djseng Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 Tried to transcribe as best I could. @31:09 ... I am contaminated by this with respect to other people. So you know that I see that "Oh you gotta have Stephan Molyneux on your podcast" right. And so I take a look at what he's been sayin' and what's being said about him and I think "I don't have the time to figure out whether this guy is a racist crackpot". .... @35:15 ... What I'm picturing here is talking to someone who you really should challenge on specific points because they have said crazy decisive irrational things in the past, but they're just not saying them on your show. So you get them there and it turns out this person's a grand dragon in the KKK but you don't that and you're talkin' about racial differences in IQ or something in a good nature academic way and you don't realize that this person's interest in the topic is just the tip of the iceberg. ... I don't know, I think this is exhausting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Ed Moran Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 I personally worry about what Stefan's sex life is like when I watch his show. It's a great distraction when I find his arguments emotionally displeasing 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casshern222 Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 Stefan says white people have a higher IQ and they should not mix with other races. If he really thinks it, he shouldn't have a problem with being called a racist, because that's exactly what the definition is: thinking that your race is superior. Of course he says that he doesn't think whites are superior, they just have a higher IQ, blacks are better at sports, which really is a lame excuse. It's like saying we are not superior to gorilla's even though they are miles away intelligence wise, they are are really physically strong. It's just a way to say racist stuff and not feel racist by self-rationalization. Anyway, like Sam Harris says, I have no time to research if there is scientific view in it so I reject it as racist, as most people would. I don't see anything wrong with that. Most philosophers are really liberal but Stefan is a basically right-wing nut in a lot of his views, supporting Donald Trump and conservatives in general. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Ed Moran Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 Stefan says white people have a higher IQ and they should not mix with other races. If he really thinks it, he shouldn't have a problem with being called a racist, because that's exactly what the definition is: thinking that your race is superior. Of course he says that he doesn't think whits are superior, they just have a higher IQ, blacks are better at sports, which really is a lame excuse. It's like saying we are not superior to gorilla's even though they are miles away intelligence wise, they are are really physically strong. It's just a way to say racist stuff and not feel racist by self-rationalization. Anyway, like Sam Harris says, I have no time to research if there is scientific view in it so I reject it as racist, as most people would. I don't see anything wrong with that. Most philosophers are really liberal but Stefan is a basically right-wing nut in a lot of his views, supporting Donald Trump and conservatives in general. Stefan doesn't say white people have higher IQs. He cites research from experts that he cannot refute that shows whites have higher IQs. Having a high IQ is not a characteristic of genetic superiority. Stefan has explicitly said on many occasions that IQ is simply an adaptation to an environment. You admit you are not familiar with the science, so you reject it as racist because it makes you uncomfortable and because it's the popular thing to do. You're the bigot here. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebeardslastcall Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 Stefan says white people have a higher IQ and they should not mix with other races. If he really thinks it, he shouldn't have a problem with being called a racist, because that's exactly what the definition is: thinking that your race is superior. Of course he says that he doesn't think whits are superior, they just have a higher IQ, blacks are better at sports, which really is a lame excuse. It's like saying we are not superior to gorilla's even though they are miles away intelligence wise, they are are really physically strong. It's just a way to say racist stuff and not feel racist by self-rationalization. Anyway, like Sam Harris says, I have no time to research if there is scientific view in it so I reject it as racist, as most people would. I don't see anything wrong with that. Most philosophers are really liberal but Stefan is a basically right-wing nut in a lot of his views, supporting Donald Trump and conservatives in general. Lefties who think facts are bigoted .... ugh Really, you see no problem with calling someone a racist... because you're unwilling to listen to them speak and think calling someone a racist is an acceptable default position to throw someone into? If you have no problem with that, then you have no problem with me calling you racist, sexist, homophobic, dumb, idiotic, bigoted, and deplorable, because I don't know you and you might be all those things... Maybe Sam Harris is avoiding him because he's scared of what the confrontation will reveal him as, not because of what he's afraid Stefan Molyneux will meet his low expectations. How does this guy vet people I wonder, to find them acceptable and to alleviate his fears of the person being a grand master in the KKK, as if that's at all really likely. Sounds like instead of just listening to a little bit of the podcast for himself he took to other people's opinions of Stefan, knowing where he was going to get those opinions would influence the result towards what he was looking to see (based on your transcription, haven't listened to Sam's podcast). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casshern222 Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 I can't believe you guys are making the point that you saying whites are intellectually superior doesn't imply that you are superior in general. I already 'prebutted' that point with my gorilla example because I anticipated that response. If you really believe that your race makes you intellectually superior, you should own it - admit you are racist. Like some gays are reclaiming the word faggot because they don't see anything shameful with being gay (I don't either). You shouldn't see anything wrong with being racist if it's justifiable with science. I just don't like you playing these semantic games. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCLugi Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 I can't believe you guys are making the point that you saying whites are intellectually superior doesn't imply that you are superior in general. I already 'prebutted' that point with my gorilla example because I anticipated that response. If you really believe that your race makes you intellectually superior, you should own it - admit you are racist. Like some gays are reclaiming the word faggot because they don't see anything shameful with being gay (I don't either). You shouldn't see anything wrong with being racist if it's justifiable with science. I just don't like you playing these semantic games. Is the lion superior to the dolphin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wuzzums Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 Sammy running away from discourse by calling the opposition racist. What an original tactic coming from a filthy leftist scumbag. You shouldn't see anything wrong with being racist if it's justifiable with science. I just don't like you playing these semantic games. Stefan is a basically right-wing nut in a lot of his views, supporting Donald Trump and conservatives in general. What was that saying about how people who live in glass houses should not throw stones...? The way I define racism is by judging the individual by the actions of the masses. This implies that racism is a lack of basic mathematical knowledge. A failure in understanding the difference between groups and individuals. Like for instance I have a group of 100 numbers, and I know that 50% of these numbers are higher than the number 17 Me saying that at least 50% of the numbers in the group are larger than 17 is a true statement. Me saying that the number X, which is part of the group, is 50% larger than the number 17 makes no sense whatsoever. Do you agree with my statements? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebeardslastcall Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 I can't believe you guys are making the point that you saying whites are intellectually superior doesn't imply that you are superior in general. I already 'prebutted' that point with my gorilla example because I anticipated that response. If you really believe that your race makes you intellectually superior, you should own it - admit you are racist. Like some gays are reclaiming the word faggot because they don't see anything shameful with being gay (I don't either). You shouldn't see anything wrong with being racist if it's justifiable with science. I just don't like you playing these semantic games. Are you calling yourself racist? Or are you saying the studies are false? Or are you just calling people racist while denying any coherent position? Why don't you own a coherent position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorBlux Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 I can't believe you guys are making the point that you saying whites are intellectually superior doesn't imply that you are superior in general. I already 'prebutted' that point with my gorilla example because I anticipated that response. If you really believe that your race makes you intellectually superior, you should own it - admit you are racist. Like some gays are reclaiming the word faggot because they don't see anything shameful with being gay (I don't either). You shouldn't see anything wrong with being racist if it's justifiable with science. I just don't like you playing these semantic games. Your own IQ makes you intellectually superior or not. However a randomly selected Jew will beat a randomly selected Asian (more than one half of the time), will beat a randomly selected European, will beat a randomly selected African America, will beat a random sub-Saharan African. This isn't racism, it's simply a fact. And if racial disparities arise from those differences, it is not evidence of racism. The difference is great enough that if you have to deal with aggregates or random selections, you would be correct to act or racial criteria. Where dealing with individuals Race is far less significant than other factors that can be ascertained, and it is in failure to use those other factors in which racism consists. Whereas the smartest African- American is far more intelligent than the average Asian, the smartest Gorilla is not as smart of a tenth percentile 5 year old child. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Ed Moran Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 I can't believe you guys are making the point that you saying whites are intellectually superior doesn't imply that you are superior in general. I already 'prebutted' that point with my gorilla example because I anticipated that response. If you really believe that your race makes you intellectually superior, you should own it - admit you are racist. Like some gays are reclaiming the word faggot because they don't see anything shameful with being gay (I don't either). You shouldn't see anything wrong with being racist if it's justifiable with science. I just don't like you playing these semantic games. If you can't refute the scientific literature about IQ, then maybe you should own it and be the example. You're telling us to identify as racists, but you're defining being a racist as simply acknowledging facts. You want others to identify as racists, but your way out of taking on the label is by denying facts. You're a hypocrite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebeardslastcall Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 I love when people make up things which Stefan never said and then attack it. That's always amusing. Can't say I liked that, but makes people easier to identify when you know they're doing it, which is kind of nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djseng Posted September 11, 2017 Author Share Posted September 11, 2017 Resurrecting this old post becase... Stef gets talked about again! in #93 this time with Douglas Murray... too busy to transcribe... but the gist is this time... Stef is just too close of a jump to people who are "actually" racists.... https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/identity-terror Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts