Stefan Molyneux Has A New Book Out

For those who didn’t see it, Stefan has a new Kindle out. It is a dissection of argument, and the virtues it has in creating, maintaining, and restoring civilization.

The Link is here.

What I found amusing is his review section, which is almost entirely five star reviews, and one star reviews. As you go through them, you see all the five stars are purchasers, and all the one stars are people who never even read it.

The funny thing is, I have never seen any marketing strategy as effective as having that on your book page. I immediately bought a copy and will put up a review when I am done with it. Apparently, judging from the sales rank, I am not alone in thinking that way. He was at about 500 when I saw it, while Evopsych hovers around 100,000.

If I ever wrote another book, I would actually pay to have stupid one star reviews, because not having those is probably a good indicator that what the person says is not going to be of any use against the greatest threat humanity faces these days – amygdala-addled leftists.

Spread r/K Theory, because it is all about repelling the left.

This entry was posted in Amygdala Hijack, K-stimuli, Politics, Psychological Manipulation, rabbitry. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Stefan Molyneux Has A New Book Out

  1. Andy says:

    Molyneux is a scamer and a hack that changes his ideology according to the market situation. At first he was a libertarian who thought himselfs smarter then everyone else, then he went in the direction of anti-feminism, western chauvinism and what it is at the moment i don’t even know. Molyneux in his nature is a rabbit, selfrightous lamenting over the superiority of his arguments as if they would have any meaning in the real world where tooth and claw rule. Cancer will rid us of this hack in maybee two to three years anyway. Fuck this guy and fuck his book.

    • I see his transition as the natural path of the instinctual libertarian. It begins with principled libertarianism, which is just explaining from the perspective of your instincts, how libertarianism would work, if people would only adopt it the way you have. After banging your head against that wall, you begin to realize there must be a reason why nobody can just leave everyone else alone. For me it was r/K, at which point I began to realize libertarianism would never work.

      Stefan now seems to be leveraging his impressive audience to simply plant anti-leftist amygdala-bombs, attacking individual parts of the totalitarian left, which is probably the best strategy you could hope to enact. My guess is, make him king and he would still try to legislate total freedom, but given reality he is fighting the best he can.

      • Andy says:

        In his age its a little bit late for transitions, especialy if someone calls himself a philosopher king the whole time and wraps himself in bullshit platitudes like “the argument… is humanity”. The audience is not so much impressive as it is easy to impress. Molyneux scam now lives entirely off better peoples ideas and i think i never heard an original thought from him. Add to that the cheap clickbait headlines and dumb faces he makes for the thumbnails, its the lowest form of marketing directed at the lowest common denominator. He left libertarianism not because he saw the light, but because his paying audience left it who grew out of its angry teenage boy phase and started looking for meaningfull things besides pseudo-moral hubris and nihilism. That was the point when he played footsy with anti-feminist ideas and western chauvinism.
        Also he showed in all the years since hes doing this scam often what rotten character he has. Molyneux is a damaged rabbit and he and his cult construct FDR will do more damage then good to everyone associating himself with it. I stay far away from that toxic scamer.

        • Youtube intellectuals talk about Molyneux the same way you’d talk about a dirty diaper. Something unpleasant that needs adressing. That if you ignore, it just gets worse. Waiting for him to die admits his dominance.

          Whether he is a damaged rabbit or not, I will make the claim that your perception of him as such, is projection.

          • Pitcrew says:

            Bullseye Zach. Molyneux is based. Fact based.

          • Andy says:

            The guy can’t even dominate his own life and is dependet on finding new pasture to feed on like the r-typical animal he his. He also needs to shift between personalities he surroundes himself with cause after a while everyone sees behind his act. Fact based or not doesn’t matter since the interpretation of these facts is relevant, thats the whole point of r- and K- Selection Theory. Show a liberal and a right winger the same facts and they come to different conclusions. Molyneux pseudo-highpriest act fails the smelling test. And yes, i look forward to this guy just dropping dead since there isn’t anything else to be done worth the efford.

            Dominance… seriously this fucking guy with his non aggression principal bullshit. Violance makes history and no one gives a fuck about his principals or his snarky moral arguments.

          • Andy says:

            The guy made a whole concept out of it how to destroy your family unit when your parents slapped you and how everything is childabuse. The guy is cancer and thank god he got some himself.

          • The thing is, he has seen a lot of abusive situations, where the only way to save the person is to break the momentum, and drive them to cut ties. DeFOO is something that does not come naturally in abusive relationships due to the dynamics, so his adding a push probably helps a lot of people escape it. I can’t say there aren’t situations where DeFOO drove somebody away from a good relationship, but generally if a relationship is good, breaking the tie externally is near impossible. My guess is if people follow his DeFOO advice, there was something bad going on there, one way or another.

  2. Anonymous says:

    I bought it, and have started reading it. 👍

  3. c_arnold says:

    Any alternatives you might recommend to folks who might want something more tangible? Until this thing finds itself circulating on pirate channels, I’d like to avoid the machines knowing too much about what I’ve been reading that isn’t party approved. I’d rather have them find out when looking on my bookshelf after they kick down the door to a dusty abandoned home than with the click of a mouse to bump me up the target priority list.

    • You know, I went to all sorts of troubles to try and stay hidden. It was useful to stay out of sight of the private sector, but the government knows whatever it wants. If you are a troublesome little prick, or even just think bad thoughts now and again, they will know. They probably already have it in the database, if they aren’t talking about it this very minute.

    • Andy says:

      You ain’t as important to the system as you think. Everytime the cops showed up at my place they didn’t care for books. Patriot Act style library trackings are clues that are supposed to lead to an act commited, not the act itself. You ain’t a target, youre alone and your head has no value to any agency or office where people look ahead for promotions.

    • FLSverker says:

      Stefan Molyneux makes sophomoric mistakes in his introduction logic, such as mixing up the terminology that distinguishes between “valid” and “sound”. The lack of proper editing of basic argumentation concepts should be enough to dissuade people from reading it. He’s cashing out on his audience, which I don’t blame him for doing, but without even putting in enough effort to keep them educated in a way that wouldn’t make them a laughingstock to people of all persuasions. If you tried to debate a logician in a totally non-political context with ideas about logic from Molyneux’s book, they would laugh at your amateurish mistakes and send you to a remedial class on logic.

      If you want books on critical thinking and forming arguments, try one of the following: Creative & Critical Thinking by W. Edgar Moore (hard to find but worth it), The Art of Reasoning by David Kelley (you’ll get a great intro to formal logic too), and Rulebook for Arguments by Anthony Weston (short but succinct). Annotate those books heavily, so you can easily return to them as you try to apply what you’ve learned to everyday topics. Return to them every once in a while to strengthen your base and compare how you think in the present with how you thought in the past. Good luck, you’ll need your wits about in today’s degenerate society.

Leave a Reply