So your points are: 1) You don't like Stef because he doesn't appeal to the university croud. 2) You don't like Steph because he sells his philosophy at low prices in the form of books. 3) You think Stef has a big ego. 4) You think Stef is ignorant of modern philosophical trends. 5) You don't fault Stef for being a salesman because every one has to make a buck to live in our modern world. Any logical refutations of his arguments? Maybe video #2?
Sorry this didn't go better for you. I think you should consider more of your own ideas, and less of other peoples. Perhaps starting with an investigation of authority.
A major problem with STefbot is that he really acts like a bot. If you criticize any of his bullshit or unfounded assumptions, he spasms and can't handle it or just ignores you. Often, though, he just repeats his original assumptions as fact over and over.
Although I may disagree with steph, I find it interesting that you "fault" him for "being a salesman". You're right, he's selling his ideas for a profit.... i'm sure there are many philosophers seeking donations, and i'd hope that his greed for Profit would motivate him to work his hardest at giving us the most value for our donation, for surely he would make more money in the long run doing good work as opposed to short lived success like bernie maddoff.
no one can sell you anything if you don't want to buy it! Nothing is "perfect" and I'd say 95% of what the guy "stefbot" has to say is "ok" with me. I just think that he's 500+ years ahead of societies imprinted and existing think and behaviour patterns.
If selling something is immoral as you propose, there is no business which is moral and there is no farm which is moral. All must farm their own food and never sell it for profit.
People who hate the free market often claim that the profit motive is the root of all evil. But the free market is nothing but voluntarism - people reaching an agreement without coersion, force, or violence. I would not be surprised to learn that you are a communist who supports the evils of taxation.
Did you not get that vibe of communism from "Deconstruction"? Haha... Bet this man has one too many courses in Women's studies, which really is a misnomer. They should be called taxpayer funded feminist's brainwashing camp.
A logical argument doesn't have the categories you describe - there is no spine or umbilical cord of a logical argument.
A logical argument consists of premises which are tied together through inferences to lead to a conclusion. There are only three parts of a logical argument, none of which you have described.
Also - most of what you're saying is unintelligible, at least to me. If you want to defeat Stefan Molyneux you'll have to 'pick up the ball of logic' and meet him in that court.
Stef never adequately proves free-will, far from it in fact. His focus is on political philosophy and his defenses of free-will are egotistical. If free-will is false, then a political philosophy would necessarily account for it. Stef is already attached to his political philosophy and can't handle arguments against free-will.
When he mentions donations the way he does, people who have donated make comments on the board to pressure others to donate. Its standard psychology really. People idealize Stef as an intellectual giant, as a result they want to take part in him by supporting him. Sometimes that means ridiculing people who haven't helped the poor guy earn some money.
Oh come on. You KNOW what he meant when he called himself a warrior. You don't always have to take everything literally.
This is video is nothing but psychoananalyzing, and absurd reasons to not agree with his philosphy. So his ideas came from older philosphers, he dresses up nice, has a nice resume...therefore he is wrong? That is non sequitor. Address his points. Not the presentation.
I like how you note that he picks outdated philosophers to argue against in order to create the highly marketable image of an epic battle against a monolith.
Thaks, I'd like a good round aproach and to hear some contrasting ideas towards stefbot's positions. He is the true idealist for obvious reasons, and makes a lot of sense to me, but I'm always interested in the whole picture and contrasting view points.
So your points are: 1) You don't like Stef because he doesn't appeal to the university croud. 2) You don't like Steph because he sells his philosophy at low prices in the form of books. 3) You think Stef has a big ego. 4) You think Stef is ignorant of modern philosophical trends. 5) You don't fault Stef for being a salesman because every one has to make a buck to live in our modern world. Any logical refutations of his arguments? Maybe video #2?
JakeTheShake 2 years ago
That was a good and coherent analysis.
ReIgNoFrAdNeSs 3 years ago
Sorry this didn't go better for you. I think you should consider more of your own ideas, and less of other peoples. Perhaps starting with an investigation of authority.
quietthomas 3 years ago 2
You wasted ten minutes of my life.
anakin005 3 years ago 5
Could you cut it with the ad hominem. I also see no objections that are not ad hominem related in your video.
walkerindarkness 3 years ago 6
Hey Dos, uh metaphors are supposed to make things easier to understand. Yours are far more complicated than the original concepts.
bluecactii 3 years ago 5
Agreed. Dospook should definitely take this into consideration.
gunsandbullhorns 3 years ago 4
Stefbot is simply stating the obvious.
