- 4 hours ago
"Why do you tend to focus on ethical questions? The answer is always ultimately God, which philosophy argues is an appeal to authority. If the authority doesn't just have the truth, but is the truth, then what is the issue with appealing to God?"
"Do objects in the natural world have an essential quality or are their attributes constructed in the effort to make sense?"
"You mentioned on recent episode how no prior philosopher discussed childhood, parenting and childhood trauma and thats what prompted your book 'peaceful parenting'
"Why do you think it’s the case?"
"Would UPB apply to an alien race of sentient, intelligent beings, or could their evolution have driven them toward a value system that would be completely incompatible with a human value system?"
"You said: 'It is my firm belief that illness often follows a lengthy period of feeling useless.
"Having a purpose – especially a moral purpose – keeps you healthy.'
"Can you explain the physiology behind that first statement? I mostly agree with the second."
"Ultimately the left/right divide is equality vs freedom. Both are necessary for a society to function. What would be the best form of government to enact a sensible balance between the two?"
"Could exile be a legitimate non-violent extension of shunning when an individual persistently breaks the social contract?"
"A proposition: Hard determinism is true, our belief in agency is the veil that separates from a non-dual, “enlightened” understanding and perception of reality."
"Ideas of the supernatural rule out the possibility of materialism since they 1) should be inexplicable in observed nature 2) are irreducible in quality and 3) cannot be created ex nihilo. Either we experienced the supernatural or our mind is part immaterial."
"Do you have any thoughts on Taoism?"
"I was pushed into marriage at 18 by the Baptist couple that 'adopted' me in high school. They were so afraid I’d embarrass them by having premarital sex or something, but they also wanted me to be college educated before having kids. We didn’t make it through college together and I was divorced and devastated at 21 and they 'disowned' me.
"I went on to graduate, got a great ...
SUBSCRIBE TO ME ON X! https://x.com/StefanMolyneux
Follow me on Youtube! https://www.youtube.com/@freedomain1
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
"Do objects in the natural world have an essential quality or are their attributes constructed in the effort to make sense?"
"You mentioned on recent episode how no prior philosopher discussed childhood, parenting and childhood trauma and thats what prompted your book 'peaceful parenting'
"Why do you think it’s the case?"
"Would UPB apply to an alien race of sentient, intelligent beings, or could their evolution have driven them toward a value system that would be completely incompatible with a human value system?"
"You said: 'It is my firm belief that illness often follows a lengthy period of feeling useless.
"Having a purpose – especially a moral purpose – keeps you healthy.'
"Can you explain the physiology behind that first statement? I mostly agree with the second."
"Ultimately the left/right divide is equality vs freedom. Both are necessary for a society to function. What would be the best form of government to enact a sensible balance between the two?"
"Could exile be a legitimate non-violent extension of shunning when an individual persistently breaks the social contract?"
"A proposition: Hard determinism is true, our belief in agency is the veil that separates from a non-dual, “enlightened” understanding and perception of reality."
"Ideas of the supernatural rule out the possibility of materialism since they 1) should be inexplicable in observed nature 2) are irreducible in quality and 3) cannot be created ex nihilo. Either we experienced the supernatural or our mind is part immaterial."
"Do you have any thoughts on Taoism?"
"I was pushed into marriage at 18 by the Baptist couple that 'adopted' me in high school. They were so afraid I’d embarrass them by having premarital sex or something, but they also wanted me to be college educated before having kids. We didn’t make it through college together and I was divorced and devastated at 21 and they 'disowned' me.
"I went on to graduate, got a great ...
SUBSCRIBE TO ME ON X! https://x.com/StefanMolyneux
Follow me on Youtube! https://www.youtube.com/@freedomain1
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
00:00Hello, everybody. I hope you're doing well.
00:02Stephen Molyneux from Freedom, Maine.
00:04Just stepping through a spiderweb here.
00:07Hopefully it's not dragging some venomous Australian denizen behind me.
00:12So, great questions from the fine readers and callers on X.
00:19If you would like to subscribe, I would gratefully, humbly, and deeply appreciate that.
00:26You can go to fdryurl.com slash locals, or you can go to subscribestraw.com slash freedomain,
00:33or you can just go to me on X and subscribe there, too.
00:36So, let's dive in.
00:39Why do you tend to focus on ethical questions?
00:41The answer is always ultimately God, which philosophy argues is an appeal to authority.
00:45If the authority doesn't just have the truth but is the truth, then what is the issue with appealing to God?
00:50Well, I deal with ethical questions because that's the essence of philosophy.
00:58Philosophy isn't all discipline, like the philosophy of science, philosophy of math, and so on.
01:02But the one realm that philosophy deals with, that no other discipline deals with, fundamentally, is the question of ethics.
01:11So, all core philosophy is ethical philosophy.
01:16And so, that's why I focus on that.
01:18Now, why do I say that we need philosophy without appeal to gods or governments?
01:28Well, I want you to imagine, and we've certainly seen this in the world throughout history,
01:36I want you to imagine the issue or question of science that is dependent upon God or government.
01:45So, if we have science that is dependent upon God, then we don't have the scientific method.
01:52We simply consult religious texts and or pray for the answer to scientific questions.
02:01And so, in the Bible, it says the earth is fixed and does not move.
02:04And so, we would say that, of course, the earth is the center of the universe,
02:07and it does not, of course, go around the sun.
02:09And we would have that as our answer.
02:12In other words, we wouldn't have science.
02:14We wouldn't have science.
02:16We would simply have religious texts or prayer or, of course, a pope-like character or the pope
02:24who would say, this is what the truth about science is.
02:27I have consulted the Bible.
02:29I have read the original ancient Aramaic.
02:32I have prayed.
02:33I have meditated.
02:34And the answer has been provided for me.
02:36Well, we wouldn't have science at all.
02:39Now, if, on the other hand, when it's actually not that much of another hand,
02:43it's just another kind of mystery religion,
02:44if the government runs science, as the government generally does, right?
02:48The government has usurped science from individuals and, a lot of times,
02:54people with us, even a scrap of integrity.
02:56And the government has now said, science is what we say.
03:01Science is what we decree.
03:03The vaccine stops COVID in its tracks.
03:07It's safe and effective.
03:09And if you question Dr. Fauci, you are questioning science.
03:13In the same way, if you question the ultimate supreme religious leader,
03:18you are a heretic and trust the science.
03:21Of course, all science is based on mistrust of authority.
03:24So, if the government runs science, you don't have science.
03:30You just have compromised, paid-for people who are pretending to do science
03:34while pillaging the taxpayer for everything he or she has got.
03:38It's the same thing with the SSRIs.
03:41Oh, we're correcting a chemical imbalance.
03:43Can you test for that chemical imbalance?
03:45No.
03:46Has it ever been proven?
03:47No.
03:48In fact, there doesn't seem to be much of a relationship between serotonin and depression.
03:51So, but because it is a government science, which means that government is largely paying
03:58for these treatments, then it gets completely corrupted.
04:02So, you can't have government science and still call it science.
04:07You can't have theological science and still call it science.
04:11It has to be voluntary.
04:13It has to be private.
04:14It should not be corrupted by either theological or political power.
04:18Now, the big challenge, of course, and this is really foundational to the history of the 20th century,
04:24but the big challenge is this.
04:27If morals are based on God,
04:33then you can escape morality
04:35by disbelieving in God.
04:38Now, you need to let that simmer and cook in your brain
04:41quite considerably
04:42and quite deeply
04:44because
04:45that's a very big issue
04:47and that had a lot to do with the
04:4820th century.
04:51Science had proven itself much more efficacious
04:53in the promotion of human welfare, safety, security, and health
04:56than religion ever was.
04:58I mean, no hate on religion,
04:59but it's just a
05:00basic fact
05:01that
05:03sanitation
05:04and
05:06better food production,
05:08free markets,
05:09these had,
05:10and technology,
05:11these had all contributed
05:12almost vastly more to human well-being
05:14than religion.
05:16Now, again, we're just talking physical well-being.
05:18We can talk about sort of
05:18issues of the soul or the spirit.
05:22That's a sort of separate category,
05:23but in terms of just
05:24human beings not getting sick and died,
05:28secularism,
05:30science, medicine,
05:31and the free market,
05:32these all contributed
05:34almost infinitely more
05:35to human well-being
05:36than religion had.
05:38And I'm not saying religion,
05:40Christianity,
05:40was completely unrelated
05:42to these things,
05:43but nonetheless,
05:44if you sort of look at that
05:45sort of flat line
05:46of human well-being
05:47over what seems like
05:48it's sort of been extended now.
05:51You know,
05:51this skull that's been developed
05:52in Asia,
05:54that's a very old,
05:55humanity,
05:56might have not come out of Africa,
05:57comes out of Asia,
05:59and we seem to be
06:01a million years old
06:02rather than 200,000,
06:04250,000,
06:04which is sort of what I've heard.
