Why aren't you a skeptical classical liberal yet?

Why aren't you a skeptical classical liberal yet?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=o49cGq9UUBY
youtube.com/watch?v=A-VdZyxW4I4
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell's_theorem
youtu.be/nFAQNjqH1zA
youtube.com/watch?v=GV1aDkrNlCw
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Cause ancap is manlier

>ancap
>manly

>"skeptical classical liberal"
>the man does not posses a working knowledge of basic political theory or philosophy
>why don't I emulate that?

lel

i consider myself more conservative. Sargon has a lot of good material though

Because I smoke meth, not cigars.
With meth it's
BALS
TO
THE
WALL

I'm WALL, the nigger mage.

Do you even watch his videos nigger

Sargon has some alright points. I like how he attacks arguments when he's not laughing or being condescending.
>fucking annoying laugh
I'm more of a 50's conservative though (pro USFS, Bureau of Land Management type). I don't bother with a label because modern people are too stupid to correctly understand an accurate label, so I just tell them I'm nat soc so I can get on with it and make my point.

SAGE THIS NOW!!!!!! This is a slide thread by the leftist cucks who have infiltrated and gained control of Sup Forums. /leftypol/ was able to become mods, which is why so many shill threads pop up. Keep on stopping slide threads like this.

because I'm an objective rational centrist

the most rational and skeptical position of all

Because I know that classical liberalism and humanism are what ruined the world in the first place. They invented the
>not all jews
fallacy.

I support decentralization and hold no ideology outside of that. My personal preference is libertarian but if the world was filled with smaller decentralized states it wouldn't matter what governments people had because it would probably not affect me.

Because i'm a national-leninist

lol implying that sargon is anything but a mindless trump-dick sucking retard at this point

Liberalism is death. It may be reborn, but first all (((liberal))) ideas, structures and actors need to be removed

You believe you are manly? You are like a wee baby.

Behold:
>Anprim

anarcho-memetic paleofascist reporting in.

youtube.com/watch?v=o49cGq9UUBY

You know sage has been pretty well gutted since moot left, right?
>learn to do something useful
>like growing potatoes

Respectable digits, but I'm surprised you haven't gone post rationalism.

Boolean logic isn't how the universe or, more importantly, man functions

liberal posting to the scene

IT'S BULLSHIT

WE'RE TRYING TO HAVE A REASONABLE DISCUSSION


IT'S BULLSHIT

Just save your fucking money and work for an hour for 3 months worth of potatoes.

Right, because it's all due to the "people" who were burning "heretics" and "witches" that somehow humans made it to the moon?

It's all due to hippie fucktards that believe in crystal healing and homeopathy that someone figured out that all the galaxies are moving away from each other AND us, implying that all matter was at one point in time located in the same point of space?

I guess the pope at the time of Galileo putting Galileo under house arrest for the rest of his life was just helping human progress, you know, because Galileo was so so so un-christly wrong for publicizing the fact that Earth is not the center of the Universe?

youtube.com/watch?v=o49cGq9UUBY

Because I'd rather have free markets.

because I don't have interracial gay pornography in my computer

I was going to laugh at ancap then I saw your flag

I need to just not read anything leafs say anymore

Sorry, but as a former ancap, no its not.
Autistically reasoning about the finest points of how economic theory relates to moral philosophy is pretty fucking gay.

I'VE HAD ENOUGH OF THESE PEOPLE AND THEIR UNDERAGE WORSHIPERS REEEEEEEEEEEE

Being skeptical of everything is easy, actually committing to an idea is hard.

...

kek confirms

its funny how most skeptics aren't atheists.
only the retarded ones.

You clearly aren't using your potatoes correctly. Are you eating them?
>filthy irish
Because you should be mass producing vodka to make business and government interactions go more smoothly.

They are redpilling gen Z, the content is being made for you or people who have gone all the way down the rabbit hole already.

isn't*

This.

It puts your ego in danger to actually hold a belief in a sincere way.

I will say that one enjoyable thing about Youtube is the hot liquid shit a lot of Youtubers in the "Rationalist" genre are taking a hot liquid shit on Armored Skeptic. Fuck that syrup sucking faggot

Kek.

Bretty gud song. It's about time people started to meme against these "IM SO ABOVE IT ALL" centrist cucks.

fuck off alt left scum

sage

Anarchist Capitalism.
Fucking spook. Stirner Capitalism is a greater ideology then your bullshit
>Small markets are spooks
>Banks are spooks
>Nations are spooks
>Individualism is the only answer

I can't watch his videos, I can't stand it, everyone talks about how great he is but every video is him saying 'oh I don't know man, I see both points of view, but I don't know, I don't think you or I or anyone should take sides, we should just sit on this fence'
Faggot needs to nut up every once in awhile and take a stance, I never realized what pussies the centrists are until I saw him

Rationality != Boolean logic
Rationality is an algorithm based on Bayesian inference which gets our knowledge as close as possible to the actual observable reality, while you could attempt to argue that you can't rationally prove reason, it gets you nowhere because if you actually believed that then you wouldn't be "arguing" in the first place.

