Friends with Evil!?! Sophistry Unpacked

Stefan Molyneux

Stefan Molyneux reviews an X post where Robby Soave talks about maintaining friendships with people convicted of crimes. Stefan points out the risks of moral relativism, citing Jeffrey Epstein as an example to underline the value of carefully assessing ethical obligations in those relationships.  See Freddie Sayers's interview with Robby Soave here: https://x.com/freddiesayers/status/2021958470556430384  GET FREEDOMAIN MERCH! https://shop.freedomain.com/  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/UPB2025

Transcript

00:00All right. Hi, everybody. This is Stefan Molyneux from FreeDomain of FreeDomain.com,

00:04and we're going to check in to an almost perfectly encapsulated Patrick Bateman style of sophistry.

00:15We're going to go through this piece by piece to show you how philosophy is absolutely necessary

00:21to defend you against this kind of corruption. All right. Well, I'm not convinced by the principle

00:26that you need to cease all correspondence with or friendship with someone convicted of a crime.

00:34Okay. So, I'm not convinced. I don't know why his eyes are going in different directions,

00:38but that's neither here nor there. So, he says, I'm not convinced by the principle,

00:43and it's this sort of droll, dead-eyed voice that is sort of taken on with this kind of stuff.

00:52So, let's just do this first sentence. I'm not convinced by the principle. Okay. So,

01:02whether someone is convinced or not is irrelevant, absolutely irrelevant to a moral principle.

01:10So, whether you're convinced, I'm not convinced by the proposition that two and two make four. I'm

01:16not convinced by the opposite angle theorem or the triangle inequality relation. So, when you start

01:23with I'm, I'm like, who are you? The standard truth? You're the standard of reality? You're the

01:28standard of fact? Who would care at all whether you are or not convinced? So, when somebody starts

01:36with I, this is pure narcissism to me, right? It's just my amateur opinion. It's just pure

01:41narcissism. I'm not convinced. Why would anybody want to bother convincing you? People make an

01:49argument. Why would you care about whether people are convinced by you or not? And furthermore,

01:57why would you think anyone else who has half a brain cell to ignite a spark or two of thought

02:03would

02:03care whether you're convinced or not by anything? People who start off moral arguments with I,

02:09maybe I, I this, I that, I, it's bah! How about you examine the principle? So,

02:16I'm not convinced by the principle that you need to cease all correspondence with or friendship with

02:22someone convicted of a crime. Okay. I don't know. I don't know. It depends what the crime is. It

02:36it depends whether the prosecution is just or unjust. It depends on a whole bunch of things.

02:46Alexander Solzhenitsyn was convicted of a crime and spent, what, years and years in a gulag.

02:55For most people, of course, the fact that Nelson Mandela spent 25 plus years in prison was irrelevant.

03:03So, it depends what kind of crime, whether it's severe or unsevere. Oh, no, I got convicted for

03:09trespassing or failure to yield in traffic or I don't know, whatever, right? So, you can't say that

03:15all crimes are the same and you also have to figure out whether or not the crime or the prosecution

03:23was

03:23justified or unjustified. There are certainly people who are persecuted by governments all the time

03:28for wrong think or negative things. And so, there's no definition here at all, right? And it's just

03:36anyone, and this is sophistry, right? This is sophistry. So, he's talking about Jeffrey Epstein,

03:44of course. So, let's be clear. Let's be clear about what's being talked about here. Jeffrey Epstein

03:49was convicted in 2008 in Florida State Court of procuring a person under 18 for prostitution

03:55and solicitation of prostitution. He received an 18-month sentence with work release as part of a

04:00controversial plea deal that were, in fact, over 30 complainants. So, a person under 18 would be

04:06called a child legally. That is a child. So, he procured a child for prostitution and solicitation

04:13of prostitution. Okay, that's not a little crime, and he was not unjustly prosecuted. I think that it was

04:21way too light a sentence, but, you know, that's, you know, he belongs to intelligence, whatever it is,

04:24right? And, of course, he was married to Ghislaine Maxwell. Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted in 2021

04:31in federal court on five counts. Sex trafficking of a minor, transporting a minor for illegal sexual

04:38activity, and three related conspiracy charges she was sentenced to, 20 years in prison in 2022.

04:47So, when they say minor, so sex trafficking of a child, transporting a child for illegal sexual

04:51activity. And these are not little crimes at all. And they were not unjustly prosecuted. I mean,

05:02according to anything that I've ever heard or read about. So, putting this out of the blanket of all

05:09crime, all crime, all crime, I mean, somebody who was, who shoplifted when they were a teen, right? They took

05:21a

05:21dare, they shoplifted, they took a candy bar. Must you disassociate yourself from all of these, right? All of these

05:27sorts of people. Somebody who had some sort of wrangle with the tax authorities and so on. So, you're taking

05:33this

05:33rubric of all crime, and cutting off everyone for any crime conviction. That is your sophistry 101. So,

05:44all correspondence with, or friendship with, someone convicted of a crime. First of all, the ethics of

05:51that, I think, are dubious. Okay. So, again, I think I'm, I'm not convicted. I think these ethics are

05:58dubious. What does that mean? Who cares what you think? Make your case. But starting off with, I

06:05disapprove. I think this is dubious. I'm not convinced. Who the living frack are you that anybody should

06:11want to convince you of anything? Or how are you some sort of crumb-like standard of truth, reality, proof,

06:17and virtue? A lot of religious Christians are joining the fray in this argument, but friendship is

06:23supposed to be a virtue. Okay. So, friendship is supposed to be virtue. So, this guy is very,

06:28very interested in virtue. In virtue. Royalty is supposed to look after people in trouble.

