>Shakespeare didn't write any of this plays
>it was the Earl of Oxford Edward de Vere
>even esoteric geniuses like Mencius Moldbug acknowledge this fact
>the image of the bard as a genius from humble origins is forever shattered
Please tell me this is bullshit IQfy
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Doubting Shakespeare's authorship is a very cheap way to (I guess) look intelligent.
Anti-Stratfordians have been demolished many times before.
Is your webm meant to be ironic? Because it comes off that way. You can just look at Shakespeare's signature as is preserved from several legal wills and documents, the man was barely literate let alone the greatest author of the English language.
>b-but he wasn't educated!
he had SOVL.
i am anti stratfording but you are right, apparent level of education and everyday culturedness is hardly a strong proof for either case
There's no way anyone can buy that lie without first being brainwashed by egalitarianism.
The Oxford theory is comprehensive and accounts for every minor detail. No alternatives presented make sense. Sometimes these things are so obvious that they reveal anyone running on inertia from outdated academic work as mindless morons.
>noooo you don't understand you HAVE to be university educated to write
it's for slow brains frankly
University makes people dumber that doesn't change the objective and verifiable fact that Hamlet was written by the lord of Oxford who happened to have access to the only known copy of Beowulf at the time.
wait how does beowulf play into the authorship of hamlet
what stops the proposal that oxford filtered some ideas to shakespeare who then relied on his own creativity
Nothing "stops" any moronic shit you can come up with. The totality of the data points to one conclusions and that conclusion is not the subversive egalitarian propaganda you're so desperate to spread.
Also, considering he famously used sources like the Danish historian Saxo Grammaticus’s Gesta Danorum as a sourcebook for plays like Hamlet, it is entirely possible he could’ve gotten the gist of Beowulf in an indirect manner in such a way
that seems a fairly available document of the time
wtf did beowulf have to do with it? i couldnt find any allusions to beowulf in hamlet. is that anon legit a schizo?
they both tell the story of a young man in Denmark fighting. that's literally it. the stories are completely different in tone
i think theyre a bot gone haywire. next theyll be saying hamnet was named in honor of the play
What's wrong with you? What kind of person acts like this? Why do you think it's ok?
>it is entirely possible
Everything you say relies on a chain of "it's entirely possible". This reflect the fact that you're an idiot unable to think about any subject.
You're not disagreeing. You're accusing people that say things you dislike of mental illness. You don't want to find anything out so stop pretending you do. Anyone with any hint of curiosity would not make the posts you do.
>AH BLOO BLOO WAH WAH STOP DISAGREEING WITH ME
>wait how does beowulf play into the authorship of hamlet
I am 100% Oxfordian and I too have this quesion.
Hamlet and Beowulf both have the same request as their dying wish.
Have you even read Beowulf or Hamlet? Beowulf asks to for his ashes buried on the side of the cliff and for his nation to be strong
Hamlet asks for his story to be told
this thread fricking sucks
You don't have to be university educated to write, by you do have to know how to write to write.
mental illness
When you promote incoherent nonsense because the people before you happened to believe that incoherent nonsense you're a mindless moron that doesn't understand the basics of thinking.
You're an example of an even dumber mindless moron. You don't even pretend to try to think.
all i said was
>mental illness
you typed up a wall of text thus confirming the
>mental illness
hypothesis of anon authorship
tough but fair.
You have never put together a thought in your life and you'll work hard to undermine any hint of thinking on any subject. That's all you did here.
I presented thoughts. You tried to undermine the process of thinking. You are by definition a mindless idiot since you behave like a mindless idiot.
>AH BLOO BLOO WAH WAH STOP DISAGREEING WITH ME
epic friend, simply epic
>Anti-Stratfordians have been demolished many times before.
so you pseuds keep b***hin but i never see you put the so called proofs on the table
Anti-Stratfordians and historical proof have never been in the same conversation
Joe Rogan tier 'intellectual thought'
so post unmistakable proof of pro stratfordianism so you can at least keep lurkers from falling for antistratfordianism you cuck
>cuck
frick off homosexual, no one tells me what to do homosexual. how you like that b***h?
stratfordians have nothing. sasuga anti skeptic pseuds
>Anti-Stratfordians have been demolished many times before
...and the holocaust is the most well docuented genocide in history, eh, moishe?
Illiterate evil moron, stop being dishonest
Name one time Anti-Stratfordians were demolished?
Lol some brilliant people, who unlike yourself have made a great impression on the world, had doubts about an illiterate, uneducated usurer and theater manager/actor could have created the Works. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyVjR9FNo9w
how could he have been some incompetent, uneducated theatre manager, but at the same time he had the power to plagiarize and steal from educated nobility with impunity and without any reprecussions? Something doesn't quite add up. On one hand, you claim he was a lowly peasant, on the other hand, he was somehow powerful, smart and capable enough to keep up the biggest ruse in literary history not only through his lifetime, but for centuries afterwards.
>geniuses like Mencius Moldbug
Why would anyone want to demolish a beloved literary figure and one of the greatest Englishmen of all time? Is it jealousy?
Classist envy
mere truth seeking.
Clearly you don't understand.
Look, goy, the big game is on, better go watch it or you won't have anything to talk about tomorrow..
ok im muting this freak they might as well be a bot
bye schizo
Look at this braindead creature and try to pretend I'm not absolutely right. Just fricking think morons.
You haven't even glanced at the case for the idea you're pretending to disagree with.
You already got demolished ITT bro. gg
I understand you think this is hilarious but you're just an actual tate tier moron. You have no clue how to begin to say anything slightly interesting.
TL;DR: Shakespeare's a naturalist hack, regardless of who wrote him.
morons on here seethe unbelievably hard at the idea that an illiterate bumpkin *didn't* write the greatest plays of our language. Boggles the mind. Show me one piece of proof that Stratford bozo even got near Italy in his lifetime (how else would he have known the exact geographical layout of its cities well enough to write plays there?) and I'll give up on the de Vere theory. I'll wait.
>i write a play that mentions venice has canals
>moron on a chinese cartoon board 400 years later thinks that means I had to go to Italy to write that
You don't even try to pretend to be honest so what's the point of posting at all?
You don't even pretend to be intelligent so frick off and die, homosexual. Hope this helps
We don't need to be intelligent to understand basic logic and that every post you make undermines the process of finding things out.
nooooo
>WAH WAH BLOO BLOO IT'S NOT FAIR THAT YOU DISMANTLE MY ARGUMENTS WITH FACTS
frick off ESL moron
This is not how arguments are dismantled. You seem confused about basic logic. Why not just stop being a fricking moron and start acting like a productive, reasonable fricking person?
Keep complaining about getting dismantled, ESL. I won. Sorry.
>I won.
Jesus Christ, man! How much do you weigh and when was the last time you showered?
There's no hope for him, anon. Just let him be.
Any good well made yootoobe video explaining these theories?
t. curious lazy person
Why are all the consensus morons dishonest?
They statistically compared the body of work to itself and concluded it's therefore written by its author.
You really can't think at all. There's no mind there.
https://shakespeareoxfordfellowship.org/discover-shakespeare/
All I'm asking is that you say something moron. I'm not asking for any kind of revolutionary insight, just the bare minimum which would be actually fricking saying something. You never do. You're too braindead.
Already dismantled your moronic merchant in venice argument
GG EZ NO RE
>alternatives are possible
Can always be used no matter what the subject matter is. It tells us nothing. It just reveals that you're an idiot incapable of saying anything about any subject.
Yes, moron, unless someone got a camera and filmed shakespeare writing the actual plays there will always be alternatives. by your moronic logic, there are alternatives to de vere which makes that also invalid.
Try writing in proper English next time. Are you Slavic?
We're getting to the root of the issue which is your absolute and verifiable inability to think about any subject.
>there are alternatives to de vere
Is what I fricking said in the post you're replying to you illiterate cancer on humanity.
The Oxford model accounts for every detail without needing special pleading. For every detail mentioned you have to say "there could be an alternative explanation".
I direct you to a gas station down the street, you walk down the street and find a gas station there. It could be a different gas stations but only an absolute moron would try to argue that based on the given information.
>The Oxford model accounts for every detail without needing special pleading
Except that De Vere was kill in 1064, years before The Tempest was released, fricking moron. Have you even read shakespeare? Aren't you slavic?
An actual inconsistency would be more relevant than anything you said so far if it was accurate which it isn't.
>desperately trying to fish for irrelevant personal information
What is wrong with you? I'm very serious, you have deep issues and they infect everything you touch including this board.
Oh, I guess De Vere didn't die in 1604 and the Tempest was written almost a decade after now
We don't know when it was written. At least read the points the Oxfordians make if you want to pretend to have an opinion.
>Dozens of writings raising questions about the author’s identity were published for decades before Shakespere’s death in 1616.
