/lit/ - Literature

is that louis ck

It's not possible without God

>>11066199
*misunderstands basic syllogism*

>>11066199
Molyneux is totally irrelevant in today's world. For a while he was the closest thing the "alt-right" had to a philosopher but now Peterson has filled that void and he has had more success than Molyneux will ever have.

>>11066208
It is possible. Read 'Universally Preferable Behaviour'.

>>11066220
>(((Stefan)))
>Jordan 'loves the jews, is married to a jew and won't talk about race" Peterson
>altright

you're confusing libertarians/liberals with national socialists

>>11066225
What's the argument?

>>11066220
Nietzsche is more align with the altright than either of those 2

>>11066241
>socialists
>rightwing

>>11066199
He's two steps away from becoming a cult leader and it's obvious he only cares about money. A few years ago he was a full blown anarcho-libertarian but as soon as nationalism started blowing up he became far more right-wing.

>>11066250
the left/right wing spectrum is bs

>>11066255
when? he's a liberal who loves jews and never mentions race. A few years ago he would have been called a lefty

>>11066199
do you think he is fueled by the rage of knowing that with hair he would be a solid 7/10 but without it he is relegated to being "that bald guy with a strongish jawline but ultimately cannot be sexually conceived of as anything other than a middle-age dad with two daughters, a son, an SUV, and who is terribly under performing in bed"?

>>11066225
>universally
>preferable

>>11066273
probably not insecure about that, he already has a family, he doesn't have to worry about sex appeal

>>11066258
>I don't understand complexities in politics
>therefore it is bs
go read Leviathan, kid

>>11066290
no it is just a meme, if you go by the spectrum than both the 3rd Reich and the USSR were the same being economically left leaning and socially both far right wing, yet are said to be on the opposite sides of the spectrum

>>11066241
how do you know he wife's jewish?

>>11066290
>right/left is complex
holy fuck taso brainlets

>>11066220
gtfo to t__d. I hate meme ploitical talk

>>11066329

>>11066326
his* lol

>>11066336

>>11066326
the nose confirms

>>11066247

>>11066220
He's not irrelevant. He still informs the opinions of many people on the right, even those who watch Peterson's videos and realize that in a conversation Peterson is the guy you want to namedrop, while Molyneux is the one whose ideas occupy your waking thoughts and decision making. It's perfectly acceptable to flip flop between the two depending on what point you need to make to whom, in what context, and at what time.

>>11066208
Why would God's decree make it anymore objective than my decree?

>>11066199
he was cool but he's gotten to wacky with his advice bullshit.

>g*d, morals, objectivity
>real
why is /lit/ so spooked these days?

>>11066273
He looked way worse with hair

>>11066698
Found you

>>11066225
This is funny because he just made a video where he said there can't be justice without God. Molymeme is at least pretending to be sympathetic to Christianity now.

>>11066199
Molyneux nuffin about morality

>>11068460
That's where his market share is

>>11066199
*spams the words "not an argument* so many times the mouth-breathers don't realize his own arguments are just cribbed from Wikipedia*

>>11066199
>>11066200
>>11066208
>>11066215
>>11066220
>>11066225
>>11066241
>>11066243
>>11066247
>>11066250
>>11066255
>>11066258
>>11066265
>>11066273
>>11066280
>>11066289
>>11066290
>>11066303
>>11066326
>>11066329
>>11066334
>>11066336
>>11066338
>>11066356
>>11066464
>>11066698
>>11067543
>>11067547
>>11067548
>>11068453
>>11068458
>>11068460
>>11068462
>>11068467
>>11068474
not an argument

Such a goofy sophist.

>>11068485
faggot

>bruh violence is wrong
>except when I don't class it as violence

>>11068485
saying not an argument isn't one either

>>11069319
u think ur a smart one, arent ye?

>>11066220
Peterson clarifies psychoanalysis, which is in itself a set of rules that psychology and pop culture already understand implicitly. That's not a politically charged topic. Plus he's a liberal.

The alt right doesn't even exist tbqh. It's just a catch phrase that Vice and CNN use when a proper ethnography is needed but demands too much from their operational apparatuses (as dictated by their business models). Journalists are lazy.

>>11067543
do you actually want a serious answer? this seems like the answer is obvious.

>>11066225
So fucking stupid.

>>11066220
Stefan likely is too "unlikeable" to appeal to many who don't take issue with the composite social tissue and varying "mainstream" norms of modern western culture . His penchant for discursion in moral conversations, his rapid speech, and condescending laughter are just not things that people care to hear.

But those things are becoming to, least I imagine, angry males who feel marginalized and agree with the topics he belabors constantly. The repeated drum beating is key. When people are angry and have few outlets to share their anti-social discontents those concerns are recurred through daydreams whereby the angry man bravely propounds his noble ideas and wins over his nebulous audience.

Stefan on his show, personifies the daydreamed man in the loop. His delivery is clear and penetrating, his responses are usually unerringly quick ripostes.

He is Peterson's archetypal dragon-slayer.

>>11069311
Violence in self-defence is a moral action.

>>11066199
>dude im a mentally unstable monkey using signs with leaking truth value and there’s this system of maths that references itself and can’t be consistent internally and also its used for making predictions about stuff
>but the stuff we don’t understand that’s why every year we argue like chimps at conferences about what 70% of the universe is made of, how old it is, and what caused it
>we also strongly disagree about the smallest stuff and some of us are viscerally opposed to prevailing intepretations of it
>we also have no idea why x, y, z, and ten billion other important mechanics are this way and we can’t produce models that describe it
>however, even though we will never understand even 1% of what this system is like, how it works or how to control it, we can use some of our wrong, but clever, ideas about how it works to make toys that kill us and are a massive drag on fitness and ecological stability
>also we made up this need formulaic cosmology which we shill constantly on tv and in textbooks at state mandated schools, and basically its built off the limited, foundationally schizophrenic, and ultimately flawed system of incomplete signs that leak truth value and we know pefectly well that its just useful nonsense and you have to submit to us or we’ll call you crazy or stupid
>also we want to build tons of nuclear plants and turn space into a coal mine
>also you don’t exist and we know everything about your brain and brains are just like these things we also don’t understand which we can pretend are simming an autistic lobotomized humans thoughts
>also because we have your trust we’ll hedge against our own incompetence and impotence in the face of chaos and infinity by inserting apocalyptic-utopian conceptions of technology, the useful nonsense that hurts us, into your mind and use that to shame you into unthinkingly backing everything we do
>also the board we post on is filled with people have a 90 iq and will be working 20 hours a week for starvation wages at a lab tht makes test kits for industrial civilization borne genetic diseases and the toys we play wth will mostly end up as black market bioweapons and emp’s/cyber nukes
>also we demand collaboration, because our supremacy is not based in the strength of a race or racially oriented priesthood, but a hive consciousness of millions of disparate, often incompetent, and parasitic people; so we need open borders for people to do the science
>also its vital for us as an overcaste to have unlimited budgets and for corps that “invest in tech” to be give supremacy in courts over individuals and races
>also let us do eugenics on you
>also we’ve never genetically engineered whole types before but we want to try it on millions of already degraded unstable people
>also because we did the thing in the books the nerdic bewitched retards wrote you have to let us do it or you’re crazy
wow really makes you think!

>>11070677
Nothing here makes you think. It’s autistic rambling that merely rims the truth.

>>11070677
who are you quoting?

>>11068485
epic.. simply epic!

>>11066225
>universal and objective
>"preferable"

>>11067543
because god has omniscience and you wear glasses from watching too much close-up hentai in the dark

>>11068485
mods plz permaban him and delete this post

>>11070962
kek
I actually have very good eyes although my mother wears glasses due to that reason. I know these notions of 'nature', 'omniscience', and 'creator' which would imply God's will to be inseparable from reality and my own existence/nature. But, what does it actually mean in practice? If it's not something implicitly 'natural' to be and act in a certain way, and it's more like a desire of god or nature rather than a real imperative. Then what reason is there to follow it aside from referring to authority? In such case, there is room for my own deliberation.

Also, given that I believe in no god, what would make me favour a god's decree over mine, especially if it felt all wrong and unnatural?