LimpLoser 3 years ago
A major problem with STefbot is that he really acts like a bot. If you criticize any of his bullshit or unfounded assumptions, he spasms and can't handle it or just ignores you. Often, though, he just repeats his original assumptions as fact over and over.
Technocratic 3 years ago
Although I may disagree with steph, I find it interesting that you "fault" him for "being a salesman". You're right, he's selling his ideas for a profit.... i'm sure there are many philosophers seeking donations, and i'd hope that his greed for Profit would motivate him to work his hardest at giving us the most value for our donation, for surely he would make more money in the long run doing good work as opposed to short lived success like bernie maddoff.
rjtoten 3 years ago
This is really confusing to me... all the body-parts in the beginning.
PhilosophyWatch 3 years ago
Its simply BS padding to make the following rationale seem scholarly.
utubehayter 3 years ago 3
no one can sell you anything if you don't want to buy it! Nothing is "perfect" and I'd say 95% of what the guy "stefbot" has to say is "ok" with me. I just think that he's 500+ years ahead of societies imprinted and existing think and behaviour patterns.
But people have to start somewhere ... right?
LastReplaySC 3 years ago
If selling something is immoral as you propose, there is no business which is moral and there is no farm which is moral. All must farm their own food and never sell it for profit.
People who hate the free market often claim that the profit motive is the root of all evil. But the free market is nothing but voluntarism - people reaching an agreement without coersion, force, or violence. I would not be surprised to learn that you are a communist who supports the evils of taxation.
RLore18 3 years ago 4
Did you not get that vibe of communism from "Deconstruction"? Haha... Bet this man has one too many courses in Women's studies, which really is a misnomer. They should be called taxpayer funded feminist's brainwashing camp.
utubehayter 3 years ago
A logical argument doesn't have the categories you describe - there is no spine or umbilical cord of a logical argument.
A logical argument consists of premises which are tied together through inferences to lead to a conclusion. There are only three parts of a logical argument, none of which you have described.
Also - most of what you're saying is unintelligible, at least to me. If you want to defeat Stefan Molyneux you'll have to 'pick up the ball of logic' and meet him in that court.
RLore18 3 years ago 2
Stef never adequately proves free-will, far from it in fact. His focus is on political philosophy and his defenses of free-will are egotistical. If free-will is false, then a political philosophy would necessarily account for it. Stef is already attached to his political philosophy and can't handle arguments against free-will.
Rybot9000 3 years ago
When he mentions donations the way he does, people who have donated make comments on the board to pressure others to donate. Its standard psychology really. People idealize Stef as an intellectual giant, as a result they want to take part in him by supporting him. Sometimes that means ridiculing people who haven't helped the poor guy earn some money.
Rybot9000 3 years ago
Stefbot is annoying and he has a shiny cranium so there.
petermaquire 3 years ago
What is the mother of all arguments?
petermaquire 3 years ago
"why?"?
Rybot9000 3 years ago
Oh come on. You KNOW what he meant when he called himself a warrior. You don't always have to take everything literally.
This is video is nothing but psychoananalyzing, and absurd reasons to not agree with his philosphy. So his ideas came from older philosphers, he dresses up nice, has a nice resume...therefore he is wrong? That is non sequitor. Address his points. Not the presentation.
DaveDoggOwns 3 years ago
LOL! Even taken metaphoricly "warrior" is an aggresive term. Are you trying to say that Stephan doesn't know English.
ericpage420 3 years ago
So are you saying Stefan should not be critical of the state? Stefan does not advocate violence anyway so what is your point?
DaveDoggOwns 3 years ago
If you think he is violent listen to his old podcast on pacifism
CypherSystem 3 years ago
Cool. I'm looking forward to the series.
I like how you note that he picks outdated philosophers to argue against in order to create the highly marketable image of an epic battle against a monolith.
bickleschmickle 3 years ago
I've got no idea what you were on about in the first part of the video, about argumentation.. can I ask you where you're getting that from?
The second part is very understandable and I agree with you, you've presented the problem with stefbot very well.
TheMariborchan 3 years ago
Thaks, I'd like a good round aproach and to hear some contrasting ideas towards stefbot's positions. He is the true idealist for obvious reasons, and makes a lot of sense to me, but I'm always interested in the whole picture and contrasting view points.
InfectedDaemon 3 years ago
As much as I like Stefan, I still think he needs to be heavily criticized on account of being unfamiliar with subjects he teaches.
BrianTheMusicMan 3 years ago
Bravo, I look forward to the followup videos!
baphometlovesyou 3 years ago