- 2 months ago
Given that Plato's Allegory of the Cave seems to still apply to modern people, is there any hope of some day having a civilization rooted in reality?
If truly sentient and self-aware and self-motivated robots come to be, would you welcome them into the world as fellow beings worthy of respect?
Can an Atheist, like an Ex-muslim be a Christian at least culturally go to church and all, even if he can't find any rational way to believe that God exists. I know, I know it's a strange Question.
If the purpose of life is, as I think it is, to become a great mate, find a great mate, create a family, and raise kids who will be great mates themselves... what does the purpose of life become for people who can't, don't, or choose not to become parents?
Would moral standards exist, or need to exist, in a post-Singularity world where anyone can have anything they want, built by robotics, AI, and insanely advanced 3D printers?
My question is basically rooted in the notion that, once we have anything we want, what are moral standards worth?
Moral standards are worth something right now because we need each other in order to survive and thrive. Moral standards produce mutual respect between humans so we can trade with each other, either without conflict or with minimal conflict, maintaining social stability.
I apologize if I've completely misunderstood what "morality" as a concept is about. I kind of know what it is, but only from my simpleton perspective. I would love to get your perspective.
Thanks Stef.
Utilitarianism or Deontology - "greatest good" or "moral principle?" Old debate but I haven't heard your take.
what is truth?
Not a question but elaborate a bit on the left-right rabbit hole. I'm feeling used.
How do we keep ourselves from hating our enemy more than we love our people?
What does it mean to feel pain for the loss of someone you never met in person?
Why are we here?
Divorce and family dissolution is agony that endures until death.
Is it better to have loved and lost or to never have loved and thus be spared the loss?
Would you abort a pedophile baby?
How can we know that we ALL see the same color when we say "blue" or "Green"?
If space ends what is on the other side?
Why is there something, rather th...
FOLLOW ME ON X! https://x.com/StefanMolyneux
GET MY NEW BOOK 'PEACEFUL PARENTING', THE INTERACTIVE PEACEFUL PARENTING AI, AND THE FULL AUDIOBOOK!
https://peacefulparenting.com/
Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!
Subscribers get 12 HOURS on the "Truth About the French Revolution," multiple interactive multi-lingual philosophy AIs trained on thousands of hours of my material - as well as AIs for Real-Time Relationships, Bitcoin, Peaceful Parenting, and Call-In Shows!
You also receive private livestreams, HUNDREDS of exclusive premium shows, early release podcasts, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and much more!
See you soon!
https://freedomain.locals.com/support/promo/UPB202
If truly sentient and self-aware and self-motivated robots come to be, would you welcome them into the world as fellow beings worthy of respect?
Can an Atheist, like an Ex-muslim be a Christian at least culturally go to church and all, even if he can't find any rational way to believe that God exists. I know, I know it's a strange Question.
If the purpose of life is, as I think it is, to become a great mate, find a great mate, create a family, and raise kids who will be great mates themselves... what does the purpose of life become for people who can't, don't, or choose not to become parents?
Would moral standards exist, or need to exist, in a post-Singularity world where anyone can have anything they want, built by robotics, AI, and insanely advanced 3D printers?
My question is basically rooted in the notion that, once we have anything we want, what are moral standards worth?
Moral standards are worth something right now because we need each other in order to survive and thrive. Moral standards produce mutual respect between humans so we can trade with each other, either without conflict or with minimal conflict, maintaining social stability.
I apologize if I've completely misunderstood what "morality" as a concept is about. I kind of know what it is, but only from my simpleton perspective. I would love to get your perspective.
Thanks Stef.
Utilitarianism or Deontology - "greatest good" or "moral principle?" Old debate but I haven't heard your take.
what is truth?
Not a question but elaborate a bit on the left-right rabbit hole. I'm feeling used.
How do we keep ourselves from hating our enemy more than we love our people?
What does it mean to feel pain for the loss of someone you never met in person?
Why are we here?
Divorce and family dissolution is agony that endures until death.
Is it better to have loved and lost or to never have loved and thus be spared the loss?
Would you abort a pedophile baby?
How can we know that we ALL see the same color when we say "blue" or "Green"?
If space ends what is on the other side?
Why is there something, rather th...
FOLLOW ME ON X! https://x.com/StefanMolyneux
GET MY NEW BOOK 'PEACEFUL PARENTING', THE INTERACTIVE PEACEFUL PARENTING AI, AND THE FULL AUDIOBOOK!
https://peacefulparenting.com/
Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!
Subscribers get 12 HOURS on the "Truth About the French Revolution," multiple interactive multi-lingual philosophy AIs trained on thousands of hours of my material - as well as AIs for Real-Time Relationships, Bitcoin, Peaceful Parenting, and Call-In Shows!
You also receive private livestreams, HUNDREDS of exclusive premium shows, early release podcasts, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and much more!
See you soon!
https://freedomain.locals.com/support/promo/UPB202
Category
📚
LearningTranscript
00:00Good morning, everybody. Hope you're doing well. Stefan Molyneux from Free Domain.
00:05FreeDomain.com slash donate to help out the show, to help out philosophy.
00:10I very much appreciate it. Don't forget to check out my debate with Dr. John from last night,
00:19mid-September. It was a really, really good debate, and I appreciated him calling in.
00:24I know that he's been bagging on me on X for a couple months, and then he's been saying he's
00:31going to call in. So, when I saw his name, I'm like, yes, bring him on. Let him tear at me.
00:38And that was a really enjoyable debate. All right. So, these are questions from listeners on X. You
00:43can now, of course, subscribe to me on X, X.com slash Stefan Molyneux, and you can just click on
00:50subscribe. I'm the header. All right. Given that Plato's allegory of the cave still seems to apply
00:55to modern people, is there any hope of someday having a civilization rooted in reality? So,
01:02Plato's cave is an analogy not of human nature, but of political power. So, why is it that it is so
01:13profitable to lie to people? Well, because if you lie to people and you get them to accept
01:18all the vagaries and moral contradictions of massive amounts of political power, then, well,
01:25you rule them and they'll obey and shut up and comply and all of that. So, lying to people,
01:33planting lies and harvesting subjugation is foundational. You have to teach the slave
01:38that he's not a slave, that slavery is good, that it's fine, and it's loyalty. And, oh, oh,
01:45without being a slave, he'll be dead, right? This is the ultimate argument for power, is that,
01:52well, power is a problem, but it's better than being dead. And this goes all the way back to,
01:57I mean, goes all the way back to Plato, but Hobbes' idea that in a state of nature,
02:03life is nasty, brutish, and short. And so, we band together and agree to subjugate ourselves to
02:09political rulers so that we don't get murdered by each other on a continual basis. So, it's better
02:15than being dead, is sort of the basic argument. And then you have to lie to people about all kinds
02:22of things. And you see this not just with political power, I mean, it's all coercive power, right? So,
02:30when I talk about being against spanking, what do people say? Well, spanking, yes, we understand it's
02:37difficult and unpleasant, but what's it better than? Oh, quick question, what's it better than?
02:42Why, yes, it is, in fact, better than being dead. Because if you don't spank your children,
02:48they'll go run in the road and get hit by a semi and die, and so on, right? And Stephen King vividly
02:54wrote about this when he was writing about the creation of Pet Sematary, that his kid was running
03:02towards the road, and he barely stopped him in time and all of that. So, yeah, it's, oh, if you don't,
03:07you'll die, right? If you don't subjugate yourself to me, to my audiology, whatever,
03:12well, you're just gonna, you're just gonna die. Or, you know, be grievously wounded, you know,
03:17like if, there are two examples of spanking, it's always like running into the street, right? Number
03:21one, running into the street. And number two, of course, it is, well, your kid is going to,
03:27what are they gonna do? Oh, they're gonna pull a pot of boiling water off the stove, and, you know,
03:34it's gonna be terrible, and die, or be horribly scarred for life, and so on. So, just lying to
03:41people and say, well, without us, you're gonna die, and therefore subjugation to us is better than
03:48dying, and so on, right? So, tyrannies say, I'm here to protect you. Well, from what? Well,
03:58from what I'm gonna do to you if you don't obey me. Seems a little circular to me, but that's the
04:05general issue. All right. So, once we have peaceful parenting, and then that diminishes the need and
04:13thirst and acceptance of political power, we can begin to work for a voluntary state of society,
04:18a peaceful state of society, and then we get a free and voluntary society, and in a free and
04:27voluntary society, people don't profit from lying to children. They actually end up with a stable
04:33society by telling the truth to children, and that's what we want. Somebody asks, if truly sentient
04:41and self-aware and self-motivated robots come to be, would you welcome them into the world as
04:46fellow beings worthy of respect? I have had many decades' experience as a computer programmer,
04:54and computers are not human brains, and the level of richness and complexity all the way from the
05:02medulla, the hippocampus, the neofrontal cortex, the lizard brain all the way to the mammal brain
05:08all the way to the post-monkey beta expansion pack called Humandly is incredibly rich and complex and
05:14deep. We don't understand it really much at all. Computers are just a whole series of ones and
05:18zeros, right? Just bytes. Bites and bits, ones and zeros. And that's not the way that the human
05:25mind really works at all. So, I never say never, right? The future, blah, blah, blah. And if, you know,
05:33if at some point we really do understand the brain, maybe we can find some simulacrum in,
05:37or some sort of reproduction in software and hardware, but it's hard to conceive that that
05:46could ever really come to pass. But again, a thousand years from now, who knows what's possible?
05:52But if there are robots that have the same functional capacities as human beings, then sure,
05:59yeah, they would be fellow beings, and they would be covered by the non-aggression principle,
06:04they would be covered by UPB and all kinds of cool things. UPB being universally preferable
06:10behavior, a rational proof of secular ethics. It's a great book. You should get it for free
06:14at freedomain.com slash books. This is the argument that I had with Dr. John last night,
06:21which is if there are space aliens, and actually I had a thought about this. I'll sort of mention
06:29it at some point, but I'll throw it in here as a bookmark. So, if there are space aliens living on
06:35Alpha Centauri that have minds to some degree analogous to human minds, in other words, they've
06:41evolved and so on, then would they be covered by morals and ethics? And yeah, of course, to me they
06:46would, right? Now, all life originates in a state of nature, and all life originates in violence and
06:55theft. I mean, there's predators, there's prey, and animals steal from each other all the time,
07:03and so, I mean, it's not, it's not, it's violence, not murder. It's getting first, early bird gets the
07:12worm, takes it from all the other birds, and although you can certainly see from the movement
07:18of wolves that they respect property rights. To some degree, marking territory and so on is a way of
07:24trying to minimize conflict between animals, but creatures that evolve on some other planet through
07:32the process of evolution will, of course, pass through the phase of violence and theft.
07:41Violence drives evolution, theft drives evolution, camouflage, hiding, you name it, property
07:47to some degree, to some degree, or property delineations drive evolution, creatures guard
07:53their property. And so, all life that is sentient and conscious will have passed through violence
08:01and theft and rape, or, you know, forced sexual contact. I mean, we don't accuse, we don't send
08:08dolphins to jail for, sorry, I was just about to walk into a giant spiderweb, and I don't
08:17hugely want to, you know, that feeling where you get wrapped in that spiderweb around your
08:22calf, and then you just wait for that little prick of a bite, and followed by a strange Australian
08:27death. Anyway, that's the fear. So, all creatures will go through violence, rape, theft, and so on,
08:35to evolve. And civilization occurs when people come up with moral rules to ban these things.
08:44So, all creatures in the universe will have issues with rape, theft, assault, and murder,
08:49because that's where we evolve from, rape, theft, assault, and murder. So, all creatures are going to
08:56have to ban rape, theft, assault, and murder if they are sentient and capable of abstract thinking
09:00and morality and so on, or moral theories. And so, UPB is a universal phenomenon designed to
09:08help delineate the animalistic violence, rape, theft, assault, and murder from a civilization where
09:16people can work to ban these things. So, UPB is truly universal in that it is required to restrain
09:25the animalistic impulses of all creatures that are attempting to evolve beyond the mere hedonistic
09:31and instinct-driven brutal necessities of the moment. So, all right. Can an atheist, like an
09:39ex-Muslim, be a Christian, at least culturally go to church and all, and even if you can't find any
09:44rational way to believe that God exists? I know, it's a strange question. I don't think it's strange at
09:47all. I don't think it's strange at all. And I go to church. I find it very interesting to be
09:54in a room, in a large room, and I love the aesthetics and the beauty of a good church.
10:00And it does, of course, remind me of my childhood and the stained glass overlays that drape over the
10:07shining faces of the choir boys of which I was one. And so, I think it's a lovely thing to go to
10:13church. You get to listen to ideas, to arguments, to morals. You get to lift your head from the trough
10:18of day-to-day issues and problems and challenges and look at the larger sphere of life and the more
10:23noble and spiritual sphere of life. And who knows, right? Who knows? Maybe something vivid will
10:28happen to you that certainly happens to many mystics that will give you some powerful experience of the
10:36divine. I mean, I'm ready, waiting, and open. I would love to have some proof of the divine.
10:44So far, no good. All right. Or no luck. All right. So, if the purpose, and next question,
10:51if the purpose of life is, as I think it is, to become a great mate, find a great mate, create a
10:56family and raise kids who will be great mates themselves, what does the purpose of life become
11:00for people who can't, don't, or choose not to become parents? Well, obviously, I'm going to get
11:05into trouble here. I'm just telling you my sort of personal opinion. This isn't a sort of
11:10syllogistical, rational argument. Neither it is inductive nor deductive reasoning. I'll just
11:17tell you my experience. So, I don't know that the purpose of life is to become a great mate,
11:22because the purpose of life is a concept. I don't imagine that rabbits ever sit there and think,
11:30geez, you know, all I do is dodge predators, munch grass, and try and have as much sex as possible.
11:34Well, really, what's the point of it all? I don't think that animals feel that, or think that.
11:41They wouldn't have the conceptual ability, really, to face ennui or some kind of angst or,
11:49you know, meaninglessness or despair in that existential way. So, if it can be done by animals,
11:56it's not the purpose of humanity. I'm not saying that the purpose of humanity doesn't include what
12:02animals do. I mean, animals eat. Human beings have to eat. Animals reproduce. Human beings kind of need
12:07to reproduce. Animals sleep and rest. So, do human beings. So, there is a circle, an overlapping
12:16circle. So, but it's two overlapping circles, because there are things that animals do that
12:22human beings shouldn't do, such as rape, theft, assault, and murder. There are things that humans do
12:28that animals can't do, such as use abstract language, reason, and debate. And then there are things that
12:36both humans and animals do. So, sort of two-cent circles side-by-side overlapping. So, it's not
12:42finding a great mate, having kids, and having them reproduce, because animals do that. And so,
12:49that can't be the purpose of humanity. That having been said, my personal belief or my personal
12:57experience, my personal emotional experience, which is, again, not to say it's logical or objective
13:02or anything like that. I find people who don't want to have kids, not the people who can't have kids,
13:08that's a whole different category. But the people who don't want to have kids, who could have kids,
13:12I just find them weird. I find them weird. I find them kind of selfish. I find them kind of
13:17incomprehensible. I had friends when I was younger. Married couple, seemed to get along reasonably
13:22well. Just never had any talk of kids. And that's just weird to me. Like, have kids, my gosh. I mean,
13:32have kids. I mean, you're alive. You get some reasonable pleasure and enjoyment out of life.
13:37So, spread that reasonable pleasure and enjoyment out of life to others. Have kids. It's a natural thing.
13:43It's a beautiful thing. It's a wonderful thing. Yeah, just have kids. So, the purpose of life
13:49is to promote virtue and fight evil. That's the purpose. Because that's the one thing that human
13:56beings can do that only human beings can do. So, the purpose of life as a human must be to do
14:01something that's exclusive or specific to humanity, right? Right? The purpose of a painting
14:07is to evoke an emotional response in the person who watches. And the purpose of a painting is specific
14:14to a painting, right? And the purpose of a painting is not to be a manhole cover. The purpose of a
14:24painting is not to have a pleasing reggae beat to it, right? Because that would be specific to other
14:31things, engineering or music or something like that. But the purpose of a painting has to be something
14:34specific to any painting. So, all right. Would moral standards exist or need to exist in a
14:41post-singularity world where anyone can have anything they want, built by robotics, AI, and
14:45insanely advanced 3D printers? Uh, yeah. You would need even more morality where goods are more plentiful.
14:53So, for instance, if everybody's broke, do you need a system of morality that says, don't overspend?
15:01Uh, no. However, if people are relatively wealthy, they have good lines of credit and access to credit
15:07cards and so on, in other words, they have plenty, then you need even more morality that says, do not
15:14overspend. You need a diet when you have an excess of food. You need dietary requirements. You don't need
15:23dietary requirements if you're in prison and can't choose your meals. You don't need dietary requirements,
15:29or you don't need a sort of specialized diet if you're on a desert island and can only eat fish and
15:35coconuts. So, the more access you have, the more morality you need as a whole. Like, we need something
15:44called don't overspend because we have a financial system that allows us, in an unholy manner, allows us to
15:52use the future earnings of the unborn as collateral against which to borrow to buy votes in the present.
15:57So, you need more morality the more access that you have. Uh, somebody says, my question, oh, uh, once we
16:04have anything we want, what are moral standards worth? Well, you won't have anything you want.
