Is Destiny the closest person to modern day Rousseau?

kek

me on the left~

Attached: b5252e4c599bd602d9fbb4c6ee0a1a48.png (441x585, 579K)

sooo... why should I care about some dead white guy?

>physiognomy isn't rea....

He was swiss

he was FUCKING A WHITE MALE

A twitch streamer, music major, entertainer, admitted non-reader, with a cursory understanding of philosophy and debate... yeah, he's like one of the greatest philosophers of all time. Saged and reported.

I suppose it's a testament to the level of intellect with the retards he debates that he comes off looking smart. I just watched his debate with some gun guy and it was cancerous

> Gun guy: Look at all these states with concealed carry and lower crime and all these states without concealed carry and higher crime! Therefore concealed carry = lower crime.
> Destiny: You can't compare states like that. What if they have different propensities to crime (inb4 hurr niggers) and the states with concealed carry would have even lower crime if they got rid of concealed carry
> Gun guy: But the states with concealed carry have lower crime, how is it not obvious

And so it went for like an hour of Destiny explaining the difference between correlation and causation

He was having a debate with some philosophy pleb recently and he was having to explain how logical validity doesn't mean an argument is sound. This level of debate wouldn't even make for a footnote in a philosophy book beyond entry-tier.

i remember him discussing music with some guy on stream and couldn't comprehend that "music" is just a term that has no intrinsic value.
then he called him a retard and hung up

I thought it was the other way around, the guy was unironically arguing that "2+2=4 therefore the Earth rotates around the sun" was a good argument because the conclusion was correct.
He can be a condescending fag but it's fun to see him dab on retards

>talks fast
>No formal education
>Uses weak arguments and fallacies but no one he debates is trained either

Precisely

His arguments are usually logically sound and follow from the premises. Can you give an example of a fallacious argument he's used?

Nah it was another debate

>I wouldn't want to be killed as a baby
>Therefore abortion is wrong

> application of the golden rule is a fallacy

Has destiny debated anyone who finished highschool?

Why would anyone watch 2 fools debate.

He got destroyed by MisterMetokur when he debated him. Destiny got angry and gave up.

He's an egoist so that line of reasoning makes absolutely no sense. If you were only concerned about yourself you would only support policies which outlaw killing adults.
I'm aware that egoists can have empathy and decry killing if it hurts their feelings but Destiny presents himself as a cold person who only cares about himself.

This guy loves to talk about logical fallacies but 90% of his arguments are just appeals to authority.

I watched a few of his debates and was disgusted by the whole thing. It was all about blame point-scoring and spectacle. I don’t even think anyone watching nor the participants grew or developed their positions in anyway.

Was Rousseau also famous for dunking on low IQ reactionaries and e-celebs?

He's pro child pornography (if it's ethical). Yet the idea of racial preservation disgusts him (blanda up).And all the ills and crimes black people commit are the result of systematic racism and whitepipo being bad 300 years ago.
Trannies are legit and should be in the army (respect the pronouns). Also guns are bad, give them to the government asap, aka give them to Trump (who is literally Hitler)

Appeals to authority is valid. This shows you don't know much either

He is physically repulsive.
I would enjoy pummeling him

same

Shut the fuck up you fucking niglet. Appeals to authority are valid if you're 7 years old and saying "MY DAD CUD BEAT UR DAD" Otherwise, it's the most piece of shit revolting fallacy that only subhuman sheeple like you could possibly follow (ad-hominems are valid)

that's the debate as spectacle for you

No it's not. If you make an appeal to authority you have shifted the subject of the debate to whether or not that authority is trustworthy enough to offload a portion of your chain of reasoning onto.

There's no longer an unbroken connection of logic to any agreed upon premises. You are simply asserting that the other party MUST accept the statement of that authority as a new premise.

What logoi would be reached in a dialectic between these two?

Attached: 92818905.jpg (1383x2528, 770K)

Destiny needs a call from the homosexual police.
youtube.com/watch?v=0WKV1Snu55o

Using accurate statistics and quotes from experts in a related field is not an appeal to authority fallacy, ironically you trying to conflate that with an actual appeal to authority fallacy (quoting a respected figure on something they're not educated on or whose opinion is no more valid than a layman) is fallacious

stemtard bugman, go eat onions faggot

Have you never studied formal logic? Appeals to authority is valid.

