Author Topic: Met a Molyneuxite randomly  (Read 3014 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Marc Moïni

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 63
  • Respect: +56
    • marcmoini.com
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #15 on: February 26, 2018, 05:09:06 PM »
0
"I am asking how you go from "person X said or did something I strongly object to" to "person X is an idiot/whackjob"."

I do not say that because I strongly object to what they say. Many people say things I strongly object to, and they are not whackjobs. They are simply mistaken, or hold different belief systems, or they have been deluded. I say someone is a whackjob when they are a whackjob.

" A crazy, possibly dangerous, person.
Synonyms
(crazy, possibly dangerous person): basket case, loony, nutjob, nutter, screwball, wacko, wingnut, freak"

I hope this answers your questions!

I'm glad that I'm getting a slightly clearer picture, but there's still a lot I would like to understand.

You gave me some information by saying what you're not doing, but I'm asking about what you are doing in your mind. The steps in the process which gets you to conclude that someone is stupid/wacko.

Are you saying there is only one step? You come to settle on thinking someone is stupid and/or crazy and possibly dangerous, simply by observing what they do or say? There is no interpretation at all on your part?
lessons from my journey out of confusion and despair:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEy_JSW_saSvsiG6wFnB8DeYUzT26-bA6

Hierophant

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 70
  • Respect: +24
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #16 on: February 26, 2018, 07:21:43 PM »
0
Of course there is interpretation. There is interpretation in every epistemic act. All knowledge is ultimately personal.

The Observer

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 212
  • Respect: +126
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #17 on: March 03, 2018, 12:10:11 AM »
0
A lot of the newer people don't really understand his past and his whole story.  I wouldn't be too hard on them.  Perhaps just tell them to continue to research the guy until they come to their own conclusions.  But that may be bad advice for some that are very wounded inside. 

Marc Moïni

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 63
  • Respect: +56
    • marcmoini.com
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #18 on: March 04, 2018, 02:07:00 PM »
0
Of course there is interpretation. There is interpretation in every epistemic act. All knowledge is ultimately personal.

Yes, so that's what I'm asking about. Your interpretation process. If you don't mind saying.

Because I'm thinking maybe something similar, that has nothing to do with a person's intelligence, could be a reason why people who we'd expect would know better, seem to gloss over many of Molyneux's contradictions.
lessons from my journey out of confusion and despair:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEy_JSW_saSvsiG6wFnB8DeYUzT26-bA6

Hierophant

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 70
  • Respect: +24
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #19 on: March 07, 2018, 03:22:05 AM »
0
To be honest, I don't know why you're so curious about my process, but I've given a lot of insight into it in my previous posts. I don't really see the connection between my evaluation of someone as stupid and someone being unable to evaluate Molyneux rationally.

Loner

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • Respect: +20
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #20 on: March 08, 2018, 07:52:06 PM »
0
 The curiosity is about trying to follow a outline of what is called "Non Violent Communication".

Hierophant

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 70
  • Respect: +24
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #21 on: March 09, 2018, 03:42:28 AM »
+1
Pretty sure I haven't ever punched anyone online.

Marc Moïni

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 63
  • Respect: +56
    • marcmoini.com
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #22 on: March 09, 2018, 07:06:52 PM »
0
It's clear to you what your process is, and you've given a lot of insight into it. But I still don't know what it is.

It's clear to me what the connection could be, between your evaluation of someone as stupid and some people's difficulty with evaluating Molyneux's rationality, and in my first reply I spelled it out. But you don't know what the connection is.

So it looks like we're both in a similar position. We're both convinced we have explained ourself enough for the other to understand. Yet the other does not understand.

I'm still interested in the 3 goals I mentioned:
1) offer a possible explanation for why people who could know better, still give Molyneux a pass.
2) hopefully do you a favor, if you appreciate people pointing out any blind spots you might have.
3) learn something, if I can.

The question of yours that I've been trying to answer is:
Libertarian, I can understand, I used to be one (it's vacuous as hell if you think about it for more than a minute, but I get the attraction). But believing in current Molyneux's brand of MRA alt-right fire-and-brimstone?

Are you still interested in possibly having it answered?
lessons from my journey out of confusion and despair:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEy_JSW_saSvsiG6wFnB8DeYUzT26-bA6

Hierophant

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 70
  • Respect: +24
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #23 on: March 10, 2018, 06:48:52 PM »
0
Go ahead.

Marc Moïni

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 63
  • Respect: +56
    • marcmoini.com
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #24 on: March 26, 2018, 06:29:44 PM »
0
Ok, let's try to figure this out. You said:

To be honest, I don't know why you're so curious about my process, but I've given a lot of insight into it in my previous posts. I don't really see the connection between my evaluation of someone as stupid and someone being unable to evaluate Molyneux rationally.

and my idea is that perhaps the connection is what's been called emotional flashbacks.

When I get them, I'm not aware that it's going on, but thinking becomes difficult, I become confused. If I’m talking with someone, I can sort of keep track of the point I’m trying to make, but I’m not able to understand their point. I tend to get angry.

And this happens consistently, for certain topics. This is what I was pointing at in my first reply, when I wrote:

I laughed at your turtle joke, but I know several people who I think are very smart and still listen to Molyneux's BS. And they see themselves as Libertarians.

Psychological blind spots from emotional wounds, is my explanation. I certainly know what it can be like, to have no awareness that one's mind is avoiding entire topics and aspects of experience!

I had some treatment for this, and now it's not as severe as it used to be. It’s now much less difficult for me to notice that it's happening, and then I can get out of it.

The way I understand it, certain situations trigger memories of times when we saw ourselves in mortal danger. We might have no conscious recollection of these, but our survival instinct takes control and switches us into high alert. This is the fight/flight-or-appease/freeze unconscious reaction.

Which involves disconnecting our intellectual brain from what's going on, because it's faster to take action from instinct (or from habit), rather than from reasoning, and in a life-or-death situation, speed of reaction can save our life.

Molyneux has talked about this, and as usual he's turned it into a caricature. But even though he’s misrepresented it, this reaction is real. I’ve been learning as much as I can about it, these past few years, and I’ve made videos to share what I’ve learned. Because to some degree, most people seem to be affected by this.

So that’s why I’m asking about your thought process. If you can identify something like this going on, then I’m hoping you’ll free yourself from it, and you’ll appreciate very much the increased clarity that results, which makes it possible to achieve so much more! And regardless of whether it’s that or not, I’m hoping to learn something here.

And I think this can explain how smart people can suddenly seem to lose their wits, when certain topics come up. Which would answer your question.
lessons from my journey out of confusion and despair:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEy_JSW_saSvsiG6wFnB8DeYUzT26-bA6

Hierophant

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 70
  • Respect: +24
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #25 on: March 28, 2018, 11:45:00 PM »
+1
I can tell you what emotional flashback I get about Libertarianism. It's the memory of how absolutely vacuous and stupid I was when I was a Libertarian, and how happy I am to be free from its totalizing grip. Hope that helps.
(I also associate Libertarians with pedophiles, because it seems like a whole lot of Libertarianism exists solely to justify pedophilia. not sure if that's an emotional flashback though)

Marc Moïni

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 63
  • Respect: +56
    • marcmoini.com
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #26 on: April 19, 2018, 07:05:23 AM »
0
You're glad you have a lot more clarity now, and more freedom as a result, is that right?

And you're angry with people who abuse children, which is what you see Libertarians in effect are advocating, if I understand correctly.

The following is a longer description (from http://pete-walker.com) of what I think makes people vulnerable to Molyneux:

"A significant percentage of adults who suffered ongoing abuse or neglect in childhood suffer from Complex Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. One of the most difficult features of this type of PTSD is extreme susceptibility to painful emotional flashbacks. Emotional flashbacks are sudden and often prolonged regressions [...] to the frightening circumstances of childhood. They are typically experienced as intense and confusing episodes of fear and/or despair - or as sorrowful and/or enraged reactions to this fear and despair. Emotional flashbacks are especially painful because [of strong] shame, inhibiting the individual from seeking comfort and support, isolating him in an overwhelming and humiliating sense of defectiveness.

Because most emotional flashbacks do not have a visual or memory component to them, the triggered individual rarely realizes that she is re-experiencing a traumatic time from childhood. [...] Most of my clients experience noticeable relief when I explain PTSD to them. The diagnosis seems to reverberate deeply with their intuitive understanding of their suffering. When they understand that their sense of overwhelm initially arose as an instinctual response to truly traumatic circumstances, they begin to shed the awful belief that they are crazy, hopelessly oversensitive, and/or incurably defective."

I find the treatment model explained on that site lacking, especially the part about seeing the "inner critic" as an enemy. I think it's a powerful ally. But I recommend the articles there, for understanding what can cloud people's judgment (as was my case) to the point of not seeing through Molyneux.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2018, 07:15:53 AM by Marc Moïni »
lessons from my journey out of confusion and despair:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEy_JSW_saSvsiG6wFnB8DeYUzT26-bA6

money detonator

  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
  • Respect: +748
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #27 on: April 22, 2018, 03:27:29 PM »
+1
You can be stupid and not deluded, and you can be deluded and very intelligent (intelligent people, actually, have more of a capacity to rationalize their own delusions- I know, I used to be in that position). In general, I think people who are not in leadership positions and are well aware of the horrible nature of what they promote are profoundly stupid, but most of their followers are deluded.

This is an important distinction.  Another distinction to make is between intelligence and insecurity about one's intelligence.  The other combination is being deluded about one's intelligence (usually thinking one is more intelligent than one is).    Also, many intelligent people are incredibly insecure, because they are surrounded by those who are even more intelligent (often the case at a competitive college or in a competitive profession).  All these combinations exist in abundance in MolyWorld.  Thus, the incredible defensiveness at any hint of challenging or questioning their intelligence level.

Given Molyneux's incessant lectures about IQ and how undeserving low IQ people are, I believe he is baiting people who are very insecure about their intelligence, and using that to emotionally manipulate them.

That is the reason I try very hard to not make comments about his followers being stupid or lacking intelligence (though it is very tempting, especially when they keep calling me retarded or stupid when I criticize Molyneux), regardless of my feelings or opinions.  It will just add to Molyneux's hold on the person.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2018, 03:32:02 PM by money detonator »

Kronze21

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 215
  • Respect: +1
Re: Met a Molyneuxite randomly
« Reply #28 on: June 29, 2018, 11:38:36 PM »
0
For me anyone who spends so much time hating someone is someone with a low IQ.  Also why do you say pretends to be libertarian??  He's an an-cap,  he wants a stateless society.  Why is that so hard to believe?? 

It just sounds like to me you're  just butthurt that you got banned.


I had the displeasure of meeting a Stefan Molyneux fan at work today (I live in a relatively small city, so that was surprising). I told him I was one of the first members of his group in the old days. Of course, I didn't tell him I was also one of the first to get banned. I figured that anyone who's a Molyneux fan nowadays must have the IQ of a turtle, so I didn't want to argue with him.

He was also talking about Libertarianism. Does Molyneux still pretend to be a Libertarian these days? I was kinda surprised by that.