16:09You want, a human, two human beings can't occupy the same space at the same time. They can certainly
16:13try to, which is a lot of fun. But, uh, you, you can't have anything you want. So, uh, there's still
16:20going to be a shortage of raw materials. All raw materials are limited. Land is limited. Space is limited.
16:24Houses will be limited because you'll have to have a place to put them. So, uh, there is no such thing
16:30as post-scarcity as a whole. And even if you have everything you want, you still are mortal. All
16:36right. Hmm. Uh, let's see here. Utilitarianism or deontology? Greatest good or moral principle?
16:44Old debate, but I haven't heard your take. So, this is the idea that is the good that which benefits
16:51to most people, the greatest good, the greatest happiness of the greatest number. Is that the
16:56good or is it moral principle? Well, the greatest good of the greatest number is mysticism. You
17:06can't know the greatest good of the greatest number because good is subjective and good
17:10being subjective cannot be ever the basis of an objective system of morality. The greatest
17:17good for the greatest number. Well, all that will happen is that people will tell you what
17:23the greatest good is in order to control the process, uh, the, the, the distribution of
17:28resources. So, you need a central authoritarian agency, a tyranny really, to gather up all the
17:33resources and then distribute them in a way that apparently creates the greatest good for
17:37the greatest number. But then all that will happen is that people will claim that they should
17:44get resources because it will create the greatest good. And they say, well, I want some sort of
17:47objective way of the greatest good, but such a thing doesn't exist. Uh, let's say the prettiest
17:55girl in school should go out with the most men or the most boys, let's say. No, let's make
18:01it adults, right? Let's make it adults. So, the, the prettiest girl in a university, well,
18:07all the, all the boys, all the men want to go out with her. So, what's the greatest good
18:11of the greatest number? Well, she should date as many men as possible. I don't mean sleep
18:16with, but date as many men as possible because that's the greatest good of the greatest number.
18:20Is that right, fair, moral, and just? Nope. Right? What if, uh, the men, uh, lusts after
18:27her, right? She's got a great figure, she's very pretty or whatever, she's very sexy, and
18:31all the men lust after her, what is the greatest good of the greatest number? Well, uh, that's,
18:36it would be wrong to say she has to sleep with the men because it will make the most men
18:40happy. Uh, no. Right? It would be rape is wrong, and she should not sleep with anybody
18:46she doesn't want to sleep with. All right? So, and, of course, people will simply change
18:51their behavior to gain the greatest good. So, um, one of the big things was that when
18:57there was a relatively small number of single mothers, people said, oh, well, we should have
19:01a welfare state to take care of the material needs of the small number of women who have, uh,
19:07children without fathers to provide for them. And so, it's a small amount of pain to take
19:14money away from people who can afford it, and it's a great amount of happiness to, uh, give
19:21that money to the single mothers so that they have, uh, material comfort, uh, access to health
19:27care, dental care, housing, food, and so on for their children. So, the unhappiness of people
19:32paying 10% of their income to the welfare state or 20% or whatever it is, that unhappiness
19:37is relatively small, whereas the happiness of the single mothers having food and clothing
19:45and shelter and health care for their children is very high. So, uh, net happiness increases,
19:50right? Okay. Well, uh, then, of course, what happens is because you set up this system where
19:56you've turned children from a liability which needs a provider into an asset which doesn't
20:01need a provider, then women will, a lot of women simply change their behavior so that they have
20:08children in order to get money from the welfare state. And, you know, for instance, in the black
20:12community, it used to be 20% illegitimacy, right? 20% of black children growing up without fathers,
20:19now it's 75%. So, that's what happens when you break principle. People change their behavior.
20:25So, if you pay women to have children, then women will have children in order to get paid,
20:30and then you end up with many more problems and dysfunctions and messes. So, no, it has to be
20:36a moral principle. Anything that occurs in the future is mysticism. Nobody can predict the future.
20:41So, somebody says, well, I know the outcome of, let's say, I know the outcome of the welfare state
20:47is going to be really good. It's going to help out the world. It's going to make everyone better
20:50and make the world a better place. The outcome of the welfare state is super, super good. Okay.
