual deviancy is okay
It seems like you're uncomfortable with certain arguments or dismiss them as "pseudo-philosophy" because they're morally relativist in your view. What's the different between philosophy and pseudo-philosophy?
>ONE DOLLAR
>>74438445
Not an argument
>>74438631
No doubt, it was an observation and an inquiry.
>>74438720
I'm glad we could agree on that.
>>74438570
is an argument
>>74436855
You can't be white
>>74438445
Philosophy must concern itself with eternal truths.
Post-facto rationalisations aren't philosophical arguments.
Pseudo-philosophy would be arguments applied to knowingly seal off certain trains of thought without following the main logic of the central premises.
It's what the TRS people would call "tactical nihilism", as deployed for things like knowledge of race differences, though lots of people too attached to edginess and hatred use tactical nihilism when it comes to doing predatory things against other races, or against innocent individuals with the justification that it being for the good of the race or whatever other ultimately socially-constructed collective is at stake, switching from the position that things can be only justified situationally to the position that certain positions, most commonly, the "benefit" of "the race", can be extrapolated as a universal idea underpinning a system of morality that is not subjective.
Ironically my departure from the cul-de-sac of racialism was precipitated the same way my political journey through libertarianism and paleo-conservatism began, with questions of morals and individualism, things I won't abandon because it's not the in-thing with a bunch of paranoid, degenerate misfits on the internet.
>>74438834
So what you're saying is, it's not an argument?
>>74438918
Not an argument
>>74436757
His show is not philosophy. It's social commentary through formal argumentation.
Give him 20 years of loneliness and you've got Plato 2.0 on your hands
>>74440038
Not an arguementacle
>>74436757
>>74439115
>lots of people too attached to edginess and hatred use tactical nihilism when it comes to doing predatory things against other races, or against innocent individuals with the justification that it being for the good of the race
Complete strawman of Molyneux's views. You have no idea of what you're talking about.
>>74436994
a hobo