>>11070962
>because god has omniscience
[proof needed]

>>11070677
jeremy?

>objective moral system
yeah and who forces me to act morally?

>>11066303
>3rd Reich was economically left
Holy...
>"Privatization” in the Analysis of Nazi Economic Policy In the late 1930s and the early 1940s, a number of academic works were devoted to the analysis of economic policy in Germany under the rule of the National Socialist Party. One major work was Maxine Yaple Sweezy’s (1941) The Structure of the Nazi Economy. Sweezy stated that industrialists supported Hitler’s accession to power and his economic policies: “In return for business assistance, the Nazis hastened to give evidence of their good will by restoring to private capitalism a number of monopolies held or controlled by the state” (p. 27). This policy implied a large-scale program by which “the government transferred ownership to private hands” (p. 28). One of the main objectives for this policy was to stimulate the propensity to save, since a war economy required low levels of private consumption. High levels of savings were thought to depend on inequality of income, which would be increased by inequality of wealth. This, according to Sweezy (p. 28), “was thus secured by ‘reprivatization’. . . . The practical significance of the transference
of government enterprises into private hands was thus that the capitalist class
continued to serve as a vessel for the accumulation of income. Profit-making and the return of property to private hands, moreover, have assisted the consolidation of Nazi party power.” Sweezy (p. 30) again uses the concept when giving concrete examples of transference of government ownership to private hands: “The United Steel Trust is an outstanding example of ‘reprivatization.’

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/04/capitalism-and-nazism/

>>11066241
>you're confusing libertarians/liberals with national socialists
yeah but so are libertarians and national socialists

>>11066225
lmao. I knew this MUH BETTER DAN GOMMOONIZM retard was a retard, but this is better than I could have ever imagined.
What a title.

>>11066250
the nazis totally abandoned socialist on the night of the long knives when they killed all the socialists to better consolidate his allegiances with the capitalist establishment

Antinatalism is universally preferable.

>>11066698
>Peterson is the guy you want to namedrop
We are so fucked.

Has he ever been refuted? Is there any rational argument against UPB or the free market that isn't a fallacy?

>>11066225
This book is so full of holes that it could get gangbanged by every black man in the city of Los Angeles at the same time.

An actual excerpt from Molymeme's book:
>If I tell you that “Your senses are invalid,” then my argument also self-destructs, since I am using your sense of hearing to communicate to you that your sense of hearing is invalid. If I can successfully communicate my thesis to you, then your sense of hearing must be valid. Thus I must assume that your senses are valid in order to convince you that your senses are not valid, which cannot stand.

This is a lazy way of refusing to engage with
>Kant
>Hume
>Leibniz
>Descartes
and many, many earlier philosophers, all of whom have pointed out a laundry list of problems with direct and/or indirect realism (the position which would follow if one believed "My senses are [a] valid [source of knowledge]").

Most of his book is equally laughable.

>>11073601
The WE

>>11073945
No. Everything in the world is going just peachy.
Remember to tip your boss.

>>11066199
Why are 'libertarians' 'classical liberals' so obsessed with creating these supposedly 'objective' and 'irrefutable' systems of morality that add up to nothing but empty tautologies? Ayn Rand, Molyneux, Harris, Mises' Praexology, could it be that they only care about preserving the institution of private property at all costs?

>>11075173
If you're too dumb for STEM, you try liberal arts. And to protect your own brittle ego, you project your own inferiority onto everyone else.

I figured this out after one year of elementary school.

>>11073632
>jacobin
Milton Frieman is worse than Hitler

>>11075173
to be fair, egalitarians arent any better
see rawls and others

>>11070597
Killing someone over property you arbitrarily declared yours isn't self-defense.

>>11074014

If I tElL yOu ThAt “YoUr SeNsSs ArA iNvAlId,” ThEn My ArGuMeNt AlSo SeLf-DeStRuCtS, sInCe I aM uSiNg YoUr SeNsE oF hEaRiNg To CoMmUnIcAtE tO yOu ThAt YoUr SeNsE oF hEaRiNg Is InVaLiD.

>>11078097
kys

>>11066199
The guy who makes Jordan Peterson look like a good, responsible cult leader by comparison.