>The title of a 1611 epigram did so openly and with startling bluntness: addressing “Shake-speare” as “our English Terence.” Terence was an ancient Roman playwright notorious as a suspected frontman for two hidden, aristocratic writers.
De Vere was praised by more than one who read him as a great playwright but nobody today has seen any of those plays. They were valued, plays like that don't just vanish. After he died the plays we attribute to Shakespeare got released over a few years with introductions that imply the author is already dead.
And De Vere's remaining poetry today sucks ass. Not even close to Shakespearean sonnets.
Macbeth was written after De Vere's death and contains references to the Guy Fawkes plot, which literally happened after De Vere died in 1604.
I'm sorry to have an important belief of yours torn apart limb from limb on IQfy, but really, you should do more research about these things.
hope this helps
Is this really the best you have? I should ignore the debate about the authorship that was going on during the years the play was being released because you interpret one very abstract part of one play in a very specific way. But alternatives are possible, there's nothing even slightly approaching definitive here. The fact that people at the time were arguing is much more definitive.
My point is don't accept established consensus just because it's the consensus. Your model is not better than the Oxfordian one and both could be wrong. You don't act like you grasp these basics of thinking.
>no, the British Museum is wrong, not me
I'm diagnosing schizophrenia. Sorry bro.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHN7SCKlsa9lPYJmqqQ2uIg
btw-- when you're done with Shakespeare/Oxford, you should really look into that whole holocaust thing.
Why does it matter? They're just names from people who lived hundreds of years ago, just meaningless words.
Pretend we find something that proves beyond any doubt that instead of "Shakespeare", the actual author was "Edward de Vere". What changes? Absolutely nothing. The works themselves exist independent of their creator and the exact identity of that creator is completely irrelevant.
If you think an illiterate, uneducated, failed actor wrote the works of Shakespeare, you have brain damage.
That is all.
This is a point in favor of Oxford.
This is deranged noise from a mindless moron.
If you think a financially bankrupt and failed aristocrat wrote the works of Shakespeare, you have brain damage.
That is all.
Illiteracy and lack of education are relevant factors that can negatively influence the quality of a work of literature. Financial bankruptcy and failed aristocracy are not; one may even argue that it can positively influence the quality, kek.
Shakespeare wasn't illiterate, idiot. His education would be the equivalent of a classics degree from a state school today
How? That's not normal. Who taught him classics? Was he a priest? You have make special exceptions again to make your fantasy fit.
Again the structure of your argument is pure appeal to authority. You're telling me over and over that you don't understand the basics needed to think about any subject. You just automatically appeal to whatever is the consensus.
You literally, demonstrably don't think and don't appear to know how to begin.
reading books is appeal to authority bro
logical facts is appeal to authority bro
People dying and then making references to events after their deaths is appeal to authority bro
So you really don't understand the difference? This is exactly what I've been trying to tell you.
Look up examples, try to grasp the difference.
>schizo
Is the same structure, instead of engaging with what's presented you find ways to dismiss the person saying it. You find ways to avoid thinking, like by having the British Museum think for you. When I suggest that you might want to explore the idea for yourself instead of deferring to others your reaction is to dismiss me, the person before even considering the idea.
I did consider the De Vere hypothesis, but considering De Vere was kill before Macbeth (which contains events after his death) and The Tempest, it isn't possible. It's fun to think about though, don't you think? 🙂
>it isn't possible
It is. You have nothing definitive. Just wishful thinking that supports your favorite propaganda narratives.
Think whatever you want to think, friend. You find ways to avoid the Stratfordian thought. It's okay. Don't worry, we are all friends here 🙂
I want good things for you but you're not my friend in any sense. You're Gmork from Neverending Story. The embodiment of the Nothing and my eternal nemesis.
>getting this mad over getting called friend
sorry friend 🙁
More dishonesty as expected by an evil moron that's most definitely not my friend in any sense.
Again an appeal to some external thought you don't understand the point of. Just mindless noise using words you don't understand.
I want the best for you, everything I've said has ways to be productive. I didn't try to to shut anything down, unlike you and as a result we even found out together what you need to do to not be a moron all the time.
Your posts are all about projecting evil onto the world and trying to oppose it but all you accomplish is acting evil yourself.
He couldn't even sign his own name and there's no evidence of him having received a formal (or informal) education. Next.
?
What? You're reading what he may have studied if he'd gone to school.
But there's no evidence that he receiving any schooling.
>verification not required.
This is so insanely stupid and dishonest I don't know where to begin.
Shakespeare's father was a wealthy businessman who was an alderman and even eventually the Bailiff of their town. He married into some of the oldest landed nobility in England. There's a 100% chance he went to school.
don't care about shakespeare, never did. unrelated tho i 'ate gays.
Sorry, you've deflected every piece of evidence for the Stratfordian side just as I have dismantled the De Vere side. Don't play games with me bud. You're the one calling me an evil moron, acting like a bully on the internet kek. I GUARANTEE you would never say that in real life. 100%.
We went over this. They're just models. One model has far more data supporting it than the other. Declaring you have some irrefutable interpretation like you did when you appealed to the British Museum can not possibly serve the process of finding things out, no matter what the truth is. Even if Stratfordians are right you do the process of inquiry a disservice with every word you post. The issue is not your position on this subject but your apparent inability to sincerely explore any subject. You can never resist deferring the thinking to someone else. If the British Museum says something, that's the end of it. This is evil.
I accept your concession
If you value inquiry dishonesty is counterproductive. It's evil.
You're the internet keyboard warrior trying to bully people by calling them evil morons kek
what would your mother think
You're doing it again moron. Absolute refusal to engage with any kind of thought. Absolutely mindless cancer actively trying to destroy anything you touch.
>reading books is appeal to authority bro
>logical facts is appeal to authority bro
>People dying and then making references to events after their deaths is appeal to authority bro
You morons actually said this when I pointed out the evil shit you're doing. That you don't think can be objectively demonstrated to anyone capable of thought.
>cancer
>evil moron
>evil
>EVIL
wow, so convincing intellectual much impressed
I've made it very clear what that references but you don't care. On this subject like every other you'll work as hard as you possibly can to make sure no thinking actually happens. Even if simple word choices don't please you that's enough justification to stop thinking. To you everything is a justification to avoid thinking, it's all you do here. That's evil, counter productive to all states goals like the process of inquiry.
Why are you like this and why doesn't it ever occur to you to simply stop being an evil fricking moron?
hardest challenge for you: get through one post without saying evil or moron
Frick off evil moron. This is yet another excuse you've found to avoid thinking or engaging with anything said to you. Pure evil, absolutely dishonest and with no hope of ever having any kind of productive result.
Calling people evil isn’t an argument, this thread is near on 100 posts of you seething
You have no clue how to begin to think about any subject but think you can declare yourself an authority on what is an argument and what isn't.
Just frick off braindead morons. Stop pretending you're interested in thinking when all you do is undermine the process.
>reading books is appeal to authority bro
Deal with your moronic shit morons. Learn to fricking think before infecting others with your cancerous shit.
You don’t need to be upset, everyone loses arguments
Always the exact same pattern. Never even the slightest hint of deviation from the dishonest horseshit.
It references clarifications made earlier. You pretend it doesn't so you can avoid thinking. Illiteracy or dishonesty are the only explanations.
>if i call them dishonest and evil, that means I win!
no, it just means your argument sucked bro but please, if you have any more evidence to throw at us have at it
>I win!
You keep signalling that you don't understand the point I'm making on any level. That means I'm not "winning" since the fricking point is getting you to stop acting like a cancerous moron that undermines all thought.
Why do you still apparently not have any clue what point after all this? After I spoonfed it to you many times you now act as if you don't understand any of it. You're either pretending or something is seriously wrong with your brain.
Are you completely incapable of structured thinking? You can't even imagine thinking without these sorts of heuristics for braindead morons?
>tl;dr ad hominem from a mentally ill person
Pointing out demonstrable examples of your inability to think is not an ad hominem.
Pointing out that you're misusing the term here is not an ad hominem either. The structure is the same, I'm pointing out reproducible and obvious breakdowns in thinking. Usually you do them on purpose, to avoid work.
Accusing people that disagree with your argument of being illiterate, moronic or evil is by definition, ad hominem. You’ve made bad faith arguments all thread and then cry out in pain when you perceive that someone is doing the same to you.
>no you're stupid... because you're stupid
>noooooo don't use the term correctly against me, that's stupid
kek you're a lolcow
Read about the subject of basic logic and ad hominems (appeals to the man). Then reexamine your posts here. The Oxfordian shit is not definitive but the objective fact that you consistently behave like morons is demonstrable. No appeals to subjective opinions are needed.
How can you pretend you're able to discuss any subject while misrepresenting the absolute basics of thought so blatantly?