06:05I've even heard as little as 100,000.
06:07None of that really makes any sense to me.
06:09You can't get from ape to human
06:10in that short a time period,
06:12in my view.
06:13So it makes more sense
06:14for it to be longer.
06:17So you look at this
06:20sort of human well-being
06:21over a couple of hundred thousand years,
06:23it's completely flat lined
06:24and horrible and ghastly
06:25and wretched and terrible.
06:26You know,
06:26half of people dying
06:27before the age of five
06:28and so on.
06:29And then free markets
06:31and modern secular science
06:33comes along
06:34and human well-being
06:36is enormously improved.
06:39In other words,
06:40by rejecting
06:41the idea
06:44that we can understand
06:45the world
06:45through revelation and prayer,
06:47and biblical texts,
06:49but saying,
06:50we're going to wipe the slate clean
06:52and start from scratch,
06:53human lives are immeasurably improved.
06:55Well, it's a very significant issue
06:57and we don't,
06:58you can't just wave it away.
07:00You can't.
07:01So,
07:02in the 19th century,
07:04the success of science
07:05led to a general skepticism
07:07towards the value of religion.
07:09And as a general skepticism
07:10towards the value of religion
07:12came along,
07:14a general skepticism
07:15towards virtue,
07:17ethics,
07:17right?
07:18This is Nietzsche's
07:18will to power,
07:19this is the class conflict
07:20theory of the communists,
07:22this is Darwinian evolution,
07:25social Darwinian evolution,
07:27survival of the fittest,
07:28eugenics,
07:29like,
07:29all of this stuff
07:29is just like,
07:30well,
07:30if science is so great
07:31and science has improved
07:33human society so much,
07:36which it did,
07:36then the religious ethics
07:41fundamentally can't be true.
07:42Or there's no particular reason
07:44to believe them.
07:45A superior system of human well-being
07:46had come along,
07:47which is secular science,
07:49free market,
07:49and so on.
07:50None of which is
07:51foundationally predicated
07:53in the Bible,
07:54right?
07:55I mean,
07:55thou shalt not steal,
07:56for sure,
07:57but all societies
07:59generally ban stealing,
08:00at least from
08:00peon to peon,
08:02citizen to citizen,
08:03and serf to serf,
08:04but it is not,
08:06the sort of foundational
08:07property rights
08:08is not written
08:08into the Bible.
08:10So,
08:11the problem is
08:13if you base
08:14morality
08:15on God,
08:17you can escape morality
08:19by disbelieving in God.
08:22Now,
08:22of course,
08:22if you're religious,
08:23you will say,
08:24well,
08:24you don't escape morality,
08:25you simply defer
08:26the punishments
08:27until
08:28after you die,
08:30right?
08:30Or maybe being haunted
08:31Macbeth style
08:32before you die,
08:32but you don't
08:33eliminate morality
08:34or the effects
08:36of morality,
08:36you simply defer them.
08:38But,
08:39that's not
08:40a proof.
08:41And basically,
08:42that's just saying
08:42you should believe
08:43in religious morality
08:44because otherwise
08:44you'd go to hell.
08:46And that's not
08:47a moral argument.
08:48That is an argument
08:49from consequences.
08:50That is simply
08:51a threat.
08:52And a threat
08:53is not an argument.
08:54In fact,
08:54a threat is a confession
08:55that you don't have
08:56an argument.
08:57I mean,
08:57that's why
08:58people need to be
08:59threatened over the vaccine
09:00because
09:00they would not release
09:02the papers
09:02and the data,
09:03right?
09:03You can have
09:03a good argument.
09:05So,
09:05the issue
09:07that you can
09:08escape morality
09:08by disbelieving
09:09in God
09:10is so foundational
09:12that
09:13it drove me
09:14to,
09:15you know,
09:16burn the midnight oil
09:17for quite some time
09:18to develop
09:18a theory of ethics
09:19that does not
09:21rely upon
09:21the commandments
09:23of God
09:23to get the ought
09:24from the is
09:25in defiance of Hume.
09:27So,
09:27I have that.
09:28Now,
09:29the other argument
09:29is,
09:30well,
09:32you get your morals
09:33from the government,
09:34from the government laws.
09:36But,
09:36of course,
09:37the entire purpose
09:38of the Nuremberg trials,
09:40the entire purpose
09:41of everything that happened,
09:42Second World War afterwards,
09:43the horrors
09:43of the Holocaust,
09:45the horrors of the Holodomor,
09:46and all of the various
09:48other ethnic cleansings
09:49that occurred across the world,
09:51is to say,
09:52you know,
09:53natural law is,
09:54law is a reflection
09:55of universal morality
09:57versus positive law,
09:59which is law
10:00is simply
10:00whatever is written
10:01in the books,
10:02and it is not referencing
10:03an external morality.
10:05I mean,
10:05the horrors
10:05of the 20th century
10:06were so great
10:07that the Nuremberg trials
10:09were basically,
10:10okay,
10:11it was legal,
10:11but it was evil.
10:13And so,
10:13we cannot have
10:13governments
10:15dictating morals
10:16because the law
10:18is not an argument.
10:20The law,
10:20hopefully,
10:21is an enforcement
10:21of an abstract
10:23moral argument,
10:23but the law itself
10:24is simply the threat
10:25of negative consequences.
10:27It's not an argument,
10:28which is not to say
10:28that all laws are unjust,
10:30but it certainly
10:30is not the case
10:31that all laws are just.
10:32My God,
10:32we know that,
10:33without a doubt.
10:34So,
10:35we cannot rely
10:36on the government
10:37to consistently
10:38produce moral laws,
10:40and
10:40we cannot
10:42give people
10:43the out
10:43of escaping
10:44universal morals
10:45by simply ceasing
10:46to believe in God,
10:48which is why
10:48my book is entitled
10:49Universally Preferable Behavior,
10:51A Rational Proof
10:52of Secular Ethics.
10:53Rational Proof.
10:54Now,
10:55you can say
10:56that I can escape
10:58UPB,
11:00Universally Preferable Behavior,
11:02by rejecting
11:03empiricism,
11:04reality,
11:04and reason.
11:06Well, sure.
11:07And you can
11:08reject science
11:09by being psychotic.
11:11But people
11:12who are psychotic
11:13have no
11:15particular
11:16credibility
11:17when it comes
11:18to reality.
11:19I mean,
11:20would you take
11:20these statements
11:22of someone
11:22about abstract,
11:24complex topics
11:24seriously
11:25if they said,
11:26I'm literally
11:27seeing flying
11:29unicorns copulating
11:30in front of me
11:31right now.
11:32And, you know,
11:33let's assume
11:33that that isn't
11:34happening, right?
11:35So,
11:36if somebody
11:37says,
11:39I am
11:40seeing
11:40dragons
11:41float through
11:42the sky
11:42above a sea
11:44of titanium
11:44with elves
11:46on their backs
11:47that are both
11:49elves and
11:50elephants
11:50simultaneously,
11:51if somebody
11:51said that,
11:52would you
11:52take anything
11:53that they
11:53said about
11:54reality
11:54seriously?
11:55No,
11:55because they're
11:55psychotic,
11:56right?
11:56Going through
11:56some horrible
11:57brain-breaking
11:58delusions,
11:59right?
12:00Sort of
12:00beautiful mind
12:01style,
12:01right?
12:01I mean,
12:02the guy
12:02wasn't that
12:03bad,
12:03but...
12:04And so,
12:05if people
12:06say,
12:07well,
12:07I reject
12:08rationality,
12:11consistency,
12:12and so on,
12:12then they're
12:13not going
12:14to have
12:14any particular
12:15credibility
12:15in society
12:17as a whole.
12:18Now,
12:19of course,
12:19people will
12:19say,
12:20well,
12:20it's a higher
12:20reality,
12:21and it's
12:21mysticism,
12:21but it's a
12:22deeper truth,
12:23or a platonic,
12:23blah,
12:23blah,
12:24blah,
12:24but,
12:25you know,
12:25we still have
12:25to sort of
12:26work on that
12:26as a whole.
12:27But in general,
12:29you are not
12:29offered a
12:31speaking position
12:31at a scientific
12:33conference if you
12:34reject the
12:35scientific method,
12:36if you reject
12:36reason and
12:37evidence and
12:38morality.
12:39Would you
12:39take the
12:40mathematical
12:40pronouncements
12:41of anyone who
12:41said two and
12:42two make five
12:43with any
12:43seriousness at
12:43all?
12:44You'd say,
12:44no,
12:44well,
12:44they clearly
12:45have something
12:45wrong with
12:45their brains,
12:46and therefore
12:46we don't
12:46listen to
12:47them.
12:47They would
12:47be excluded
12:48by saying
12:48that two
12:49and two
12:49make five,
12:50not just
12:50from mathematical
12:51conversations,
12:52but from
12:53reality as a
12:54whole.
12:54So,
12:55my proof
12:55that theft
12:57can never
12:57be universally
12:58preferable
12:58behavior,
12:59right,
12:59theft,
12:59assault,
13:00and murder
13:00can never
13:01be universally
13:01preferable
13:02behavior,
13:02has been
13:03accepted and
13:03admitted by
13:04everyone I've
13:04debated it
13:05with.
13:05Everyone.
13:06Even the
13:06logic professor
13:07from a couple
13:07of weeks ago
13:12proof here,
13:12you've probably
13:13heard it a
13:13million times.
13:15And so,
13:15yeah,
13:15somebody can
13:16reject my
13:17proof,
13:17but only by
13:18rejecting logic.
13:20And people who
13:21reject logic,
13:22openly,
13:23are not listened
13:24to in any,
13:24say,
13:25in a rational
13:25society.
13:26All right,
13:27do objects in
13:28the natural
13:28world,
13:29asks someone,
13:30have an
13:30essential quality
13:31or are their
13:31attributes constructed
13:32in the effort
13:34to make sense?
13:35Sure,
13:35objects in the
13:36natural world
13:37have essential
13:38qualities.
13:40Now,
13:40they do not
13:41contain within
13:42them,
13:42well,
13:43there's sort
13:43of Aristotelian
13:44argument for
13:44essence,
13:45like what is
13:45the essence
13:45of something,
13:46right?
13:47So,
13:47it doesn't
13:47create,
13:48so it doesn't
13:49contain within
13:49itself any
13:51kind of essence,
13:53sort of a,
13:53a tree does not
13:56have the definition
13:56of tree embedded
13:57in its leaves
13:59and limbs
14:00and bark and
14:01wood.
14:02So,
14:02we have a
14:03concept in our
14:04mind that
14:05describes things.
14:06Now,
14:06what does it
14:07describe?
14:07Now,
14:07of course,
14:07when people
14:08were really,
14:08really working
14:09on the question
14:09of concepts,
14:11Aristotle and
14:11Plato in
14:12particular,
14:14I mean,
14:14Democritus had
14:15a theory of
14:15atoms,
14:15but they
14:16didn't have
14:16sort of the
14:16modern comprehensible
14:17theory of
14:18atoms and of
14:19the elements,
14:21right?
14:21And so,
14:23when we are
14:23describing a
14:25tree,
14:26we are describing
14:27consistency in
14:29elements and
14:31atomic structure.
14:32If I say,
14:33this is a
14:35metal and
14:36this is water,
14:36then water,
14:38I'm describing
14:39H2O.
14:40Metal,
14:40I'm describing
14:41the elements,
14:42the atoms and
14:43so on that
14:44make up the
14:44metal.
14:45And the atoms
14:45that make up
14:46metal are very
14:46different from
14:47the atoms that
14:47make up water.
14:49So,
14:50we have
14:50concepts because
14:52matter is
14:54created by
14:55atoms and
14:56atoms are
14:56consistent.
14:57A carbon
14:57atom is a
14:58carbon atom,
14:58a hydrogen
14:59atom is a
15:00hydrogen atom,
15:00an oxygen
15:01atom is an
15:01oxygen atom,
15:02and they
15:02have consistent
15:03properties across
15:05the universe
15:05through all
15:06time and so
15:07on.
15:07I mean,
15:08the number of
15:08neutrons,
15:09electrons,
15:09protons is the
15:11same.
15:11It's the same
15:12thing with
15:12chemistry and
15:14it's the same
15:14thing with
15:15physics,
15:15it's the same
15:15thing with
15:16cells.
15:18So,
15:18if you look at
15:18a tree,
15:19a tree is
15:19composed of
15:20particular cells
15:20and those
15:22cells themselves
15:22are composed of
15:23particular atoms
15:24and both the
15:24atoms in a
15:26very consistent
15:26way and the
15:27cells in a
15:27much more,
15:28much less,
15:29but still,
15:29very consistent
15:30way have
15:31stable and
15:31predictable
15:32properties.
15:33The atoms
15:33can't die,
15:34but the
15:34cells can
15:35die,
15:35the atoms
15:35can't
15:36mutate,
15:36but the
15:36cells can
15:37mutate,
15:37you know,
15:37this sort
15:37of thing.
15:39So,
15:39we have
15:40concepts because
15:41matter has
15:43universal,
15:45stable,
15:45and consistent
15:45properties based
15:46upon atoms.
15:48The most
15:49abstract concepts
15:50are based upon
15:51the consistency
15:53of atomic
15:54structure and
15:55behavior.
15:55All right.
15:56You mentioned
15:57on recent
15:57episodes how no
15:58prior philosopher
15:59discussed
15:59childhood,
16:00parenting,
16:01and childhood
16:02trauma,
16:03and that's
16:03what prompted
16:03your book
16:04Peaceful
16:04Parenting.
16:05Why do you
16:05think it's
16:05the case?
16:06Well,
16:07I think it's
16:09because of the
16:10sort of vast
16:10and significant
16:11separation between
16:12males and
16:12females in
16:14the past.
16:15So, I
16:17remember many
16:19years ago,
16:20before the
16:20show,
16:21really,
16:21before I
16:21started my
16:22show,
16:22I was
16:23chatting with
16:23my wife
16:23about tyranny
16:25and evil
16:26and philosophy
16:27and so on,
16:27and she
16:28said,
16:28yeah,
16:29but it all
16:30starts with
16:30the family.
16:32Supernova,
16:32right?
16:33And I
16:34think my
16:36wife's
16:37training and
16:38knowledge and
16:38experience in
16:39these areas is
16:40very powerful
16:41to me.
16:43And, you
16:44know,
16:44it kind of
16:44hit me like a
16:45thunderbolt and
16:45I began to
16:46sort of work on
16:47these kinds of
16:48theories about
16:48explaining tyranny
16:49through early
16:50childhood experiences.
16:51I, myself,
16:51of course,
16:52went through
16:52therapy for
16:54two years,
16:55three hours a
16:56week, and
16:56eight to
16:57ten to
16:58twelve hours a
16:58week in
16:58journaling,
16:59so a lot of
17:00digging into
17:01self-knowledge and
17:02so on.
17:03So, I think
17:05the separation
17:05between the
17:06male and the
17:06female worlds
17:07had the women
17:08deal with early
17:09childhood and the
17:09men deal out
17:10there in the
17:11world.
17:11Men would
17:12often get
17:14more authority
17:15over more
17:15interaction and
17:16authority over
17:16the kids when
17:17the kids hit
17:17late latency,
17:18sort of
17:19nine, ten,
17:20eleven, twelve,
17:21and so on.
17:22But by then,
17:23whatever's happened
17:24in the sort of
17:24first couple of
17:24years of life is
17:26embedded in the
17:27personality and
17:28it's just like,
17:29well, this is just
17:29who the person is
17:30or how the person
17:30is, as opposed to
17:32seeing who they
17:32could have been in
17:32the absence of
17:33trauma.
17:34So, I think
17:35there was a lot of
17:36separation between
17:37males and females
17:38and men did not
17:40take, usually,
17:41a huge amount
17:41of time to
17:43take care of
17:44infants and see
17:45what happened.
17:46So, there was the
17:46female world of
17:47females, babies, and
17:47toddlers, there was
17:48the male world, and
17:49the two were quite
17:50separate in many
17:51ways.
17:53And so, I think
17:54also you needed to
17:55have a good
17:56conscience.
17:57Like, you need to
17:57have a, this is a
17:58very sort of
18:00underappreciated
18:01fact that you
18:04have to have a
18:05good conscience in
18:06order to have an
18:08objective moral
18:08examination of
18:10ideas, arguments,
18:12good, evil, and the
18:12world.
18:14And so, having
18:15never harmed a
18:17child, in fact,
18:18generally being very
18:19positive to children,
18:20especially my work in
18:22daycare, but also
18:22within my family, but
18:24having never harmed a
18:24child, I could
18:25examine issues of
18:26child abuse and
18:27negative actions
18:29against children and
18:30non-aggression
18:30principle, and because
18:32I've never hit a
18:33child, I've never hit
18:34anyone, I've never
18:35hit a child, I've
18:36never punished a
18:37child in that kind
18:38of way, and so on.
18:39So, I think having a
18:41good conscience helps,
18:43but also you just
18:44need to be there for
18:45those early years.
18:48And my wife's
18:49particular graduate
18:50degree training was in
18:51early childhood
18:51education and so on,
18:52so I think that her
18:53prompt in that
18:54direction was very
18:55helpful.
