Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

Oct. 6, 2013 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux

02:33:29

2501 Profit Driven Humans: Fact or Fiction? - Sunday Call In Show October 6th, 2013

Stefan Molyneux takes listener questions and discusses marrying somebody you have never met, seat belt safety, the falsehood of human beings being driven by only profit, the origin of learning disabilities, being judged by the company you keep, building a support system and dishonesty by omission.

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Okay, good morning everybody!
	Stefan Molyneux from Free Domain Radio, 6th of October, 2013.
	My goodness!
	From my birthday month, we moved to Halloween month, which some people might say should be the same month, but I will not agree with them.
	So, I think we have a very full deck of callers this morning, so enough with my ramble tangent intros.
	Mike, let's fire up the first brain cannon.
	Well, Steph, one thing first before we move on to the callers.
	Congratulations on 2,500 podcasts.
	We finally hit the number yesterday.
	Oh, did we really?
	2,500 podcasts?
	I feel both a mixture of pride and shame and embarrassment at that.
	Good, I think, that we're adding to the canon of Western and hopefully Eastern philosophy.
	I'm somewhat shameful at the amount of words that I can simply spew out.
	I'm like Old Faithful with no pauses.
	So that's good.
	I feel ambivalent about that.
	No, actually, I'm very...
	I'm very happy.
	I'm very proud of that.
	And I think the listenership of the audience and the people who've called in and the lovers and the haters of wisdom should all feel proud.
	We've all really contributed to make this thing fly so high.
	So thanks everyone so much.
	And that's good.
	And I will soon get back to my dreaded singing podcast.
	But I haven't really been able to do any over the summer because of the treatments for the cancer.
	The voice is starting to come back a little bit.
	It's a bit more Barry White.
	And I've all felt that I have put the white in Barry White.
	So we'll start doing a little bit more bass work.
	So that's fantastic.
	2,500 podcasts.
	How exciting.
	Don't forget to donate.
	FDRURL.com forward slash.
	I always appreciate that.
	And for those who want to know how the documentary is going, it's going well.
	We've started to layer in sound effects.
	The music is...
	We've sort of got placeholders for it, though it hasn't been specified in terms of where it starts and ends, although I've got good notes for that.
	And I will spend some time today recording some sound effects.
	And...
	Hopefully they'll work.
	I'm sure they will.
	So that's where things are.
	And thanks, everyone, for your patience.
	It is a lengthy process.
	That's what she said.
	So if we can move on to the caller, let's be.
	All right, Elik, you're up first today.
	Hi, Stefan.
	Good morning.
	I want to thank you in the first for your great podcasts and your willingness to couple which are topics like family relations and all of that.
	Thank you a lot.
	Thank you.
	Okay.
	I have two questions.
	They are about my relations with a girl from other country.
	I just tell about some details about me.
	I'm 28 years old.
	I'm in entrepreneurship.
	I'm dealing with entrepreneurship.
	I'm from Greece.
	And my girlfriend is from Morocco.
	Okay?
	She's an atheist.
	We meet on the internet.
	We know each other a couple of months, but we have a very strong love, very strong emotional contact, and I really feel that she's the love of my life.
	But we have two problems.
	The first is government bureaucracy, to deal with, to give to immigrants to my country.
	And the second is the distance between us.
	So I met her when she was in divorce, the process from her husband.
	Her husband is American.
	Okay, and sometimes I feel she can't divorce him in Morocco because it's very hard to divorce process in the Islamic law.
	So she wants to go to the US and do the divorce process there so she can divorce him, marry me, and come to my country.
	Okay?
	So my first problem is that I'm not sure our relationship is great, but I'm not sure.
	It's like I'm not sure how she's serious about our relationship because it's kind of she is doing an immigration visa to the US and it's kind of strange to me that she's not she's doing that way and she's a lot of times it's our When we talk,
	she really loves our love talk, love your kisses and all that, but she's not willing to tell the details from her life, and I'm not sure how she's really serious about this relationship, or just it's good for this time.
	Right.
	I'm not sure that I have a real question.
	My question is how I know that she is really serious like me in this topic.
	The second topic is how can I overcome the oldest government bureaucracy because, you know, if there was no government, she just can come to my country and live there.
	But as this is so complicated, we know we need to be here to divorce and we need to marry in some country with civil marriage and then she can immigrate to my country.
	So I want your advice, what you think about it.
	I want all kinds of these things.
	How long was she married to her previous husband?
	Two years.
	She was married to him for two years and how long has she separated?
	She's not, she didn't really visit the US. They just married in Morocco.
	And she's not like separated.
	She doesn't live, she doesn't never live to him.
	She doesn't complete the immigration visa.
	I'm sorry, I don't quite understand that.
	So, sorry, is she still living with her husband?
	She didn't live with him.
	She married him and she wanted to get an immigration visa to the US, but she still didn't get the immigration visa.
	So did she marry her husband with the intention of getting a visa?
	I don't think so.
