The "alt right destroyer" Destiny is currently getting destroyed in a debate vs a Philosopher...

The "alt right destroyer" Destiny is currently getting destroyed in a debate vs a Philosopher. How will our guy ever recover?

destiny.gg/bigscreen

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=lt_JMlGVUcU
youtube.com/watch?v=BAXwt9vUny4
twitter.com/AnonBabble

youtube.com/watch?v=lt_JMlGVUcU

>can't beat him in a factual debate
>has to use short jokes

isn't that the guy that wanted to fuck his own child and convinced his friend to commit suicide?

That's the one

>get BTFO
>act smug and say you won
Sorry, that doesn’t work anymore.

I quite like Destiny, despite disagreeing with him on nearly everything. He's the only lefty who can bant

Kek i thought he was standing up

Reminds me of this

youtube.com/watch?v=BAXwt9vUny4

What did he mean by this?

kek

favorite part of the video is Joseph Bernstein's icon being Viewtiful Joe

That gut.. absolutely disgusting he need to rethink his diet with less sugars and soy

He is against pedophilia and incest he just poses hypothetical scenarios to test if people actually know the practical reasons why they are bad. He did not convince his friend to commit suicide he just didn't do enough to prevent it in his opinion. I don;t like him but Sup Forums is not a board of fake news.

if I recall he basically told his friend "well, just do what you gotta do i guess"
he's a piece of shit either way you look at it, what kind of person wouldn't put in the minimum effort to at least tell their friend not to kill their self?

Someone who's a kid and just bought into atheism? Just so you know, he really regrets it today.

Oh no, he really regrets it, a-ok in that case!

judging from his amos yee debate he is for pedophilia as long as kids arent "harmed"

Yeah and a person totally remains the same his entire life and never changes so you can totally call todays destiny a piece of shit too.

Not exactly, he was attempting to examine the moral system Amos subscribes to to justify child-adult relationships, landing on Utilitarianism. His personal main objection is the lack of informed consent, but since Amos does not believe consent matter and only the outcome (harm or no harm) is relevant, Destiny can not use the consent argument to defeat Amos' statements.

I don't know the exact circumstances, I just know that the only reason it was brought up in the first place was that he stated this thing he did when he was 19 is the one thing he regrets in his life.

I thought it was hilarious that Yee used Destiny's typical tactic of water muddying with consent and he failed to realize it.

>open stream
>moral system someone coded somewhere in the universe
>close stream
you astoundingly retarded youtuber fanboy faggots belong at reddit

I think overall he is a relatively honest debater. The only cases I have seen him sperg out were versus Metokur when they started talking about affirmative action and versus Sargon when he got a seizure on his chair. Otherwise he tries to get to the core of people's belief systems to see if they are consistent and coherent, which is not in itself a problem.

My main issue with Destiny is that he is too generous when it comes to aiding women and minorities without recognizing the failure of our systems so far that have burned through a ton of money while not giving the expected results. When someone who opposes him on that point shows up, he instantly turns to "muh slavery" and "muh computers", justifying the reasons why he would want to have such social systems without admitting they have failed. He is a capitalist and a gunfag so I don't have much issues with him on that front.

>Its the Sup Forums pretends to be a moral board episode

He's honest but he never fucking improves beyond his level and just sticks to debating entry-level fags on twitch, save for people who would like to take a piss on him sometimes like Jim

The only genuine debate that could elevate him was him vs Ryan Dawson, and he was pretty clueless in that one. I would actually have more respect if he tries and actually go beyond the call

If he's honest then he's an idiot

>"I recall"

Dont lie, you shilling cuck. You saw the false claim in one of the jewtubers videos, which were crying about losing to based Destidwarf.

H-how tall is he?

6ft 1

I listened to this for like 2 minutes and left. He rambled a bunch of incoherent nonsense about agency and free will. "I have not read enough literature to make a definitive statement... b-but I've read a lot of literature"
*close tab*

3'11" but on a full moon he can eek out 4' even

Why is he jamming his fingers into the dude's liver?

The thing that disgusts me most about him is that when he was planning to murder a kid and his father he said he was going to get a group of people and a handgun. Like what kind of a cowardly little shit needs a gang on top of that?

He is a a layman with no academic background, he had the geneticist french guy (Jean-something) who believes races are genetically different and intelligence levels are due to genetic realities, but Destiny would not disagree with him simply because he knew he can't punch above his weight as he is not a geneticist. He debates people on his level - shitposters with no academic background in the subject they are discussing.

Probably by banning his opponent and then ranting for an hour about how he is correct and doesn't need to be challenged on why

>get beat at debates
>keep pretending otherwise and spamming Sup Forums with your midget

Do you have any idea how incredibly dumb what you just said was? Besides the fact that it's just one giant appeal to authority if he can't debate someone who knows the facts then he can't debate anyone because obviously he doesn't know anything.

It's like watching an idiot's first philosophy lesson with a patient tutor

>dubs
>shooting stars starts playing

There is a huge difference between debating a specialist in a field who spent years studying it as a layman and debating someone on an issue that has a more easily graspable set of facts, a least in comparison to the former case.

You will never beat someone with a PhD in genetics in a debate on genetics, even if your position is the correct one by some chance, you will still be incapable of properly interpreting and defeating the arguments posed to you since you do not have enough knowledge on the subject matter. The argument is not "the person with authority is always correct". Whatever literature you will attempt to use to debunk them that you found within the last week is something they have read a thousand times over and can give refutations to. Whether those refutations are valid or invalid is very difficult for someone without the necessary background to assess.

You can make the claim that you are some sort of super-human who can in two weeks or a month (however long it takes for a debate to be scheduled) learn enough information to provide rigorous counter-arguments to a specialist in the field, but unless you are that type of person debating highly specialized people as a layman is just a recipe to make yourself look retarded even if your stance of the subject was the correct one.

>destiny is advocating for the removal of age of consent laws again

Such retardation, obviously you can debate someone making a wrong claim with an inferior amount of knowledge. All studies provide is at best correlative evidence, all you need to debate is knowledge of the scientific laws and logic. Reading the latest in mathematics for example doesn't make 2+2 =5 any less wrong you are just completely reliant on appeals to authority because you genuinely unintelligent. I mean that in the literal original sense you can't perform logical analyses effectively enough to discern truth and you project that on everyone else. Lastly your claim is wrong about how much people are able to learn go look up what a polymath is.

I think if he started sitting on a couple dwarves shoulders and wearing a trench coat with a fedora will hide it well.

Destiny BTFO again just like when he went toe to toe with Nick Fuentes.