18:56All right, would
18:57UPB apply, this is
18:59another question, of
18:59course, sorry, would
19:00UPB apply to an
19:02alien race of sentient
19:03intelligent beings, or
19:03could the evolution
19:04have driven them
19:05towards a value
19:05system that would be
19:06completely incompatible
19:07with the human value
19:08system?
19:09No, I don't think so,
19:12because all life starts
19:13with violence, and
19:15restraining violence
19:16according to
19:17virtues and values is
19:19the essential task of
19:20morality and therefore
19:21civilization.
19:23So, UPB's values are
19:26applicable to all
19:28creatures able to
19:29compare proposed
19:30actions to ideal
19:31standards, conceptually.
19:33And so, what do we
19:35say to kids?
19:35We say, well, how
19:36would you like it if
19:37someone did that to
19:37you?
19:38So, that's taking some
19:40sort of personal
19:41experience and trying to
19:42universalize it and so
19:43on, but then we ask
19:45them what is right and
19:46what is wrong.
19:47Our stealing is wrong.
19:48That's a uniquely human
19:49concept.
19:50In nature, stealing is
19:51de rigueur.
19:52It's how a lot of
19:53creatures get their
19:54resources.
19:55So, all life evolves
19:59out of violence,
20:01aggression, deception,
20:02and so on, and at
20:05some point we say, is
20:06this right or wrong?
20:07Is this good or bad?
20:08Moral or immoral?
20:10Good or evil?
20:11And it will be the
20:13same.
20:14UPB is the same all
20:15over.
20:16I mean, it's sort of
20:16like saying, would a
20:18different race of
20:20creatures somewhere else
20:21in the universe have
20:23different mathematical
20:24principles?
20:25No.
20:26Would they be dealing
20:26with different properties
20:27and behaviors of matter
20:28and energy?
20:29No.
20:29Those are universal
20:30across the universe.
20:32So, the non-aggression
20:33principle is a defiance
20:36of the immediate value
20:41of violence and the
20:42acquisition of resources.
20:43And so, they would have
20:45evolved out of violence
20:46and deception, and then
20:48at some point they would
20:48have to say that violence
20:49and deception are immoral
20:50from an ethical
20:51standpoint, and UPB would
20:53apply universally there.
20:54So, I don't think that
20:56there'd be any system of
20:56ethics that would be any
20:57different anywhere in the
20:58universe.
20:59All right, you said,
21:00it is my firm belief that
21:01illness often follows a
21:02lengthy period of feeling
21:03useless.
21:04Having a purpose, especially
21:05a moral purpose, keeps you
21:06healthy.
21:07Could you explain the
21:07physiology behind that
21:08first statement?
21:09I mostly agree with the
21:10second.
21:11Now, again, none of this
21:12is medical advice.
21:14This is just my amateur
21:15thoughts on the subject,
21:16of course.
21:18But, in life, stress is
21:22the Aristotelian me, right?
21:25If you have a stress-free
21:26life, then your brain
21:28generally tends to invent
21:29problems and you feel
21:30useless.
21:31If you have an overly
21:32stressful life, then that
21:34can cause you to become
21:35ill as well.
21:36And some examples for this
21:38would be that the data can
21:40be mixed in some areas, but
21:41there does seem to be a
21:43significant increase in the
21:44risks of sort of heart
21:45disease and stroke and
21:46other forms of serious
21:47illnesses, and 40% rise in
21:49the first short, fairly short
21:51period after a person
21:52retires.
21:53Now, of course, you
21:53could say, well, he's
21:54retiring because of health
21:55issues, but that's been
21:56controlled for to some
21:57degree.
21:58So, retirement leading to
22:01illness is kind of known
22:03about that.
22:03And from an evolutionary
22:04standpoint, let's say we
22:06have tribe A and tribe B.
22:09And from an evolutionary
22:09standpoint, tribe A has
22:13people who don't contribute
22:14anything.
22:16And through some genetic
22:17quirk, the people who don't
22:18contribute anything get sick
22:20and die.
22:21Tribe B has a bunch of
22:23people who don't contribute
22:24anything, who just keep on
22:26living and living.
22:27So, which tribe is going to
22:28grow more?
22:29Again, we're not talking
22:30right or wrong, we're just
22:31talking about sort of these
22:33raw Darwinian realities or
22:37absolutes.
22:38So, if you have a tribe where
22:41the people who don't really
22:42contribute anything just live
22:43on and on, and then you have
22:44a tribe where, through
22:45genetic quirks, people who
22:46don't contribute anything die
22:47off, then clearly the tribe
22:49which has people who die
22:50off, again, not through
22:52violence, but just through
22:52illness, people who die
22:54off, if they're not
22:56contributing anything,
22:57release resources to other
23:00people who are contributing
23:00things.
23:01I mean, I'm sure you've heard
23:02about the Inuits, formerly
23:04known as the Eskimos, that
23:06they will take their
23:07significant elderly, people
23:08who are too old and roomy
23:10and half-blind, and they
23:12will put them on a little
23:14ice flow and just sort of
23:15push them off into the
23:16cold, right, so that
23:17they'll join their
23:18ancestors and so on.
23:19And they do that because
23:20to provide resources, you
23:22know, and I'm talking when
23:23resources are very scarce
23:24and hard to win, providing
23:27resources to those who
23:28can't provide any value in
23:29return is negative for the
23:32long-term survival of a
23:34tribe in a state of scarcity,
23:35in a state of nature,
23:36particularly where it's very
23:37hard to get resources.
23:39So, if you have that as a
23:43sort of absolute, then we
23:44would expect that the tribes
23:45that succeed are the tribes
23:46where the useless don't last
23:49as long as the useful.
23:50And again, I'm not talking
23:51good or bad, right or wrong,
23:53just talking about sort of
23:54brutal Darwinian stuff.
23:56So, human beings who aim for
23:59a stress-free life are rarely
24:01happy.
24:01They feel that their life has
24:02no meaning, you know, just,
24:04what was it, Sandman used to
24:06say, you know, you can just
24:08retire and spend your time on
24:11the beach taking pictures of
24:13ladyboys or something like
24:14that.
24:14I used to say this many years
24:15ago.
24:16And, you know, sitting on the
24:17beach taking Polaroids of
24:18people, kind of gross, creepy,
24:20and weird, but it's not much
24:21of a life.
24:22And there is a sort of
24:24depression or a feeling of
24:26uselessness.
24:27I mean, and just
24:28evolutionarily speaking, we
24:30would expect that people who
24:31are useless would feel some
24:32prompt to start becoming
24:34useful because, again, an
24:36excess of people who aren't
24:39providing for creating
24:40anything in society leads to
24:42an expenditure of resources
24:44with no future, right?
24:46So, let's sort of take an
24:48example that there's somebody
24:50who kind of lies about and
24:51doesn't hunt and doesn't take
24:53care of anything or anyone,
24:54doesn't go get berries,
24:56doesn't ward off predators,
24:58doesn't build fences, it
24:58just doesn't, just lays us
24:59around all day.
25:01And then you also have a
25:02pregnant woman.
25:02Now, a pregnant woman isn't
25:03also hunting and doing all
25:04these, like, late-stage
25:05pregnancy.
25:06So, let's say that you only
25:07have one unit of food per
25:10day, right?
25:11Enough to keep someone doing
25:13okay, but, and you can only
25:16give food to either the guy
25:18who's lying around doing
25:19nothing and doesn't have any
25:21kids and doesn't hunt and
25:22doesn't fish and doesn't
25:23contribute, doesn't build,
25:24just lying around doing
25:25nothing.
25:25You can give it to him or you
25:28can give the food to the
25:28pregnant woman.
25:29What is best for the survival
25:31and flourishing of your
25:32tribe?
25:33Well, it's not to give food to
25:34the guy who's not doing
25:35anything.
25:35It is to give food to the
25:37pregnant woman.
25:38So, human beings in general
25:40do not feel good at a life of
25:45self-indulgence and not really
25:47doing much of anything.
25:48And the reason being is that if
25:50there was an evolutionary
25:52quirk that gave people a great
25:54sense of contentment and
25:55happiness and not doing
25:55anything, they would overburden
25:57their tribe's resources and
25:58their tribe would collapse and
25:59fail.
26:00So, you know, whether you like
26:02it or not, it doesn't really
26:03matter, but you will be happy
26:06when you produce things of
26:08value.
26:09And if you're a male in
26:10particular, you feel happy
26:12when you produce excess value
26:13because males are designed to
26:15turn over 90% of the value that
26:17they provide to a wife and
26:18children.
26:19That's how we're designed and
26:20that's how we evolved.
26:22And those who didn't feel that
26:23way didn't last or didn't, the
26:25tribes didn't last or the
26:27individuals didn't last.
26:28And so we're just not happy when
26:30we're selfish.
