Avarice567 Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 In my opinion, for our sake. I don't mean this to offend. I'm not saying he's wrong, but it's pretty hard to convince anybody of anything from just referring them to his videos. The primary reason for this I believe is because Stefan often times comes off like a politician, or a biased activist(which is what he is, really). His rhetotical style bounces from educational to outright biased sounding. His videos only sound pleasing to those who already agree with him. Compunding this is the fact that it's often hard to trace and substantiate his arguments. I was watching his Bankers, Busts, and hitory video. Great video. Two problems though. First: broken link. Second: Unsubstantiated arguments that seemingly require esoteric knowledge, for example, where does it say that NASA started out private? I used this in an argument, and totally got creamed. I guess what I'm asking for is a more objective presentation, and more inbuilt cititations, like an essay. However, perhaps the problem is me. Perhaps I shouldn't be using Stefan's material for educational purposes. rather I should be doing my own research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen C Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 I'm curious what getting creamed looked like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefan Molyneux Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 NASA started out private? That's not my argument. My argument was that NASA recruited many of its original engineers from non-bureaucratic sources, and had about a generation of fair successes before the statist rot set in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 I've found that whenever you show or share a video to someone, this could be a video by Richard Dawkins to a theist, or a video by Stef to a statist, or a video by any particular expert in any particular area to someone who is at best very skeptical and at worst, very resistent to changing their mind about things, they will always latch on to one particular mistake or percieved error that has very little if any bearing on the overall point being made. People will find any one single thing to say "oh this guy is wrong about this so he's got no credibility at all therefore I can continue believing this bullshit" which is often times ironic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avarice567 Posted January 11, 2013 Author Share Posted January 11, 2013 "NASA started out private? That's not my argument. My argument was that NASA recruited many of its original engineers from non-bureaucratic sources, and had about a generation of fair successes before the statist rot set in." My apologies. Still, I'd like to know where you got this information, or was it something you inferred because it was NASA's beginning, ergo they would have had to recruit from private sources? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avarice567 Posted January 11, 2013 Author Share Posted January 11, 2013 "I've found that whenever you show or share a video to someone, this could be a video by Richard Dawkins to a theist, or a video by Stef to a statist, or a video by any particular expert in any particular area to someone who is at best very skeptical and at worst, very resistent to changing their mind about things, they will always latch on to one particular mistake or percieved error that has very little if any bearing on the overall point being made. People will find any one single thing to say "oh this guy is wrong about this so he's got no credibility at all therefore I can continue believing this bullshit" which is often times ironic." I've considered this as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribuck Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 I guess what I'm asking for is a more objective presentation ... like an essay. There are plenty of objective essay-like writings available from others. For example, the writings of Murray Rothbard make many of the same points that Stefan makes, in a careful reasoned way without the toilet jokes. Stef has his own strengths though. I think he's astonishingly good at looking beyond the small details and seeing the big picture. And he can convey that picture very clearly to those who have the right background to understand it. I recall a video which discussed how the freedom movement needed to become more effective, and that it could do so by adopting some of the tactics used by religious movements. Sorry, I can't find the video (I'm not even sure if it was by Stef, or whether it was one of his interviews, or whether it was by someone else). Anyway, one of those tactics was to maintain motivation amongst the faithful by providing a place for them to gather together regularly, to hear a sermon that will keep them motivated. And Stefan certainly does that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avarice567 Posted January 11, 2013 Author Share Posted January 11, 2013 I guess what I'm asking for is a more objective presentation ... like an essay. There are plenty of objective essay-like writings available from others. For example, the writings of Murray Rothbard make many of the same points that Stefan makes, in a careful reasoned way without the toilet jokes. Stef has his own strengths though. I think he's astonishingly good at looking beyond the small details and seeing the big picture. And he can convey that picture very clearly to those who have the right background to understand it. I recall a video which discussed how the freedom movement needed to become more effective, and that it could do so by adopting some of the tactics used by religious movements. Sorry, I can't find the video (I'm not even sure if it was by Stef, or whether it was one of his interviews, or whether it was by someone else). Anyway, one of those tactics was to maintain motivation amongst the faithful by providing a place for them to gather together regularly, to hear a sermon that will keep them motivated. And Stefan certainly does that. Ya, that's like what i said. Stefan is preaching to the the choir. However, I do acknowledge that a reason for this is like Nathan said: our opponents will come up with any excuse to ideologically shield themselves. I'm just really frustrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LovePrevails Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 I have to say I have found Stef's videos great for people on board already, but I would say if I was speaking to a bunch of liberals I wouldn't proceed with as many "assumptions of agreement" as he does , although I wouldn't say he isn't a good empiricist he does tend to back up his claims I'm sorry for raising my criticisms without inference to examples and if Stef or someone wants me to give specific examples then I will look out for them in future and quote some Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen C Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Hehe, get your isht together. Gettin' people creamed in arguments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts