Author Topic: Is Molyneux just another con man or does he really believe he's a philosopher?  (Read 3588 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Kronze21

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +1
I think its funny that you think I care if you care about what I think or not.  Also the point of alex jones is for entertainment, hes an entertainer.

That's a very good point, but dishonestly has a ceiling. 
hmmm, I have to disagree about the ceiling.  We have a President that lied all the way to the White House!  I think Molyneux didn't get very far because he is mediocre at lying, like he is at a lot of things, but will do it because he can't resist taking advantage of others and has no shame.

You might be right.  I'm just going off my own theory.  What I was trying to get at is that Molyneux will never reach the top of his field and get taken seriously.  Alex Jones is very popular, but a lot of his subs are for entertainment reasons.  Jones isn't taken seriously by professionals, and Molyneux has a similar fate. 

I find it funny that this Kronze guy thinks I care what he thinks.    ;D

Kronze21

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +1
Plenty of awesome people werent taken seriously in their time and people used to get killed for saying he world isnt flat.  The fact of the matter is the human race is generally irrational and you anti Stef people are on the wrong side of history just like the flat earthers

. . . What I was trying to get at is that Molyneux will never reach the top of his field . . .

I don't think Molyneux is even in the field (philosophy), let alone vying to get to the top, or any position of influence . . . from what I can see he's not at all taken seriously or even recognised within philosophy.

Of course his white-knights (along with Molyneux himself) will tell you this is the result of a giant all encompassing leftist plot to stymie his brilliant insights, but inherent in that idea is a recognition (or even an admission) that he's not in fact be taken seriously or recognised in the field of philosophy.

Kronze21

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +1
Sounds about right to me.  You could get killed back in the day for saying something the ruling class didnt like.  Stating all of it is going a bit far but a lot of it sounds about right.

. . . What I was trying to get at is that Molyneux will never reach the top of his field . . .

I don't think Molyneux is even in the field (philosophy), let alone vying to get to the top, or any position of influence . . . from what I can see he's not at all taken seriously or even recognised within philosophy.

Of course his white-knights (along with Molyneux himself) will tell you this is the result of a giant all encompassing leftist plot to stymie his brilliant insights, but inherent in that idea is a recognition (or even an admission) that he's not in fact be taken seriously or recognised in the field of philosophy.

Listen to what Molyneux has to say about the history of philosophy here https://youtu.be/cdax5DJwfik. Starting around 9:30 he basically says the entire philosophical oeuvre, up until about 10 years ago (coincidentally when he was starting his podcasts, ha) is suspect because there was no real free speech so it all "served the needs of the rulers". There's nothing that can be added to that to make it more asinine, it just stands on its own as representing the scope of his thinking.

summa logicae

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 98
  • Respect: +47
Sounds about right to me.  You could get killed back in the day for saying something the ruling class didnt like.  Stating all of it is going a bit far but a lot of it sounds about right.

. . . What I was trying to get at is that Molyneux will never reach the top of his field . . .

I don't think Molyneux is even in the field (philosophy), let alone vying to get to the top, or any position of influence . . . from what I can see he's not at all taken seriously or even recognised within philosophy.

Of course his white-knights (along with Molyneux himself) will tell you this is the result of a giant all encompassing leftist plot to stymie his brilliant insights, but inherent in that idea is a recognition (or even an admission) that he's not in fact be taken seriously or recognised in the field of philosophy.

Listen to what Molyneux has to say about the history of philosophy here https://youtu.be/cdax5DJwfik. Starting around 9:30 he basically says the entire philosophical oeuvre, up until about 10 years ago (coincidentally when he was starting his podcasts, ha) is suspect because there was no real free speech so it all "served the needs of the rulers". There's nothing that can be added to that to make it more asinine, it just stands on its own as representing the scope of his thinking.

That sounds right to you? Well, it could sound right to me that we should sacrifice infants to Cthulhu, but that's not an argument for why we should do it. It's nice that something sounds right to you, unfortunately that's the same as saying absolutely nothing in terms of rebuttal.

Kronze21

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +1

Difference is that would violate rights.  My view point doesnt.

Sounds about right to me.  You could get killed back in the day for saying something the ruling class didnt like.  Stating all of it is going a bit far but a lot of it sounds about right.

. . . What I was trying to get at is that Molyneux will never reach the top of his field . . .

I don't think Molyneux is even in the field (philosophy), let alone vying to get to the top, or any position of influence . . . from what I can see he's not at all taken seriously or even recognised within philosophy.

Of course his white-knights (along with Molyneux himself) will tell you this is the result of a giant all encompassing leftist plot to stymie his brilliant insights, but inherent in that idea is a recognition (or even an admission) that he's not in fact be taken seriously or recognised in the field of philosophy.

Listen to what Molyneux has to say about the history of philosophy here https://youtu.be/cdax5DJwfik. Starting around 9:30 he basically says the entire philosophical oeuvre, up until about 10 years ago (coincidentally when he was starting his podcasts, ha) is suspect because there was no real free speech so it all "served the needs of the rulers". There's nothing that can be added to that to make it more asinine, it just stands on its own as representing the scope of his thinking.

That sounds right to you? Well, it could sound right to me that we should sacrifice infants to Cthulhu, but that's not an argument for why we should do it. It's nice that something sounds right to you, unfortunately that's the same as saying absolutely nothing in terms of rebuttal.