26:31And of course, some people
26:33will say, but I'm happy when
26:34I'm selfish.
26:34Yeah, for sure.
26:36But that's very much the
26:38exception and certainly not for
26:39the long run in general.
26:41And I'm old enough now, you
26:42know, again, I'm going to claim
26:43the age card, 60th year and
26:44all, that I've seen this.
26:47Sound like 60 urinal, 60th year
26:49and all.
26:51So, demoralized was the term from
26:54the other day by the year
26:55at Besmanov.
26:55Thank you for the person who
26:56saved me from that missing.
26:57So, you want to have a purpose
27:01in order to be happy.
27:03You need to produce and provide
27:05excess resources in order to be
27:07happy.
27:07You need to have a social group
27:09in order to be happy and you
27:10need to do things for others in
27:13order to be happy.
27:14That's just how our happiness
27:17systems have evolved.
27:19And again, there may be people
27:20who are the exception for sure,
27:22but they're not part of the
27:23general conversation about the
27:25general humanity, right?
27:27So, I think that if we feel
27:31useless and the most, the people
27:34I've known who've been the most
27:35useless in life, and again, I'm
27:38not, this is not scientific, but
27:39whatever, right?
27:40But the people who feel the most
27:41useless, who don't really
27:42contribute anything, who don't
27:43produce anything and so on, they
27:44tend to be kind of self-destructive,
27:46if not downright negative towards
27:49their own long-term survival, to
27:50put it mildly.
27:51They tend to take excessive risks.
27:52They tend to be kind of depressed.
27:54They tend to be, and especially
27:55as they age, right?
27:56So, you need a purpose, because
28:00that's how we've evolved, and
28:02that general, you don't want too
28:05little stress, because that makes
28:07you seek out self-destructive
28:08stimuli.
28:09You don't want too much stress,
28:10because that also causes health
28:11problems.
28:12So, I hope that makes sense.
28:13All right.
28:14Somebody says, ultimately, the left-right
28:16divide is equality versus freedom.
28:19Both are necessary for a society to
28:21function.
28:21What would be the best form of
28:22government to enact a sensible
28:24balance between the two?
28:24There is no sensible balance.
28:27You can go to my books, Everyday
28:30Anarchy and Practical Anarchy.
28:33So, the basic thesis of Everyday
28:36Anarchy is that we are surrounded
28:38by voluntary contracts that are
28:40unenforceable all the time.
28:42And if you look at influence
28:43peddling in the state, influence
28:44peddling, bribery, and so on, is
28:46illegal in most systems, certainly
28:48Western systems.
28:50You can't just give a bunch of
28:52money to a politician and get him
28:53to enact a law.
28:54I mean, that's illegal, right?
28:56It's a bribery.
28:57So, influence peddling is illegal,
29:00but we all know that influence
29:01peddling is how the system works.
29:05And so, the government runs on
29:08contracts that can't be enforced by
29:09the government, which is how I know
29:11we don't need the government to
29:12enforce contracts.
29:13So, it's sort of an argument, Everyday
29:13Anarchy, that we see this happening
29:15all over the place all the time.
29:17We say, well, we've got to have a
29:17government to enforce contracts.
29:19It's like, but the government runs
29:20on contracts that not only can it
29:23not enforce, but it would be
29:24illegal to try to enforce.
29:26So, and that's how we know we
29:27know.
29:27I mean, if the government runs on
29:29unenforceable contracts, then we
29:32know that we don't need the
29:33government to enforce contracts.
29:34There are other better mechanics
29:35to do that.
29:36So, all right.
29:37So, check that out.
29:39Could exile be a legitimate
29:40nonviolent extension of shunning when
29:42an individual persistently breaks
29:43a social contract?
29:44Sure.
29:45Sure.
29:45Yeah.
29:45And I talk about this in my novel,
29:47The Future, freedoman.com slash
29:49books.
29:50Check it out.
29:51The, uh, Louis Staten.
29:52So, yeah, exile is the way to go,
29:54for sure.
29:55If all property is privately owned
29:57in a stateless society, then if
29:59nobody wants anybody to be on
30:00their property, they can't be on
30:01anyone's property and they can be
30:03kicked out of the society.
30:04All right.
30:05So, yes.
30:06Very good.
30:07A proposition, says someone.
30:09Hard determinism is true.
30:12Our belief in agency is the veil
30:14that separates from a non-dual,
30:15quote, enlightened understanding
30:17and perception of reality.
30:19Well, but philosophical
30:21contradictions need to be resolved.
30:24So, this is sort of the noble lie
30:27that Plato talks about in The Republic,
30:30which is, uh, you make up this
30:32society of gold, silver, and bronze
30:34people, and it's not true, but it's
30:36a noble lie that's necessary for the
30:37functioning of society.
30:38Uh, no.
30:39There's no nobility in lying.
30:40So, if we have no choice, if we are
30:44just flesh-and-atom robots grinding
30:48down the train tracks of
30:49inevitability, then that is a fact.
30:53But I will never know that fact, and
30:56you will never know that fact, because
30:57anybody who discovers that fact would
30:59never bother arguing with anyone.
31:01So, let's say that somebody has
31:02discovered that this is true.
31:03Well, you and I will never hear of
31:04it, because to accept that something
31:06is true means that there's no point
31:08debating anything.
31:08And so, you don't debate with the
31:11TV, right?
31:12You don't debate with your computer.
31:14You don't debate with a robot.
31:15You don't debate with a microwave.
31:17Because they are mechanistic devices.
31:20So, if you accept that a human being
31:22is indistinguishable from a television
31:24set, a television set has inputs,
31:27you can talk to it.
31:28It has output, sound, and video.
31:30And so, if you accept that human
31:32beings are just the same as a
31:34television set, then you would no
31:36more debate with a human being than
31:37you would with a television set.
31:39I mean, most of us have this sort
31:40of theory that when we're very
31:41young, that the characters in the
31:43television set are sort of real and
31:44alive, and you could maybe talk to
31:46them, or, you know, something like
31:47that.
31:48And, of course, you can see people in
31:50movie theaters, if somebody's going
31:52down a dark alley, like, no, no, no,
31:53turn back, right?
31:55I mean, they're just kind of joking
31:56for the most part, but we sort of
31:57outgrow that stuff, and we realize
31:59that it doesn't matter what we say to
32:00the character in the movie.
32:02The movie's already been shot, ending
32:03is assured, right?
32:06So, we can't say that human beings
32:09are exactly the same as everything
32:10else in the universe, but I'm only
32:12going to debate with human beings,
32:14because to debate with, and to try and
32:15change the mind of anything else
32:16would be insane.
32:17There's no point trying to talk a
32:19raspberry bush into putting forth
32:20strawberries, but I will try and
32:22change someone's mind, right?
32:23So, the moment you debate with
32:24someone, you're accepting that
32:25they're fundamentally different from
32:26everything else in the universe,
32:28therefore you can't say that
32:29hard determinism applies to them as
32:30well.
32:30So, we'll never know.
32:32All right.
32:33I mean, I know, because when
32:35people debate with me.
32:36So, ideas, somebody else writes,
32:38ideas of the supernatural rule out
32:40the possibility of materialism,
32:41since they, one, should be
32:43inexplicable in observed nature,
32:46and two, are irreducible in
32:47quality, and three, cannot be
32:49created ex nihilo.
32:51Either we experience the
32:52supernatural or our mind is part
32:53immaterial.
32:55So, supernatural just means
32:57contradictory.
32:58That's all it means.
32:59And contradictory entities
33:00cannot exist as per reality,
33:03as per Aristotle's laws of
33:05physics, as per sense data,
33:08and reason, and evidence, and
33:11science, right?
33:12Contradictory, a square circle
33:13cannot exist.
33:14Contradictory entities cannot
33:15exist.
33:16You cannot have consciousness
33:17without matter.
33:19It's like saying there's a
33:20shadow with nothing to block
33:21the light.
33:22So, you cannot have
33:22consciousness without matter.
33:25Consciousness is an effect of
33:27the material mind.
33:29The mind is an effect of the
33:30brain.
33:30In other words, consciousness
33:31is an effect of the physical
33:32brain.
33:33So, saying that there's
33:34immaterial consciousness is
33:35simply saying that there's a
33:36shadow without anything
33:38blocking the light, or there's
33:39a square circle.
33:39It's like, no, no, there
33:40isn't.
33:41There's just not.
33:42There's just not.
33:42So, I'm sorry, there's just
33:44not.
33:44It's like, well, no, it's a
33:45self-contradictory entity.
33:47Like, if I say square circles
33:48can't exist, and you say,
33:49prove it, I'd be like, I don't
33:50know what to say.
33:51Square circles are
33:52self-contradictory
33:53entities.
33:53And therefore, consciousness
33:55without matter is a
33:58contradictory entity.