Nothings more cringey than people who are unironically radical right/left wingers

So you're saying that rationality is based on a subjective interpretation to reality?

By your own logic, an occultist is rational.

Because I'm a 20th century progressive.

Fuck your feels.
Fuck your immigration.
Fuck your censorship.

Give us freedom from fear.
Give us freedom from need.

Give us opportunity.

Because I'm skeptical of it.

Are you implying that there is a single objective frame of reference that we can know? If that's so then please enlighten me with it. Our knowledge is imperfect, but we generally assume that reality is real, I mean why else continue living, what would be the point?
I am simply stating that if we both share the a priori belief that our reality is real and we can communicate knowledge about it to each other, then the most effective way of eliminating errors in our knowledge about the world by using Bayesian inference and relaying those inferences to one another.

I don't believe Truth resides on our realm of existence, you and I agree on that. We also agree that Truth does exist.

However I disagree with the notion that "rationalism" is a golden ticket. The way I figure, most everyone sees their point of view as rational or logical. That meaning that rationalism is vulnerable to the subjectivity of the human experience, something that cannot be removed without remove the human element. If the human element were to be removed from the metaphysical quest for Truth then we remove the subject, I.e. human and reason to seek Truth.

You Enjoy sitting on that fencepost all day?

I agree that it is impossible to know truth objectively, but I also believe you can approach objective truth via subjective observation, similar to limits in calculus. Eventually it gets to the point where the probability of an alternative would be so low you might as well disregard any other hypothesis.
However I think I see where we fundamentally disagree. You seem to be assuming that no one will ever change their viewpoint when given evidence that might disprove it. While I agree that for the most part you are correct, it's certainly not impossible. I have changed my own world view many times already due to new, more accurate logic and/or evidence.
Plenty of people on Sup Forums used to be left wing and changed their viewpoints to more or less right wing opinions.
I also think there are some people who may never change their opinions because for whatever reason, biological or psychological they are stuck in a mental valley that would require too much effort on their part to ever escape, I don't think that's the case for everyone though.

I should add that removing the human element is theoretically impossible.

Left classical liberalism a long time ago.

Without the mad philosophies of the classical liberals, there would be no SJW.

They did this. It's their fault. Fucking liberals.

Because classical liberalism got us to where we are now and repeating the same mistakes multiple times is a symptom of retardation.

Thank you. This one knows.

How about a little history lesson on the origins of liberalism, then? It involves our beloved founders who were active participants in liberalism, so sit tight and pop some popcorn.
It all began five hundred years ago--to the year, actually--with the Protestant revolt. The new doctrine of private interpretation was enshrined in a new religion which took the Scriptures of the Church and reinterpreted them according to each and every person's intellect. Not much different than taking someone else's work and interpreting their work for them. This principle, in practice, split Europe from its historical patrimony and cut off huge swaths of her from the Church. Princes, caring little for religion, saw opportunities to loot Church wealth and property. Oh, Reformation indeed!
Theology aside, the principle of private judgement was burning in the hearts and minds of men all over Western Europe. This theological principle soon became a philosophical principle, and Protestants sick of the "constraints" of Christianity began setting their mental axes to philosophy. Humanism was born, and further was developed into secular humanism as the Greeks fled West to escape Mahometan persecution, bringing with them their pagan texts which previously had been interpreted in a Christian light--now were unleashed in their pagan interpretation. This was Renaissance.

Those revolutionaries whose fathers thumbed their nose at the Church, and they who tended to the iconoclasm of Christian philosophy set to realize their philosophies in the socio-political realm. After all, Patriarchy is representative of God, and who better symbolizes this authority than the King? Enter the French Revolutionaries and classical liberalism. Liberté, égalité, fraternité, they said. Overthrow of altar and of throne.
This wonderful time was called the Enlightenment. These men were so enlightened, they set their axes to the seven day week, murdered the clergy and Catholic faithful, looted the churches (much like their Protestant ancestors), enthroned a prostitute on the altar of the Paris cathedral and founded the Cult of Reason! These enlightened individuals were the bloody result of that wonderful, God-given philosophy of classical liberalism which put the rights of man over the rights of God.
No longer would God have any representative over the people. The State would be indifferent! Truth is relegated to a subjective, personal phantasm that probably doesn't exist, except to the State, that is, whose only truth is itself and power.
I hope you can see how classical liberalism was just one of several movements in history that has led to the absolutely depraved, moonbat liberalism we have today. Without the mad philosophies of the Founders, there would be no Social Justice Warrior.