06:37Okay. So, you're supposed to look after people in trouble. Well, this is portraying someone as in

06:45trouble. Like, I'm in trouble. Some guy's picking on me in a bar. I need you to cover my back

06:49as I

06:49battle my way to the exit. Right? So, this is all just this amazing, slippery redefinition of virtue.

06:58Friendship and loyalty and standing up for and standing by people in trouble. Okay. So,

07:05how would this not apply to organized fucking crime? Sopranos, mafia, whatever. How is this not

07:12supposed to? You've got to stand by people who are convicted of crime, which means, oh, murder,

07:17means a vow of silence. It means you take care of the hitman's wife and children, and you make sure

07:24that you don't testify against him. So, friendship is supposed to be a virtue, and loyalty and standing

07:31by people in trouble. How does this not justify criminal collusion, avoiding testifying, or in an

07:39extreme case, rubbing out a witness? Your loyalty is supposed to look after people in trouble. I

07:45certainly feel like members of my family or close friends who were convicted of terrible crimes I

07:50would still want to stay in touch with, if I need to help them and make sure that they were

07:57surviving

07:57and going through the ordeal as best they could. So, this, of course, if his friends or his family,

08:06if somebody, a friend, a family member, was convicted of a terrible crime, in other words,

08:12the sexual exploitation and trafficking of children, that you would, oh, I want to help them,

08:21you know, go through things, I want to give them support, and so on. Why? Because, you see,

08:28taking care of people who are in trouble is a plus. Now, of course, the sexual exploitation of children

08:34is distinctly not taking care of people who are in trouble, i.e., the lost wayward youths who are

08:42being exploited for a couple of hundred bucks at best. So, you see, this is the principle. Taking

08:48care of people in trouble is good. Okay, so let's say that taking care of people in trouble is good.

08:54Therefore, it's bad to not take care of people who are in trouble, which means sexually exploiting

09:00vulnerable children would be bad, right? So, this is the selective application of principle,

09:06and it's absolutely repulsive. I got to tell you, this is skin-crawling stuff to me. You know,

09:11I don't mean to make it about me. I'm just giving you my honest experience. Going through an ordeal.

09:17It's just an ordeal. You see, if you sexually exploit children, you're just going through an ordeal.

09:22Sure that they were surviving and going through the ordeal as best they could. So, I think it's quite a

09:28dangerous new principle that is coming out, which... Ah, you see, now he's very interested in things

09:35that are dangerous. Oh, my gosh. Things that are dangerous are so important, because things that

09:43are dangerous, you see, are really bad. So, for instance, you could argue that preying upon

09:49vulnerable children for purposes of sexual exploitation, well, that is really dangerous, right?

10:01So, this guy, his spider sense is tingling, his radar is just right out there for things that are

10:09dangerous. You've got to be careful of things that are dangerous. And there's a principle called

10:13standing up with child sex exploiters, standing up to them, if you don't do that, well, that's really

10:21dangerous. Apparently, the danger that was inflicted by these monsters on actual children,

10:27that danger is irrelevant. What matters is the dangerous principle of not standing tall and by

10:33and providing endless amounts of material, emotional, and perhaps financial support to child

10:40sex predators. Ah, you know, anyway. It's that if you are friends with or know someone convicted of

10:47a bad crime, you are somehow culpable or guilty of said crime by continuing to have any kind of

10:54connection to them. Okay. So, let's go back to this, right? Let's go back. So, people say somehow

11:02as if, uh, as if it's incomprehensible. Like, somehow, it's somehow, it's that, right? So, uh,

11:10somehow is just a sophist word, right? So, if you are friends with or know someone convicted of a bad

11:16crime, convicted of a bad crime, you are somehow culpable or guilty of said crime by, uh, no,

11:22you are not culpable or guilty of said crime. Nobody is saying that anybody who remained friends

11:29with Jeffrey Epstein after his conviction in 2008, right? A decade plus before he died. Nobody's

11:40saying that if you continue to be friends with Jeffrey Epstein after he was convicted of procuring

11:45a child for prostitution and solicitation of prostitution with regards to that child. Nobody's

11:51saying that you should go to jail and receive the same sentence. So, no, what we're saying, what any

11:58sane human being is saying is that you cannot claim to be a good person and pal around with convicted

12:05child sex exploiters, traffickers, and offenders. That's what people are saying. Now, it's one thing

12:13if Jeffrey Epstein were to have said, oh my gosh, I am the worst Satan spawn that matter has ever

12:21assembled. Uh, I am going to, uh, I have found virtue. I found Jesus. I found morality. Okay. That's a

12:28little, little, little unlikely, but let's say Jeffrey Epstein got out of prison and he was like,

12:32oh my gosh, I have to pour my efforts and energies into providing restitution for my victims. I have

12:41to set up foundations and, uh, advertisements and raise public awareness of childhood sexual

12:49exploitation. I have to stop doing bad things. I have to reform myself and I'm going to do everything

12:55in my power to make up for the evils that I did for many decades. And that's, right, that, that's,

13:05that's a whole different matter. That's a whole different matter. Or, of course, if the people in

13:10constant communication with Jeffrey Epstein were saying, uh, Jeffrey, I'm concerned that you are

13:16still not taking full responsibility for the crimes that you did. I'm concerned that you're still fighting

13:21with the victims. I'm concerned that you're not releasing all the information that you have about

13:26dangerous actors and players on the world stage. So you're still a pretty fucking bad guy.

13:34You're still evil. You did evil. You got convicted from evil and you're still evil and you're still

13:41promoting evil and you're still refusing to take responsibility. That's a different matter.

13:47Look, we've all made mistakes. Okay. Maybe not Epstein, Maxwell mistakes, but we've all made

13:53mistakes and we are supposed to accept our mistakes, own our mistakes, apologize for our mistakes.

14:00And then we're supposed to try and live a better life and make up for our mistakes and blah, blah,

14:05blah, blah, blah. Right. So that's, so I don't, I don't understand. Let's go back a little bit.

14:11If you're friends with or know someone convicted of a bad crime. Okay. That's not the issue is okay.

14:17Convicted of a bad crime is one thing. If the person reforms and does great virtue and amends

14:23their ways and tries as best they can to make restitution for the terrible evils that they've

14:27done, that's a different matter. So if someone is convicted of a bad crime, fights it tooth and nail,

14:35right? Jeffrey Epstein fought tooth and nail for any, against any kind of punishment,

14:40which is how he ended up with this absolutely repulsive, never run past the victims,

14:44sweetheart plea deal. So he did not take responsibility. He did not take ownership.

14:49He fought and fought and fought and took the minimum punishment and then continued on with his

14:56creepy, appalling ways going forward. So it's, it's not, it's not the matter if they've convicted,

15:06have they accepted moral responsibility? Have they worked to make restitution or do they feel

15:10still fight like crazy and are outraged that they were ever convicted?

15:14If you are friends with or know someone convicted of a bad crime, you are somehow culpable or guilty

15:21of said crime by continuing to have any kind of connection to them. It's, it's a new thing.

15:27Well, no. And that's also not the case either. Uh, I don't believe that Jeffrey Epstein's lawyers

15:33would be judged in horrible, negative ways just for continuing to have association with them. I assume

15:40he had accountants. I assume he leased office space and so on. So it's not anyone who has any kind

15:45of

15:46connection. It's the people who are asking him for favors and making jokes about his crimes and

15:51continuing to prop up and reward his repulsive ways because, because Jeffrey Epstein was unrepentant.

16:00He fought the charges like crazy. He fought the, uh, victims like crazy. Uh, he, he was unrepentant.

16:08I don't know if he ever said, uh, uh, I I've never seen it. Maybe he did. Uh, and I

16:12haven't seen it,

16:13but I never heard him say, uh, gee, I was really bad. Gee, I was really wrong. I think it's

16:17fair to

16:17say that Jelaine Maxwell was, was unrepentant. So it's not, this is entirely left out of the equation.

16:23And, and you, you, you can't, I guess, know how to button your shirt, a little bit open of the

16:29waist, scratchy, scratchy. Uh, you can't know how to button your shirt and, and not understand this

16:34and not understand this. Right. And that's the theory. I mean, I guess I'm not convinced by it.

16:39I guess I'm not convinced by it. Right. So again, this is a perfectly encapsulated chunk of

16:46sophistry, uh, people who have this drawling voice. Well, I suppose I'm just not convinced by

16:53this. And, and then when they completely straw man and misrepresent the entire argument, if you

16:58are enthusiastic, best buds with an unrepentant child, sexual predator convicted, uh, and, uh,

17:05continue, uh, to promote him and call him your best friend as Noam Chomsky and his wife did. And

17:10you're joking with him and you want to go visit his Island and, and you never bring up his crimes

17:15and

17:15you never say, have you repented? Are you sorry? So no, unrepentant, uh, evildoers. If you continue

17:21to associate them, you're a piece of scum. You are scum with the caveat that at least scum has

17:28some biological benefits in a pond. And so this level of sophistry is, uh, to me, it's just hiding

17:35a massively guilty conscience. We'll find out about that. Oh, maybe we won't. Freedomain.com slash

17:40if you'd like to help out my show. Appreciate that. Love you guys. Bye.

Category

Transcript

Comments

Recommended