33:59So, a supernatural simply
34:01means, in fact, without
34:02cause, self-contradiction, and
34:05these things are invalid and
34:06can be dismissed.
34:07Do you have any thoughts on
34:09Taoism?
34:10Yeah, I've talked about this
34:11kind of stuff in my History of
34:12Philosopher series, which for
34:13this weekend, FDR, sorry,
34:16FDRURL.com slash gift.
34:18All right, somebody says,
34:21I was pushed into marriage
34:22at 18 by the Baptist couple
34:24that, quote, adopted me in
34:26high school.
34:27They were so afraid I'd
34:28embarrass them by having
34:28premarital sex or something,
34:30but they also wanted me to be
34:31college educated before having
34:32kids.
34:33We didn't make it through
34:34college together, and I was
34:35divorced and devastated at
34:3621 when they, quote,
34:37disowned me.
34:38I'm sorry about that, by the
34:39way.
34:40I went on to graduate, got a
34:41great job, and proved to
34:42everybody, as if that matters,
34:43that I was a success,
34:45regardless of being raised in
34:46the underworld.
34:47Fast forward to turning 30,
34:49biological clock, fear of
34:51missing out, all my friends
34:51having babies.
34:53I married the guy, the next
34:54guy that seemed to have it
34:55together, and I ended up a
34:57single mom of two for the
34:58next 14 years.
34:59Wow.
35:00All this sounds so
35:01degenerate, and it's hard to
35:01admit, but I'm married to a,
35:04quote, good man now that my
35:05kids love, and I think it's
35:07been good for them to have a,
35:09quote, dad finally, even
35:10though I did everything wrong.
35:11My philosophical question is,
35:13after making so many
35:14mistakes, can I be useful,
35:15can I be useful now to help
35:16others not make the same
35:17mistakes, or should I just
35:18shut up forever?
35:19I'm very sorry about all of
35:21that, for sure, and it's very
35:21sad and tragic, and you have
35:23my deepest sympathies.
35:24But yeah, I mean, be honest
35:25about your mistakes.
35:26I've been honest about the
35:27things that I've done wrong
35:28in my life, and I've tried to
35:29help people avoid the
35:30mistakes that were imminent to
35:31me, so yes, for sure, you
35:32should talk about these
35:33things.
35:34All right, somebody writes,
35:35if God warns us not to do
35:37something, but gave us free
35:39will to disobey, was it always
35:40his plan for man to dissent?
35:42Well, so genuine free will
35:44means that you don't
35:45interfere, and God does
35:47interfere by giving rules and
35:48having miracles, and his son
35:49coming, getting crucified, and
35:50so on.
35:51So, a genuine free will would
35:53be to not have God come down
35:56and intervene and interfere,
35:58right?
35:59I mean, you can't say to a rat
36:01in a maze, you can go wherever
36:02you want, then make the rat
36:03really hungry and put smelly
36:06cheese at one end of the rat
36:06desperately wants to get,
36:07right?
36:07Because then you're
36:08interfering.
36:08You can't say, well, you can
36:09go wherever you want, but
36:10here's the cheese, right?
36:11Or you can't say, you can go
36:13wherever you want, but I'm
36:14going to open and close
36:15various gates, right?
36:16That's not really free will.
36:18The issue, of course, with
36:20free will and God is that God
36:22is all-knowing, and because
36:24God is all-knowing, God knows
36:26what we're doing tomorrow.
36:28God knows what we're doing
36:29five years from now, ten years
36:30from now, fifty years from
36:31now.
36:31God knows exactly what we're
36:32doing down to the last
36:33atomic detail, and if you know
36:35in advance what people are
36:38going to do, do they have
36:39free will?
36:39Now, you can say, well, God is
36:41outside of time, but just
36:42removing standards doesn't
36:43solve the problem, right?
36:44I can't say two and two makes
36:45five, and then if you say, no,
36:47it doesn't, say, no, no, no,
36:48this is outside of math.
36:49It's like all-knowledge
36:50omniscience means knowing
36:52everything past, present,
36:53and future.
36:53So that's the big issue.
36:55All right.
36:56Are hedonistic people truly
36:57happy, or is the happiness
36:58theory, they seem to feel
37:00just an illusion?
37:01Well, hedonistic people are
37:02happy in the short run.
37:04I mean, if you, I don't know,
37:05inject heroin in between your
37:06toes, then you are happy in
37:10the short run, for sure.
37:11If you have a challenging
37:14educational path ahead of you
37:16to get what you want, but
37:18instead you win the lottery
37:19and don't have to do any of
37:21that, you feel a certain
37:22amount of relief, right?
37:23And so on.
37:23So hedonistic people are
37:26happier in the short run.
37:28And I'm not like, I'm not
37:30like hedonism is always bad.
37:31Hedonism is when you do
37:32things for the pleasure of
37:33doing them.
37:34And that's fine.
37:36I like that feeling after I
37:38work out.
37:38It's hedonistic.
37:39I like the muscle burn.
37:40I like the feeling after I
37:41work out.
37:42So there's a certain amount
37:44of hedonism and a certain
37:45amount of moralizing that we
37:46have to do in life.
37:47If we're just ascetic and
37:48moral and self-sacrificial,
37:50then we're usually too
37:51miserable to be able to sell
37:52morality to anyone, so to
37:53speak.
37:54And you do need to be able to
37:55get other people to believe
37:57what you believe.
37:58And you can do that to some
37:59degree with reason and
38:00evidence, but to a larger
38:01degree, it also needs to be,
38:03you have to have the kind of
38:04life that people might
38:04actually want to have,
38:05right?
38:05I mean, if you're a personal
38:07trainer, you've got to have
38:08muscles and abs, and that
38:10will give you credibility,
38:12right?
38:12So, hedonism is fine, it's
38:15just not a foundational
38:16principle for your whole
38:17life.
38:18You can't just do whatever
38:19you feel like doing and
38:21expect to be happy, because
38:23we have to live according to
38:25our nature, and our nature
38:26gives us a reason and morals
38:28and the capacity to defer
38:29gratification, and that is
38:31the essence of humanity.
38:33I don't think there are too
38:34many creatures.
38:34That would succeed the
38:36marshmallow test, like take
38:37one marshmallow now, or
38:39I'll give you two in 15
38:40minutes, right?
38:41So, human beings have the
38:42ability to compare proposed
38:43actions to ideal standards
38:44to defer gratification and
38:45to seek the greater good
38:47rather than simply the
38:49material, physical,
38:51sensual pleasures in the
38:52moment.
38:53And again, there's nothing
38:53wrong with physical,
38:54material, sensual pleasures.
38:55I'm not an aesthetic, but it
38:57should not be the
38:57foundation or purpose of
38:59your life.
39:00Question, how do you get a
39:01philosophy graduate off your
39:03porch?
39:03Will you thank him for the
39:04pizza?
39:05That's very funny.
39:07Somebody writes, if the
39:08Communist Control Act of
39:091954, 50 U.S.C.
39:12841 to 844, declares that
39:14communism is both a
39:15political conspiracy and a
39:16clear and present danger,
39:17then where does the line
39:18fall between protecting
39:19liberty and destroying it in
39:20the name of protection?
39:22Well, communism generally,
39:25or malevolent ideologies,
39:28worm their way into existing
39:29power structures and use them
39:31against you?
39:32I mean, would you take a gun
39:33out if you knew for certain
39:35that the criminal who was
39:37unarmed was going to wrestle
39:38it from you and use it
39:39against you?
39:39No, right?
39:40Because then your gun would be
39:41a danger.
39:42And generally, the
39:43protectionistic devices that
39:45we put in place to keep us
39:46safe are taken over by the
39:48worst people among us and
39:48used against us, and so on.
39:50So you simply have to keep
39:53advocating for more and more
39:54freedom, and with more and
39:56more freedom, you get fewer and
39:57fewer avenues for tyrants to
39:58take you over.
40:00Why does the education
40:01system persist, despite how
40:03fast everyone outside of it
40:04is learning things?
40:05Oh, because it's shielded by
40:06state power.
40:08The epigenetic question, does
40:10the experience of past
40:11generations translate into
40:12the lived experience?
40:13Yes.
40:14So significant trauma
40:16changes genetics, and so the
40:18trauma is transmitted to the
40:19children both in terms of the
40:21environment and in terms of
40:22the genetics, which is why
40:24trauma against people is so
40:26bad, just sort of rewiring
40:27their genetics to some
40:28degree, right?
40:30If energy is the foundation
40:31of all reality, if you look
40:33deep enough, all matter can
40:34be expressed as energy, and
40:36energy is a quasi-metaphysical
40:37concept that operates within
40:39physical contextual framing
40:40and parameters, does that
40:41imply that energy is a
40:43metaphysical concept, and thus
40:44all of physical reality is a
40:46branch of metaphysics?