There would be no fascist scum like you either

Don't use words and concepts you don't understand, kiddo.

Let's put this into simpleton terms for you and the other liberals.

>1000+ years of Christian (Catholic) civilization
>Western civilization

>200 years of secularism
>children confused as to which bathroom to use

Your move, liberal.

Christians sacked Constantinople
Kebab entered Constantinople later on
Kebabization of south east Europe happens
Therefore Christianity = Islam supporters

"Classical" liberalism got us here in the first place.

"muh freedoms" and "muh egalitarinism" created the SJW's - is turning white countries into third world hellholes and etc

Christians allowed the Roman Empire to fall think about that for a moment

The primary issue with classical liberalism is that it is a value neutral philosophy. It means that the net subjective desires of any population under it will become the dominant culture. This of course leads to many of the depravities that we see today.

We can change our point of view, but we can never have perfect clarity of a situation. Rationalism fails in that humans cannot recognize their own blind spots. We're great at pattern recognition, sure, but we like to pick and choose the points we see on a graph to fit a line to that limit. The idea fails as we are all rationalist with biased data collection. The stats predicting a Clinton victory are a perfect example; Clinton, by any rationalist's account should have won the election.

That said, ideally rationalism is a great tool.

Because some of them are complete cucks like Kraut.

>if aliens came and killed us it's okay as long as the are "superior"

skip too 1:24:09

youtube.com/watch?v=A-VdZyxW4I4

Let me get this straight.

Your argument is that desert descendants of Christian heretics created a false religion reminiscent of Christianity, Judaism, and cultural, folk paganism eventually gains the military might to take over Constantinople... and it's the faithful Christians' fault?

So, with that logic, Catholics are responsible for the heretics that split from the Church to form hundreds of competing Protestant sects which then left Protestantism and favored secularism and thus created classical liberalism and the natural progression of it, today's SJW.

You need a lesson in logic, kiddo. Enjoy your godless, secular State that's going to make you pay for Bobby's vagina surgery.

Because I apparently shifted to the right.

Because it isn't an ideology, it is an algorithm.

An incomplete one that leads to a bunch of bickering and nobody on the same page in terms of values.

Utility good, freedom good. No core values beyond that, and they can be traded for one another based on momentary Whimsy.

Fucking shit.

Because I've been there, it was fun back in 2007 when I thought all humans were equal and took it all on an per-individual basis. Truth is the real world doesn't work with that, you can theory craft a liberal system, it might look good on paper but when you apply the nature of humans to it all that remains is poor people and genocides.

Kraut's a Kraut, the hell did you expect?

Not only are you deficient in logic, but history as well.
The Roman elite class and the military were by-and-large Arian; as Arianism resembled paganism.

In fact, it was the Christians that salvaged Roman (and Greek) culture to revitalize the university and give the world what we used to call "Western Civilization."

Rome fell because it was weakened by usury [debt], corruption, and multiculturalism due to generations of slave trade. It was ripe for the picking.

>it's okay for superior aliens to exterminate us

wew lad he got autism.

A well reasonable debate instead of saying "I don't care" as a argument.

Because liberalism cannot compete in the ideological arena.

hahahahahhaha let me be specific for your inferior mind. 4th crusade caused the sack of Constantinople (which the Byzantines never recovered because of your shit Latin Empire) this allowed the Turks to take Constantinople (Christianity's greatest city (maybe except Rome)). This allowed the turks to be unopposed to kebab the Slavic nations. Remember Catholics allowed the turks to spread islam.

He just wants to stay consistent with his argument instead of looking hypocritically.

An army of mercenaries. Hardly the crusading religious folk of the 1st and 2nd.

Regardless, without Catholic intervention in the Mahometan invasions, you'd be reciting the Shahada.

Of course our observations will sometimes lead to imperfect knowledge, but more often than not they appear to be correct (otherwise we wouldn't expect people to be capable of basic tasks like driving their cars).
Since it appears that we are more right than we are wrong (once again we wouldn't have survived as a species if this weren't true), then we can find other individuals who have proven to be trustworthy sources of information to help validate our own inferences.

>The stats predicting a Clinton victory are a perfect example; Clinton, by any rationalist's account should have won the election.
Just because some group spouts statistics at you doesn't mean that you should trust them. The liberal media has already shown time and again that they are not a very trustworthy source. So anyone with that knowledge taking a rational viewpoint should have been much more confident in Trump's victory than the "statistics" predicted.