Don't even bother with these literal smoothbrains man

>formal logic
>appeal to authority

Attached: 1487288285568.jpg (2544x4000, 865K)

>gets called out
>g-go eat o-onions!
like clockwork lmao

>quoting a world-class geneticist about genetic link of IQ is a logical fallacy, cause he's outside his area of expertise
>a professional Starcraft player arguing politics, anthropology and ethics is totally legit and trustworthy though, all part of his skill set
I get it.

No i've never studied formal logic because i'm not a fat fucking retard like you. Fuck you and fuck your "VALID appeals" you fucking piece of shit. Stick your fucking "DADDY TOLD ME SO IT MUST BE SO" fallacies right up your loose prolapsing ass you fucking flaming homosexual. I've seen some retarded fucking people, but you...Dear GOD. Hey, it's ok guys he studied formal logic so he's right. Fuck that. And fuck you, you stupid little faggot.

>This thread was on the way to dying than some autistic moron decided to bump it and keep it alive

Fuck Yea Forums is dumb.

>from experts in a related field
Like I said: by making an appeal to authority you shift the topic of the debate to be about the validity of the expert.

absolutely based

If you deny that IQ is influenced by genetics then of course a geneticist talking about IQ is stepping outside his bounds.

I can't believe you hold this guy of all people on the same level as a philosopher. What the fuck.

Genuinely starting to think you're a butthurt discord tranny pretending to be a right winger to make them look dumb at htis point

>make a mindless, off the cuff shitpost
>come back an hour later and see literati actually discussing it as if it was a serious post
That's gonna be a yikes from me, dawgs.

how can you appeal to authority with math?

I wish I was still naïve enough that I took obvious ironic shitposts at face value

>Gets to GM by abusing infestor-broodlord tactics
>Gets to diamond by abusing Draven back when he was hidden-OP
What gimmicky game mechanics did Rousseau abuse to get famous?

Attached: 121862880db1ec2337c294804a6a0e5c77756462a09b6759d1735059a884b393.png (399x391, 7K)

This isn't about maths, can't believe you think logic only applies to maths.

Here's a syllogism
1. Doctor is usually right
2. Doctors have a consensus that X is correct
3. X is probably correct

>make a shitpost
>get butthurt when it spawns a genuine discussion

you played yourself

The funny thing is that it indeed is probably niggers.

why the fuck is Yea Forums arguing unironically about some twitch streamer

He really gives off that "leftist creeper" vibe. Like, I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if it came out that he groomed little girls online, had a child porn collection, abused his girlfriend or something like that.

Same with HBomberGuy (pictured).

Attached: hb.jpg (1140x700, 332K)

I would destroy destiny in a violent physical debate

People actually watch and pay this twerp money to play videogames. Wew lad

Debates are terrible because someone can be basically right but lose the arguement because they don't have facts on hand, come across poorly, allow their words to be twisted etc. Destiny absolutely excels in debates which is one of the worst things I could think to say about another human being

Oxford style is better First agree the terms and motion. Each person makes a 10 min statement. Then people vote.

Back and forth debates are for brainlets

Why are most left leaning internet celebrities goons?

we are reddit and we are going to destroy your website. deal with it.

>1. Doctor is usually right
That's an assertion you have to justify.
Using doctors as an example it looks simple, because basically everyone trusts doctors when it comes to offloading their medical decisionmaking.
The problem is when you use authorities that not everyone does agree about, and when you don't clearly delimit (and respect the limits) of what they are "usually right about".

Climate science is not the only factor in climate policy, there are other considerations such as economics and geopolitics. So if you make the argument "Climate scientists are experts on the impact of greenhouse gas emissions, therefore we should write into to law whatever climate policy they recommend" you are overstepping bounds and committing a fallacy.

That's why I didn't use spooks like climate science.

Authority works but it's limited

Appeal to authority is a fallacy in the realm of informal logic. Formal logic fallacies are things like getting syllogisms backwards, affirming the consequent and so on. Thanks for outing yourself as a brainlet

Everything about authority is bad for logical debate.
Even if you 100% trust an authority, you still just have facts or data without contextualization. They can be interpreted in infinite different ways. If you are not an expert yourself, who are you to judge that your interpretation of the data is the correct one?

That's an issue of soundness not validity you unbelievable brainlet