40:48I'm not sure what you mean by
40:50energy is a quasi-metaphysical
40:51concept.
40:52No.
40:53Concepts exist in the human
40:54mind, not out there in
40:55reality, right?
40:56You can look at a bunch of
40:56trees and say, that's a
40:57forest.
40:58The concept forest exists
41:00within your mind.
41:01It does not move like a ghost
41:03or a spider web, uniting all
41:05the trees in some exterior
41:06fashion.
41:08I'm not a Platonist.
41:09I'm actually anti-Platonism.
41:12Concepts exist only in the mind,
41:14and the accuracy of concepts is
41:16determined by the validity of
41:18the relationship between the
41:19concept and that which it
41:20describes.
41:21So if you say, a forest is a
41:23group of trees, and then you
41:24say, but it also includes a
41:26cloud, fog, and a moose, well
41:28then, you have incorrectly
41:30put things together.
41:31If you look at a herd of
41:33caribou, and you say, that's a
41:36forest, you say, well, the
41:37forest is defined as a
41:38collection of trees, that's
41:39caribou, so you're incorrect,
41:40right?
41:40And you wouldn't say, that's a
41:42herd of trees, and call it a
41:44forest, right?
41:45A herd moves, a forest does not.
41:47So, all right, so, except
41:50outside of Macbeth, so energy
41:54is not something, so energy is
41:57something that exists in the
41:58universe, and we have the
41:59concept energy which exists in
42:00our mind, and so do not mistake
42:03the concept for the thing
42:04itself.
42:05Does intrinsic or objective
42:07value exist?
42:09Well, again, intrinsic, objective,
42:11and value are all concepts within
42:13the mind.
42:14They do not exist, except as
42:15ideas within the mind.
42:17They do not exist out there.
42:20So, no.
42:21Now, just because something
42:22doesn't exist out there in the
42:24universe doesn't mean that
42:25everything is therefore
42:26subjective and part of a
42:28whim-based thing.
42:30So, if you say, two coconuts
42:32and two coconuts make four
42:34coconuts, two and two make four,
42:36doesn't exist out there in the
42:37world.
42:37There's no number two.
42:39You put the two coconuts
42:40together and their atomic
42:41structure changes to mirror the
42:43number two.
42:44No, there's still two individual
42:45coconuts, but two and two make
42:48four is not subjective.
42:50It doesn't exist.
42:50Like, the math equation doesn't
42:52exist out there in the world.
42:53Right?
42:54E equals mc squared, but carved
42:56into the nature of things is not
42:57the equation E equals mc squared.
42:59It's simply an accurate
42:59description of the relationship
43:01between matter and energy.
43:03So, the fact that things don't
43:05exist out there in the world
43:06doesn't mean that they're
43:07subjective, but no intrinsic
43:09objective value.
43:10Like, if I'm dying of thirst,
43:12then a bottle of water has
43:13great value to me.
43:14But the value doesn't exist
43:15in the water.
43:16It exists in my mind and in my
43:17body and my yearning and my
43:18preferences.
43:19If I've just had three bottles
43:21of water, another bottle of
43:22water has very little value to
43:23me.
43:24In fact, it's probably a negative
43:25value.
43:25I don't want to carry it.
43:26I don't want to have it.
43:27I don't want to buy it.
43:27Right?
43:28I've just had three bottles of
43:28water.
43:29I'm fine.
43:29I'm not thirsty anymore.
43:31So, the bottle that I yearn for
43:32because I'm about to die of
43:34thirst, and the bottle that I
43:35don't want because I just had
43:37three bottles of water, that can
43:38be exactly the same bottle.
43:39Right?
43:39So, there's no yearning or
43:41non-yearning in the bottle.
43:43It's all in the mind, in the
43:44preferences, in the physiology.
43:46So, no, it doesn't exist in the
43:47object in which we desire.
43:50If it can be proven that we live
43:51in a simulation, how should we
43:53act?
43:54But, I'm going to go over this in
43:56my book, Essential Philosophy,
43:57EssentialPhilosophy.com.
43:59It's free.
43:59So, it can't be proven that we
44:01live in a simulation.
44:03And stop at that crap.
44:04Like, honestly, stop at that
44:05crap.
44:06Oh, it's a simulation matrix,
44:07blah, blah, blah.
44:08You are spreading a kind of
44:10mental illness, right?
44:11Because if you tempt people into
44:12thinking that they live in a
44:13simulation, then that's very
44:15dangerous to their sense of
44:16reality.
44:16And evil people don't believe
44:18that.
44:19They will take over.
44:21All right.
44:22Tangential to recent
44:23discussions, how about a
44:24classic?
44:25What is justice?
44:26What is revenge?
44:27So, justice is restoring a
44:31wrong to a state of
44:32equilibrium, right?
44:34So, justice is if somebody
44:35steals $100 from you, they
44:37give you $100 back at bare
44:39minimum, right?
44:39That's restoring things to a
44:41state of relative equilibrium
44:43and revenge.
44:46So, justice is restoring a wrong
44:48to a right that is just good
44:50enough, right?
44:51So, you don't want the
44:53restorative value to be hugely
44:55greater, right?
44:56Like, if somebody steals $100
44:58from you and then you say,
45:00well, the restitution of that is
45:01for you to give them a million
45:02dollars, then people will beg
45:03others to steal $100 from them
45:05to get the restitution of a
45:08million dollars, right?
45:09So, you want it to be just good
45:11enough that you're okay.
45:12You're not glad that it happened.
45:13You're not sad that it happened.
45:14It's fine.
45:14It's okay.
45:16It's even-steven, right?
45:17So, that's justice.
45:18Well, revenge is simply attacking
45:21back those who attack you.
45:23So, all right.
45:25Somebody says, I'm stuck in the
45:26fact that there is no evidence
45:28of God slash gods, but the idea
45:29that at some point matter just
45:31came into existence out of
45:32nothing is also equally
45:33unbelievable for me.
45:34And that's fine.
45:35That's an idle thought to while
45:37away a lazy Sunday afternoon,
45:39perhaps, but it doesn't matter.
45:41Honestly, it doesn't matter.
45:43But it doesn't matter because
45:44the purpose of morality is
45:47virtue, ethical behavior,
45:50morality.
45:51And so, where existence came
45:53from is immaterial to the fact
45:55that we must be pursuing good
45:58and thwarting evil in the
45:59present.
46:01And where the universe came
46:03from 15 billion years ago,
46:05whether it was a Big Bang or
46:06something else entirely,
46:07whether it expands and
46:08contracts, is absolutely
46:10immaterial to the good that you
46:11need to do in your life.
46:13And don't be distracted by,
46:14well, you know, I can't really
46:16go out and be good and
46:17promote virtue and thwart
46:18evildoers until I know where
46:20existence came from 15 billion
46:22years ago.
46:23That's, you know, this is all
46:26abstract ideas planted in your
46:27mind by evildoers so that they
46:29can do their nasty work
46:31unmolested.
46:32I mean, if you were dying of
46:34cancer, would you want your
46:35doctor to give you a cure for
46:36cancer or to say, well, I really
46:39can't focus on giving you the
46:41cure for cancer, even if I
46:42have one, like some pill that
46:43cures your cancer in some
46:44magic at work, right?
46:45So we say, just give me the
46:46cure for cancer.
46:47It's like, well, no, but I
46:48don't really know where matter
46:49and energy came from and 15
46:50billion years ago.
46:51And you'd be like, can you
46:52just, please, God, don't
46:54dither away worrying about
46:56what happened 15 billion years
46:57ago and don't give me the cure
46:59for cancer, right?
46:59So, all right.
47:02Is man inherently evil?
47:04How is a society kept together
47:06without absolute chaos?
47:07If man is inherently evil, is
47:09it a knowledge of a base
47:10morality within us as human
47:11beings?
47:12How do we know good from
47:12evil?
47:13Good from evil.
47:14So, evil is when you use the
47:17principles of virtue to
47:18undermine, harm, and destroy
47:20good people, right?
47:22So, if when you lie to other
47:26people, it's a noble lie, it's
47:28helpful propaganda, it's not
47:29even really a lie, and so on,
47:30and it's good, and you deny,
47:33right?
47:33So, you're saying lying is
47:34either not lying, or it's good,
47:35or it's necessary, or people
47:36need it, a noble lie, but then
47:38when someone lies to you,
47:39they're just an evil, filthy,
47:40pathological liar who needs to
47:41be harmed or destroyed, right?
47:43So, if when you're in power, you
47:45persecute your political
47:45enemies, and then you lose
47:46power, and then your political
47:48enemies come after you, and
47:49you say, well, that's just
47:50unjust and wrong and horrible
47:51and evil and unconstitutional
47:52and tyranny, and it's like,
47:54well, then you're evil because
47:55you are using your power to
47:59benefit your friends and harm
48:00your enemies, as political
48:01power tends to be used, but
48:02when other people do that,
48:03they're just evil and wrong
48:04and it's unconstitutional and
48:05so on, right?