Remember Christians traded with the arabs which allowed the spread of knowledge which was once lost through their translations of the roman and greek texts which in return allowed us to translate these texts into the Christian languages

I should add that theories in quantum mechanics dictate that we will never be able reproduce predictions of quantum mechanics with local hidden variables; essentially arguing that on a quantum level, we cannot predict how an event will turn out.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell's_theorem

Wow the no true Scotsman fallacy you truly have an inferior mind don't you

Blames others for lacking logic even though he relies on logical fallacies. Go away and take your perverted Catholicism with you

On very long term timescales that can be true due to chaos theoretic effects amplifying quantum randomness to influence macroscopic causality, but generally the randomness follows a normal distribution and the most likely events happen the most. This means that we can predict things correctly more often than predicting them incorrectly.

Literally the only reason natsocs/other WNs shit on ancaps is because you guys are right about everything and it's very annoying. In terms of rational arguments even using real-world examples, an ancap will win every single time.

Problem is that life is not about arguments and the lack of a cohesive identity leads to ancap-ism being a dead end circlejerk.

Yeah, just got done watching it. Vegan Gains completely made these two into a fucking joke. Bearing and Kraut are nothing but "Muh Liberals are dumb lol" It is easy to point out a retard, but when someone who can form a sentence and give creditable sources they turn into the very people they criticize. Sadly a majority of these YouTubers that are in this particular category are similar in that way. When they go after someone who can form a proper argument, they can't stand up to them and they turn into the liberals that they make fun of in their videos. It was embarrassing to watch them being dismantle by Vegan Gains.

It's alright, kiddo. Anyone with a knowledge of the Crusades knows the situation of hired swords in the late Crusades.

Be thankful your criminal ancestors were allowed to live and the Church stomped out the Mahometan invasions before they were forced to worship a demon.

Still didn't prevent the kebabization of the Slavic nations though

I love how Richard (Vegan Gains) point out Bearing bias for dogs not being kill because they are intelligent but it's okay killings pigs even though there are more intelligent than dogs. Overall Richard won the debate

btw which church; oh you mean the one that backstabbed the greeks and helped to create the holy roman empire (which was very ineffective). Btw catholics caused the protestant uprisings

Nope. That situation is out of my field of interest.

because I haven't saved enough interracial gay porn

Well that's great that it's normals distribution, but we see that rationality alone, even in an ideal world without bias, cannot account for all things in this universe, honing in on one objective Truth. Thus on a universal scale, it fails to uncover pure Truth, and on mundane scale it is defeated by bias in a practical sense.

That said, do we have a better system?

thats not the reason dogs should be kill though
and its because pigs were domesticated to be eaten, dogs are domesticated to be our companion. we may have evolved behaviour bonds, there have been muh studies on this

now, if you think that doesnt matter, then you probably either thikn no animal should be kill, or any animal should be kill, either an extremist pov, undefendable. there are grey areas, humans evolved to eat animals

>dogs should be kill though
shouldnt

Personally I don't think you can win or lose a debate, but what this debate proved to many people who watch YouTubes that are similar to bearing and Kraut. Are that they are people who never to open a book or even bothered furthering their education in anyway. Their arguments were that of a high schooler. One part that made Kraut look like a doofus was when Richard brought up the fact that moral humans should have and Kraut's social contract were complete different in certain cultures around the world. Kraut's response, " I don't care but I chose to give a fuck about it." Honestly what the fuck is the difference between this statement and the statement's made by SJWs? Like why would an individual even get into a debate if they didn't know the subject matter?

Simply put, classical liberalism is dead and has been for a while. We were forced to move right because the left has gone mad, complete authoritarian, militant mad. It was necessary that politics moves into a different direction because extremism has no place in America, or any country for that matter. Let me direct you to the one of my earliest red pills... "How to Destroy America" by Liberal Democrat, former governor Dick Lamm, from 2003:

youtu.be/nFAQNjqH1zA

I was a recent high school grad when that came out and noticed that things were changing. Through the Obama years, it just kept getting worse. There is no denying it anymore. Liberalism is a means for globalism. And globalism is not classic liberalism, no matter how good your intentions may be. It's a bastardized version that takes advantage of your kindness. I will never, ever look in that direction again for the rest of my life.

So there's your data SharedBlue. You would have been better off talking that 40 million and tossing it down the toilet. Your cause only perpetuates my realizations and makes it known to the masses. Keep it up! SAGED.

youtube.com/watch?v=GV1aDkrNlCw

Pigs can be domesticated to be our companions as well. They talk briefly that domesticated animals in factory farms can be release into wild because they lack survival instincts.

can't*