Author Topic: Debunking Molyneux's philosophical views  (Read 1681 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Pavlov's Dog

  • Guest
Debunking Molyneux's philosophical views
« on: January 05, 2018, 11:23:39 AM »
+4
Well hello there. I am making a series where I debunk Stef's alleged philosophical achievements and abilities in an entertaining and hopefully informative fashion. I figured such a project would be invaluable given the aims and goals of this website. So if you want a quick and easy way of convincing dyed in the wool Molly heads to think twice about leaving their families this should do it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXsiJMVigwQ&t=217s 

phlogiston

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 71
  • Respect: +5
Re: Debunking Molyneux's philosophical views
« Reply #1 on: March 15, 2018, 06:34:01 PM »
+1
As a philosophy major i can follow your video. I doubt a follower will. Spend more than 30 seconds on modus tollens/pollens has lost them already. Show how the p>s flipped is radical. Liked the transposition to predicate logic but still not quick enough. Watch sysiphus redeemed vids. Hes really good. Contentwise i have no problem. You picked a specific thing and went with it. I am not active here but cheked in today. I was part of lime back in the day when things like the lokian proviso were prominant. Just giving my feedback and  applauding your time elucidating the issues.

pavlovsdogs

  • FDR Curious
  • Posts: 3
  • Respect: +4
Re: Debunking Molyneux's philosophical views
« Reply #2 on: May 03, 2018, 12:27:03 PM »
0
Thanks for the feedback, I really appreciate it. I did struggle to make the thing both watchable and informative, but I fear you have a point about it not being quick enough. It was basically trying to figure out exactly how much I'd need to explain before people got the punchline. It's something I'm hoping to get a better sense of as I go. But thanks again, feedback is always appreciated. 

pavlovsdogs

  • FDR Curious
  • Posts: 3
  • Respect: +4
Re: Debunking Molyneux's philosophical views
« Reply #3 on: May 14, 2018, 01:26:12 PM »
+3
I've made a second in this series for anyone interested. This one's far less logically oriented and more viewer friendly. Molyneux's politics, religious views and philosophy are the topics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSG0sCKSIn8

money detonator

  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 717
  • Respect: +761
Re: Debunking Molyneux's philosophical views
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2018, 11:30:15 AM »
+2
I feel like a step is missing in that I need convincing that Molyneux even HAS philosophical views to debunk.  He's mostly an endless daily vomiting of personal grievances mixed with justifications for treatment of others as worthless inferiors.  I think elevating his material to intellectual content worthy of being classified as philosophy to be debunked is too generous of an interpretation, and giving him too much credit.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2018, 12:28:45 PM by money detonator »

pavlovsdogs

  • FDR Curious
  • Posts: 3
  • Respect: +4
Re: Debunking Molyneux's philosophical views
« Reply #5 on: May 16, 2018, 07:57:24 AM »
+1


I feel like a step is missing in that I need convincing that Molyneux even HAS philosophical views to debunk.  He's mostly an endless daily vomiting of personal grievances mixed with justifications for treatment of others as worthless inferiors.  I think elevating his material to intellectual content worthy of being classified as philosophy to be debunked is too generous of an interpretation, and giving him too much credit.

The notion that he has philosophical views is kinda the main running joke. That and he sorta debunks himself if you just let him speak long enough. I agree with you that Molyneux doesn't have any good philosophical views, but not everyone knows that. And I think it unwise to dismiss him in the sort of deplatformatory way you've suggested. People like him thrive on this sort of thing. Makes them and others influenced by them think "My ideas are so wild that people are scared to listen to them/ can't handle the truth of my words" which in turn makes them appealing to outsiders. Whereas if you look at my content, the point is Stef doesn't have any good ideas, doesn't know how to philosophise properly, or even think clearly. I'd much rather convey that message to people who've been taken in by this rehtoritician, while also imparting enough actual philosophical basics to prevent similar future scams. While I've never personally been taken in by him I've been keeping an eye on him for years and I've seen what the lack of proper philosophical criticism has allowed him to get away with. of course aside from the "community service" aspect of the series I also take great pleasure in watching people do philosophy badly. great way to unwind after a hard day of serious thinking. So for me it's not about philosophy so much as it is undermining Stef in a humorous way, both for people who do and don't know better.