48:05So, that's using the
48:07principles of virtue in order
48:08to harm, thwart, and destroy
48:09people who are trying to do
48:11some good, all right?
48:12Or even if they're not trying
48:12to do some good, they're still
48:13operating on the same
48:14principles that you did.
48:16Man is not inherently evil,
48:17for sure.
48:18I mean, people are generally
48:20how they're raised as a whole,
48:22right?
48:22So, if you're raised with
48:23peace and reason and virtue and
48:24courage and strength and
48:25honesty, then that generally,
48:27it's like saying, do people
48:29inherently speak English?
48:30It's like, well, no,
48:31language, morality is a kind of
48:33language and you teach it
48:34through peaceful parenting.
48:35And so, men inherently have a
48:38capacity to learn language.
48:39What language they learn
48:40depends on what language
48:41they're exposed to.
48:42And so, that's why I focus on
48:43peaceful parenting.
48:45What are your thoughts on
48:45music and its effect?
48:46Does it have an effect, for
48:47instance, listening to
48:48classical music versus
48:49hip-hop music?
48:50Sure, yeah, yeah, it does.
48:51I remember many years ago, my
48:53brother liked this song by
48:54Phil Collins.
48:56That's all, I think it's
48:57called.
48:58And it goes, just when I
48:59thought it was going all
49:00right, I found out I'm wrong
49:03when I thought I was right.
49:04It's always a shame, it's
49:05always the same, it's just a
49:06shame, that's all.
49:08You can say day, I'd say
49:09night, tell me I'm wrong when
49:10I know that I'm right.
49:11And so, that opening bit,
49:12right, da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da,
49:14just when I thought it was
49:15going all right, I found out I'm
49:16wrong when I thought I was
49:17right.
49:17That's not a great rhyming
49:18scheme.
49:19And that was worming its way
49:20into my brain and it was
49:21actually kind of eroding my
49:22confidence and I literally had
49:23to reprogram myself over a
49:26period of a couple of weeks
49:27and I reversed the lyrics.
49:28Just when I thought it was,
49:29just when I thought it was
49:30going all wrong, I've added
49:31them right when I thought I
49:32was wrong, right?
49:34It's always the same, it's
49:35not a shame, that's all.
49:36And I literally had to
49:37reprogram my brain because
49:38that repetition of, you
49:40know, I mean, Phil Collins
49:40has had, what, how many
49:41marriages and he couldn't
49:42even get his wife to leave
49:43his Florida mansion or
49:44something like, it's just
49:45wretched, wretched life in
49:46my view and drinking and
49:48he's wrecked his back and all
49:49that kind of stuff.
49:50So, and you can listen to
49:52the sort of ferocity of his
49:54song about his divorce.
49:58It's just a brutal and
50:00incredible song, you know,
50:03full of sort of foundational
50:05rage about his divorce and
50:08it's, you can tell everyone
50:11I'm a dumb disgrace, slander my
50:13name all over the place.
50:14I don't care anymore.
50:15It's just screaming at the
50:16top of his lungs.
50:16I don't care anymore.
50:17Just, and the drumming is
50:19fantastic.
50:19Very powerful stuff for sure,
50:21but it has a really negative
50:22effect.
50:23You know, when I was really
50:23down as a teen, you know,
50:25listening to side three of the
50:26wall every night before bed
50:27probably wasn't quite the
50:28right idea, but yes, so it
50:31does have a big, a big
50:32effect.
50:32Sense of life stuff and so
50:33on is really a powerful and
50:36important.
50:37So, all right, almost done.
50:39I appreciate it.
50:40Let's finish it up again.
50:41I really appreciate
50:41everyone's questions.
50:42Somebody says, the wife
50:43sets the tone.
50:44My wife sets the tone in our
50:45relationship as she clearly
50:46won't adjust her behavior.
50:47Should I let her set the tone
50:49and follow suit?
50:49So to speak, can you
50:50elaborate on the credo that
50:51you treat them as they treat
50:52you?
50:53Does this apply to my wife?
50:54If she won't adjust her
50:55behavior, well, then you
50:56chose somebody that you were
50:58going to have to adjust to
50:59and you did that because you
51:00had a mother, usually a
51:02mother, it could be a
51:02father.
51:03You had somebody raise you
51:04that you had to constantly
51:05adjust your behavior to and
51:06you could never expect them
51:07to adjust their behavior to
51:08you.
51:09So you're simply continuing
51:10that pattern, right?
51:12So the very sort of brief
51:14mechanics of it in the mind
51:16is this.
51:17So if your mother is kind of
51:18a narcissist and selfish and
51:19you constantly have to adapt
51:20to her behavior, she never
51:21adapts to your requests or
51:23preferences, then that's a
51:25standard she sets up.
51:26Now, if you come across a
51:28woman who is thoughtful and
51:31sensitive and adjusts to your
51:32behavior and is reciprocal and
51:34kind and all of that, then your
51:35mother is very unhappy because
51:37that kind of person will look at
51:38your mother and say, your mother
51:39treats you really badly.
51:40She doesn't.
51:41She's just selfish and expects
51:42you to conform to everything she
51:43wants and that's really bad.
51:44And so your mother doesn't want
51:46anyone like that around.
51:47And so when you meet someone who
51:49treats you as your mother
51:50treated you, then it's familiar
51:53and you know how to handle it
51:54and your deficiencies in skills
51:57of negotiation and assertiveness
51:59are not exposed and your
52:00mother is very keen on you
52:02marrying someone who's just
52:03like her so her power over you
52:04is not threatened and so on.
52:05So that's the mechanic of it.
52:09So, all right.
52:10I mean, some choices you make
52:11remove further choices, right?
52:13So how do you strike a balance
52:15between accepting others'
52:16imperfections versus holding
52:17others to a certain standard in
52:18business and or personal
52:19relationships?
52:20Well, of course, we all have
52:22our imperfections.
52:23So you're not accepting
52:24other people's imperfections.
52:25You're asking them also to
52:26accept your imperfections.
52:27So there are small imperfections
52:29of habits which are fine,
52:31but there are moral
52:33corruptions that are not fine.
52:36Right?
52:36So if I am
52:39roaming around the house singing
52:41and it turns out someone is in
52:43the house who is napping,
52:44I'm so sorry.
52:45I didn't mean to.
52:46It's not, you know, I don't
52:47sort of sit there and sing in
52:48their ears when they're trying
52:49to, you don't care anymore.
52:51I don't care anymore.
52:52You don't sort of sit there
52:53and I don't do that, of course.
52:54But, you know, there'll be times
52:55when I, you know, if I forget
52:58to turn off some electronic
53:00device once in a while and
53:01there's a bink and a beep and
53:03a burp at night and it wakes up
53:04my wife.
53:04I mean, that's, you know, but,
53:05you know, so these are
53:06imperfections, but I don't sort
53:08of, I'm not angry at my wife
53:10and then, you know, play the
53:12Soviet anthem oversampled in
53:14full Bluetooth speakers by her bed
53:15because that would be a form
53:17of assault in a way.
53:17So, you know, the occasional
53:20carelessnesses and thoughtlessnesses
53:22and so on or accidents or mistakes,
53:23those are all fine, but any sort
53:25of persistent pattern of negative
53:27or destructive behavior is
53:28pathological and harmful and
53:30corrupt and possibly evil as well.
53:32So, it's fine.
53:34People will forget things.
53:35People are late from time to time.
53:37But if there is corruption that
53:40is not even admitted to, then that
53:42is something that I would not
53:44sustain in a relationship and
53:46wouldn't have someone like that
53:47in my life over time.
53:49All right.
53:50I hope that helps.
53:51FreeDemand.com slash donate
53:52to help out the show.
53:54I really do appreciate that.
53:55Thank you for all these great
53:55questions.
53:56Sorry for the ones I missed and
53:58lots of love from up here.
53:59I'll talk to you soon.
54:00Bye.
54:00Bye.
54:00Bye.
54:00Bye.
54:00Bye.
54:00Bye.
54:00Bye.
54:01Bye.
54:01Bye.
54:01Bye.
54:01Bye.
54:01Bye.
54:01Bye.
54:01Bye.
54:01Bye.
54:01Bye.
54:01Bye.
54:01Bye.
54:01Bye.
54:01Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
54:02Bye.
Recommended
1:00
|
Up next
1:43:04
2:17:44
1:13:12
1:53:37
2:28:37
16:34
1:41:57
51:16
31:26
25:58
36:30
1:27:47
39:50
36:45
16:53
43:59
13:25
Be the first to comment