>How can you pretend you're able to discuss any subject while misrepresenting the absolute basics of thought so blatantly?
translated from overcompensating ESL:
>Why are you such a mean liar by calling me a stupid b***h who keeps complaining that he got BTFO?
This is an example of blatant dishonesty to avoid engaging with anything said. Subversion of the process of inquiry, the only thing this forum and thread could possibly be useful for.
You know you're being dishonest but still do it. It's still easier than thinking I suppose.
>I thought this was a thread about Shakespeare, c**t. Are you going to talk about him now and give more evidence on De Vere or are you going to keep b***hing and complaining that your evidence should have been good enough?
>No. I'm going to continue b***hing
MAMA MIA NOW THIS IS A LOLCOW
Remember when you decided to make it public that you don't understand what an ad hominem is? Remember a few minutes before that when you admitted you don't understand the problem with an appeal to authority?
Just think about these two points a little and you'll be a better person for it. Why wouldn't you? Everyone including you would benefit from you not being a dishonest moron anymore.
>I thought this was a thread about Shakespeare, c**t. Are you going to talk about him now and give more evidence on De Vere or are you going to keep b***hing and complaining that your evidence should have been good enough?
>KEEPS COMPLAINING AND SEETHING FOR THE ENTIRE THREAD
AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA
>Verification not required.
>nooooo stop acting in a way I don't like!
I thought this was a thread about Shakespeare, c**t. Are you going to talk about him now and give more evidence on De Vere or are you going to keep b***hing and complaining that your evidence should have been good enough?
No. I'm going to continue pointing out morons that undermine all thought on all subjects. I explained to you in detail how you're being a moron and you simply don't care. As long as you don't correct yourself I'll keep noticing when you're being a moron and I'll keep calling you a moron for it.
>is by definition, ad hominem
No moron. A moron can put forward correct structured logic like anyone else. Who it comes from is not relevant, only the actual structure is. If I appeal to the fact that you're a moron to dismiss your idea that's the ad hominem logical fallacy.
>I thought this was a thread about Shakespeare, c**t. Are you going to talk about him now and give more evidence on De Vere or are you going to keep b***hing and complaining that your evidence should have been good enough?
>No. I'm going to continue b***hing
MAMA MIA NOW THIS IS A LOLCOW
You’ve lost the argument so your seething and name calling is just entertaining at this point, tell me more about how I’m illiterate, evil, and moronic
Is English your second language or something?
>your STOOPID
>FRICK OFF STOOPID
>STOP PRETENDING YOUR not STOOPID
>YOUR STUPID
>LEARN TO NOT BE STOOPID
here's a sentence by sentence recap of your post, fren. I really liked it 🙂
Meds
Periodic reminder that a 17 year old British kid educated in classical grammar school in the 17th century was smarter, better read, and had way more sex than anyone on IQfy and 99% of Shakespeare hate is cope
True, but also I went to a grammar school and they’re just a place to turn sexually frustrated teens into homosexuals
Another example of a moron that doesn't grasp logical structure on any level.
Another example of an autistic moron that doesn't grasp a joke on any level.
>wake up after sunrise and greet the day
>no tinnitus so I can hear every bird and insect
>chomp on some fresh baked bread and new cottage cheese mum just made yesterday
>meet the lads for grammar school
>breeze through Greek and Latin
>write a play for funsies in the afternoon
>frick the chambermaid
>wonder what dad will bring back from his trip to London for my 15th birthday
NEW DRINKING GAME: EVERY TIME THE LOLCOW SAYS
>evil
>moron
>illiterate
>dishonest
DRINK A FINGER
What does it matter? The plays exist regardless of who wrote them. It changes literally nothing.
The yarvin/moldbug oxfordianism comes from a place of pure racial envy and deep mischlinge self-hatred
You don't understand goy. you have to be ~~*wealthy*~~ and go to ~~*university*~~ as a ~~*background patron*~~ to make good art
Moldbug isn't a practicing israelite, there's nothing israeli about him in his beliefs or practices, take your meds anon. He rejects Shakespeare for the same reason he rejects lots of commonly established ideas, because he makes his money by grifting morons online pretending to be some contrarian guru.
>this untalented hackish dysgenic half-israelite can't grasp the concept of the commoner's SOVL
Forgot picture of this disgusting creature.
no goy. great things come from the ~~*synagogue*~~, not ordinary people... now get in line
Moldbug is smarter than you, frick off with your pol israelite seething.
Reckon Bill done it coz I just do
Simple as