>>11078343
I'm yet to hear one explanation of how Stefan is a "cult leader". Is anyone who dispenses advice and philosophy with a significant following a "cult leader" too?

>>11080294
Defoo

>>11078097
haha nice my man, defeating poltards with that sponge.jpg

>>11080334
So what? Of course you should cut abusive family members out of your life. They're not immune from your judgement just because you happen to share more genes with them than with a random person.

>>11066225
>universal = objective

>>11066250
>>11066290
>>11066336
>>11080420
these are my favorite

>>11066220
The alt right is a plastic abortion that could only be birthed from our decrepit, post-modern society with internet. All of its talking heads are the most insufferable duplicitous fuckwits you can imagine that solely identify with the "movement" to make money from the psuedo-intellectual dogmatic idiots that comprise it i.e Jordan "Clean your room" Peterson being too afraid to actually talk on any real issues in case their golden goose gets killed.

>>11081130

Alt right philosophers = Burke, De Maistre

>>11081812
holy...

>>11081852

Today's debate between the alt-right and the left is just the contemporary version of the enlightenment vs counter-enlightenment, with the alt-right obviously being on the counter-enlightenment side.

You can't disagree with this.

>>11081852
>>11081861

I realize now that the analogy I was trying to make doesn't work as well as it did on first thought, but the alt-right does borrow a lot from the counter-enlightenment, despite not being aware of it in most cases.

>>11081861
>with the alt-right obviously being on the counter-enlightenment side
maybe not the alt right but this time it's the right who's obssesed with MUH SCIENCE

>>11081861
I do disagree. Subclades of those who inherit or are influenced by the Enlightenment can disagree with each other, and many do. Despite their frequent superficial paeans to "traditional Evropa" (which traditional Europe?), they are basically modernist. French Revolution, American revolution, republicanism, nationalism, populism, colonialism, militarism. They are basically just a darker, more retarded shade of the same substance that's been extand for the past few centuries. We should not forget that the Enlightenment is really the genesis of both contemporary forms of liberality and centralisation, freedom and discipline.

Obviously counter-Enlightenment and criticism of modernity is a big part of the conservative tendency. At the same time, every ideological camp that exists after the Enlightenment has to wrestle with it. No one has an entirely positive perspective on modernity - certainly not those we tend to think of as "the left", such as Marxists.

The Counter-Reformation can never be the same thing as pre-Reformation Christianity.

>>11081861
>>11081900
Another thing I should mention is that the utopian tendency the political movements of today inherit from Rousseau (rightly or wrongly) is a major element at work in contemporary fascism. The perfectability of the mass citizenry, the warrior, the party member, is something that is owed more to the Terror than to say, Edmund Burke's skepticism of utopianism and vindication of the concept of man's fallen nature.

>>11081900
>The Counter-Reformation can never be the same thing as pre-Reformation Christianity.
Oof

>>11081900
>Obviously counter-Enlightenment and criticism of modernity is a big part of the conservative tendency
and a big part of postmodernists and structuralists I'd say

>>11081130
This, but unironically.

>>11066199
objectivist*

>>11081130
That's why we need unrelenting, unreconstructed, unmitigated and unleashed Hitlerism. Death is the Way to Eternity, Love will Begin when the World Ends! Viva La Muerte! All Hail the Black Sun!

>>11066200
100 emoji

>>11066208
Preach

>>11066220
>Memerson
>Philosopher

*makes this thread for a thousands time*

>>11066250
>socialists
>mfw

>>11073632
>corporatism
>not statism at its finest

>>11083473
libertarians imagine capitalism as 18th jeffersonian whig utopia of independent farmers and craftsmen, nevermind that's been made obsolete many times over by economies of scale and changing economic conditions. The era of post war suburban prosperity was an artificial product of total mobilization and massive state intervention. The middle class republic is inherently unstable.

>>11066199
I’m so fucking tired of looking at his idiot face on here.

>>11083549
Not an argument

>>11066698

> Imagine writing that unironically

>>11077578
objectivist ethics are in the last instance a justification for fascism, Rawlsian ones for a completely homogenized and atomized corporate wasteland inhabited by nominally 'equal' monads.