20:54Well, if you know the outcome of a coercive measure across an entire country of hundreds of
21:02millions of people, then you have an ability to predict the future, which means you don't even
21:06need the welfare state. And why do I say that? Well, if you have certain knowledge of the outcome
21:14of massive variables hitting hundreds of millions of people over decades, then you certainly have the
21:21ability to pick stocks that are going to succeed. Because you know the future of hundreds of
21:29millions of people based upon a new variable over many, many decades. Which means you sure as heck
21:34are going to know what the price of Apple stock is going to be tomorrow, and then you can long it or
21:39short it, and you can make zillions of dollars, and then you can give your profits to the
21:44women who have kids but no provider. Right? But if you can't figure out the price of Apple stock
21:53tomorrow, why on earth would I believe you that you know what's going to happen after the war in
21:58Iraq, that you can know what's going to happen after the welfare state gets implemented, that you
22:02know what's going to happen after Common Core gets implemented? Like, you don't. You don't. Like,
22:07people who believe that they can predict the weather in a hundred years based upon their computer
22:13models. Well, they should. What they should do, of course, if they weren't entirely full of shit,
22:20what they should do, since they can predict weather a hundred years out, is they should long and short
22:26various agricultural products based upon what the weather is going to be like next year or the year
22:33after. What the average temperatures are going to be next year or the year after. Because if you know,
22:39if you knew somehow what the temperatures were going to be next year or the year after, you could long
22:43and short various agricultural products, soybeans, pork bellies, whatever, and you could make an
22:50absolute fortune and then you could pour all of that absolute fortune into solving climate change.
22:57But this is sort of the skin in the game stuff. I don't believe anybody can predict the future,
23:03I mean, other than in broad general moral principles. So if you have an increase in coercion
23:10in society, things will generally get worse materially because you're destroying price signals and
23:16interfering with, oh my god, I must walk into that stupid repetition compulsion. I'm sorry, I almost
23:23walked right into that spiderweb again. Ah, well, the thin threads of thought shall remain intact.
23:32So, yeah, people, they don't know the future. You can get broad things as a whole, but, you know,
23:37you can say if there's a war, then people are going to die in the war and so on. So you can get sort of
23:43broad general principles, but you cannot predict the future in any specificity. And if you can predict
23:51the future, right, if there's going to be a war, then you can invest in the hideous machinery of mass
24:01combat, right? And, you know, if the government's going to pay for a, quote, vaccine, then you can invest
24:11in those companies. So those are people who know, and that's really based on politics more than anything
24:17else. But if people have no downside, and they have no history of successful prediction, right, so the
24:26welfare state, the people who put it in, now that it's revealed as a failure, do they have any downside?
24:31They lose any money? No, not at all. In fact, they gained political power and resources through that.
24:38So the people who have no skin in the game, they lose nothing if they're wrong, and they have no
24:45history of even short-term successful predictions. Now why would I listen to them about the long term?
24:51Anyway, but they're all just excuses for the expansion of political power. Okay, what is truth?
24:56Truth is when the principles in your mind are in accordance with the facts of reality.
25:04Not a question, but elaborate a bit on the left-right rabbit hole. I'm feeling used.
25:09So the left is feminine, plus the state. The right is masculine, plus the state. And for more on that,
25:16you can check out my premium show on Pink Floyd's The Wall. I know, sounds like a bit of a stretch,
25:21but it's a good stretch. How do we keep ourselves from hating our enemy more than we love our people?
25:27Yeah, I'm not sure why hate is such a negative thing as a whole. Hate is just an emotion.
25:35All emotions have their strengths and weaknesses. Excessive happiness can lead to complacency and
25:39naivete. Excessive anger can lead to destruction. Excessive hate can lead to violence, right?
25:45But to love virtue is to hate evil, right? I mean, think of your immune system, right? You want it to
25:54quote, hate and work to destroy cells or viruses or bacteria that are harmful to you.
26:01And in the same way, I'm not talking physical destruction, but to love virtue is to hate evil.
26:08I mean, if you love health, you cannot equally love illness. So I don't know that we want to
26:18classify any emotion as negative in and of itself. All right. What does it mean to feel pain for the
26:24loss of someone you never met in person? Well, I mean, of course, I've been feeling Charlie Cook's
26:28murder all week. And I did meet him once and was on a panel with him. And we co-spoke at a conference
26:37together at St. Louis. And yes, so, but of course, I wasn't close to the man. And I never heard from
26:43him directly. He never sent me anything during my deplatforming or whatever. But the reason why you
26:50feel bad or negative about the murder of someone you never met is, well, first of all, we see it
26:56vividly on the screens in front of us. Because when I grew up, you'd never see that kind of stuff.
27:01Because the networks were not broadcast a direct murder, but now we get to see it. And it's
27:06appalling. So we feel like we're there. And
27:08.
27:10.
27:11.
27:12.
Be the first to comment