Total Pageviews

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Molynuex doesn't really understand Ayn Rand

I found an interesting video that makes a good point about Molyneux. I am posting it here. This site is about warning people about the true nature of FDR. Part of the warning is that Molyneux holds himself out as a thinker for the ages. This is his initial attraction to the young mind.

The founding philosophy of FDR is Objectivism. This is the philosophy of Ayn Rand. Moly used to be relatively loyal to Objectivism as the basis for his podcast musings. But I think he is so much of a narcissist that he believes he has to transcend Rand. At first Moly decided that he was bringing something new to Objectivism because he wanted to completely eliminate the state and Rand did not. This is kind of weak. Rand described the perfect stateless society in Atlas Shrugged. She was describing an unattainable Utopian world as a plot vehicle to help bring home the philosophy. Rand, Molyneux and anyone with a frontal lobe knows that anarchy has always and will always lead to a dictorial regime. But Moly needs to keep up the facade of a workable Anarcho-Capitalist society so he can keep the donators donating.

He seriously puts forth the idea that he has now moved all of Philosophy to its final state of being. He has come up with this simpleton idea called Universally Preferred Behaviors (UPB). Moly conveys to his members (and potential donators) that UPB solves all the problems of morality and ethics. UPB doesn't hold up to any thoughtful, much less scholarly, scrutiny. The proof of this is that when Moly is seriously questioned about the serious flaws in UPB, Moly bans the questioner from the FDR web site. Here is a small list of some who were banned from FDR,-79.453125&spn=131.156957,320.625&z=1

These days he goes to great lengths to try and find flaws in Rand’s writings or to put down Objectivism. He says things like “In this regard I am a slave to Rand, but as regards…. I do not agree.” The then goes on to make his point of disagreement. He is very sloppy with his logic. In the link below, you will see that it is as if he has not actually read Ayn Rand. If one wants to find flaws with Ayn Rand, you have to go to Nathaniel Brandon. Don’t bother with Moly. He doesn’t really understand Objectivism. Here is a YouTube video that will prove it conclusively.


  1. I'd pay good money to hear you debate him.

  2. That would be an entertaining encounter. Moly would likley not be interested. He is a quite cowardly when it comes to facing parents. I have seen Moly debate. He wanders all over the place and uses typical deflections, change of subject, and invention of new definitions of terms to wiggle out of having to 'debate' a point. I was on the debating team in high school and college. Not great at it, but I did learn a few things. I would insist on the specific topic and a definition of terms. for example: Resolved: the typical western culture, middle class family is inherently corrupt. He would take the affirmitive. I would have the negative. Terms like force, violence, discipline, etc. would be defined. If Moly debates me, he will have to either reconcile all his contradictions or quit in frustration. That would be fun.