	I think she loved him in the beginning, but she said that after they married, the love was gone away because she got to know him, a lot of details about him that he didn't tell her.
	And what were her complaints about her ex, her husband?
	What didn't she like about him?
	Okay, she said that he is...
	She said that he is not really atheist, he is Christian, and he doesn't say it well.
	She said that he is racist, he doesn't love blacks, and he is like crazy, he is like very, you know, like sometimes men are very...
	It's like property.
	They think that their woman is their property, and they didn't give her space.
	It's like very, you know, very property, very, look like property, doesn't give her space.
	And really, really, like she said to her that if they separate, he will suicide, all kind of this emotional, emotional, yeah.
	So she has very bad judgment in marrying this man, right?
	She made a very bad judgment.
	I mean he's codependent.
	He's racist.
	He's controlling.
	He's like he's really a low quality, to put it mildly, in fact probably quite a dangerous marriage partner, right?
	Yes, I guess it is like that.
	Well, if you say that you guess, it means that you're not sure and I'm happy to be corrected.
	Yes, she didn't see his character right.
	Maybe she just wanted to go from Morocco.
	But you're right.
	Yes, you're right.
	And the reason that I say that is that it's very important that you marry somebody...
	Who has good judgment.
	Because when you marry, I don't know if you've been married before, but when you marry, everything in your life comes together.
	Everything in your life gets merged together, gets compressed together.
	It's like pouring a colored water into clear water.
	You can't really separate your life.
	And if you get married to somebody Who has a really bad judgment, then you're getting on a rollercoaster ride, which is going to crash.
	Do you think that it is like...
	Maybe it is like one mistake.
	People don't mistake.
	It's really hard to...
	Yeah, no, no, absolutely.
	No, no, listen, sorry.
	Let me be clear.
	I'm not saying that therefore you can't marry someone who has...
	Who's made mistakes?
	Of course, I mean, we all make mistakes.
	So it's not that she's made a mistake.
	This is a very big mistake.
	I mean, it's a huge mistake to get married to, you know, a guy who threatens suicide if you're going to leave him, who's a racist, who's controlling, and there were a couple of other things I can't remember, but that's a really big mistake.
	And my question is, does she know why she made that enormous mistake?
	Has she processed it?
	Has she talked to a therapist?
	Has she explored self-knowledge?
	Has she really examined herself to figure out why she made such an enormous mistake?
	It's like if I say, hey, let's get into business together, you and I. Now, my last business, I ended up completely bankrupt.
	I still owe $500,000 on that business.
	Let's get into business together now.
	I have no idea what went wrong with my last business.
	What would you think?
	I understand your question.
	We'll talk about it.
	She told me that he very impressed her.
	He asked her a lot of times to marry him.
	After that, she agreed because she thought that because he loves her very much, she will love him in the process.
	So I think that she has processed her mistake.
	She is not like, you know, didn't thought about it.
	I think she has processed it.
	I think it is an adult man's answer.
	You understand?
	Wait, so wait.
	Is her answer as to why she married this disaster of a husband, is her answer that she simply thought that they loved each other so it would be okay?
	No, no, no.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	That's not an answer.
	That's not processing it.
	Because she's not taking any responsibility for her decision.
	She's saying, well, I thought we would love each other, and it turned out he wasn't who he said he was.
	That's not her taking any responsibility for this unbelievably bad decision to marry this guy.
	She's saying, well, he didn't tell me who he was.
	I mean, that's saying that she has no responsibility and also that he showed no signs of instability during the entire time they had a relationship before they got married.
	That's not possible.
	You know, crazy can't fake sane.
	There's always signs that somebody...
	Is unstable.
	And she is 100% responsible for marrying this crazy guy.
	And if she doesn't know why she did that, why is she unable to see the signs that someone is unstable?
	In fact, downright crazy, this guy sounds like.
	If she's not able to see those signs, that's very dangerous for you.
	Because you will be joining your life together with someone...
	Who invites crazy people into your communal life and has no idea why and has no capacity to see them before they inflict their inevitable disasters on your shared life.
	Also, she got involved with another man while in the process of divorcing.
	That is not a good idea.
	Experts say it takes about half the length of a relationship to really get over that relationship.
	So if she was married for two years, I assume she knew the guy for at least a year before they got married.
	So, after the divorce is complete, after the dust has settled with all the legal stuff, it would still take her 18 to 24 months of really processing it.
	I mean going to therapy.
	I mean keeping a journal.
	I mean trying to figure out how this disaster happened in your life.
	But that's not what she did.
	She got straight involved with another man over the internet and she's not taking any responsibility For what she did to marry this crazy guy.
	This is not a good sign.
	Have you guys met?
	No, we're just talking Skype.
	Talking Skype on the phone and all of that.
	And now, after a few months, you're talking about marrying her.
