“Universally Preferable Behaviour – Debunked (Stefan Molyneux Refuted)” – REBUTTED

“Over the last five years Stefan Molyneux has risen to fame, and while I personally enjoy a lot of his content, I maintain that a great many of his assertions are disastrously flawed… and his Universally Preferable Behaviour (otherwise known as UPB) is one of them. What follows is a refutation of the Five Proofs that Molyneux offers, and hence, this is Universally Preferable Behaviour Debunked!


As promised within the video, here’s a link to Common Sense Atheism’s review of UPB (of which I found very useful in my research, and I highly recommend). Give him/her some love! http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=75

For a detailed explanation of the flaws and fallacies within Molyneux’s Five Proofs, please watch the video, but if you just want a brief announcement of some of the flaws, they are as follows:

The First Proof is flawed because:

• Premise two is a False Premise.

The Second Proof is flawed because:

• Premise one is Begging the Question, and;
• Premise four unjustifiably smuggles in the word “acceptance”.

The Third Proof is flawed because:

• Premise two is Begging the Question;
• Premise three is a False Premise, and;
• Premise four is a False Premise.

The Fourth Proof is flawed because:

• Premise one is either pedantic or a False Premise;
• Premise three commits an Ambiguity Fallacy, and;
• Premise four is a Non Sequitur.

And finally (thanks for sticking around people!), the Fifth Proof is flawed because:

• Premise one is Begging the Question, and;
• Premise two is Arbitrarily Assigning Significance”