	And you've never met.
	Yes, but it is the only way that we can meet because I can't really go to her country and she can't go to any other country.
	Why can't she go to any other country?
	That is the strange part.
	What she says is that she can't leave her country because of her family and because of the law.
	But the law doesn't say what she says.
	So I confronted it on her, but she didn't really have an answer.
	So, come on.
	What do you really want from me?
	Because you know what I'm going to say, right?
	It's okay.
	It's okay.
	You really gave me very good answers.
	Thank you very much.
	It was a very good conversation.
	Thank you a lot, sir.
	Oh, are we done?
	I think, yes.
	I really got good answers.
	Okay.
	Well, I think everybody knows what my answer is.
	Thank you very much.
	If we can move on to the next caller.
	All right, Richard, you're next.
	Hello, I'm...
	Hello, Richard.
	Great to be on your show, Steph.
	Yeah.
	Well, I want to discuss three quick questions, not as deep and difficult as...
	The one before me.
	So I mentioned, I heard you talk about or mention seatbelts in a couple of your videos on YouTube.
	You say that seatbelts, instead of saving lives, actually Yeah, let me just run over the basic argument for those who've not heard it.
	The argument is that seatbelts – so let's say people drive at a safety level of 100 before they have seatbelts.
	So before they have seat belts, if they crash, they're going to smack their head against the steering wheel or fly out through the window or something like that.
	And when seat belts come in, they feel safer.
	And so instead of driving at a safety level of 100, they now drive at a safety level of 50.
	So they're twice as careless because they feel like airbags, I've got seatbelts, you know, my crash safety rate.
	So they drive less carefully.
	And so what happens is it doesn't end up saving lives.
	What happens is people drive, they get into more accidents.
	Now, because of all the safety equipment around them, what happens is like the same number of Of drivers die or don't die.
	So let's say there's 100 driver deaths for every million whatever car things.
	Then what happens is there still is 100 driver deaths for every car measurement.
	But the difference is that people who aren't inside these cocoons of safety end up getting hurt more.
	So bicyclists, pedestrians, motorcyclists, and so on end up paying the cost of these safety devices.
	Now, this is not an argument against the safety devices at all.
	I mean, I think safety devices are very good.
	Because if you're a very careful driver, which I am, then...
	I'm happy to be shielded by all these things because there are other drivers out there who aren't careful.
	The argument is designed to help people think more critically about statements that seem obvious.
	Seatbelts save lives.
	Well, they don't really actually save lives and they actually cost lives of non-drivers.
	It's just a way to get people to think critically or to think rationally or really to think in terms of economics.
	The reason why it's such a good argument is that people think that if you pass a law, you solve the problem.
	And this is not true.
	This has been verified in countless studies to be not true.
	So people think if you pass a law, you solve the problem.
	But the reality is when you pass a law, people's behavior will change.
	So if you have a small number of poor people and a large number of rich people, you think, well, we'll take 20 bucks from each of the rich people, give it to the poor people, and then there will be no poor people, which is viewing people like they are pawns on a chessboard, like they're inert.
	But the reality is as soon as you start taking money from rich people and give it to poor people, the poor people will change their behavior and the people who are just outside the range of whatever you define as poor have a huge incentive to drop their income so they get free stuff.
	So it's not like moving pieces around on a chessboard, which is how the central planner or the socialist or the statist looks at people.
	It's very different.
	What it is, it's like stepping into a boxing ring and saying, well, I'm just going to punch this guy and win.
	But when you punch him, he moves.
	It's a dynamic system.
	And so the point with the seatbelt thing is people say, well, the government has had to pass a law to save lives so people would have to have their seatbelts, and this is simply not true.
	Yes, it's true the government passed a law.
	Of course, everybody wants safety.
	cars.
	Everybody wants to be safe in the cars.
	But it's not as simple as, well, we'll just pass a law and then people will have seatbelts and then people will be saved and their lives will be saved.
	And that's the kind of good that government can do.
	It's just a way to get people to understand.
	It's really a way to think in terms of economics or just critical thinking is to understand that when you pass a seatbelt law, people's driving behavior changes.
	So I just sort of wanted to mention that argument for people who weren't familiar with it.
	But sorry, Richard, please go on.
	May I ask the question then?
	Do you wear a seatbelt while driving?
	I do.
	So...
	So, I just misunderstood.
	I was worried about you because your safety, you know, is very important for us.
	No, no, sorry.
	Let me sort of be clear.
	There's three reasons.
	There's three reasons why I wear a seatbelt.
	Number one is that I know that everyone else is driving around with seatbelts and therefore they're driving less carefully, right?
	So, that's important.
	And number two, it's illegal in Canada to not wear a seatbelt.
	Well, we don't care about the law.
	Yeah, and number three, the car makes a really annoying sound when you don't wear your seatbelt.
	So yeah, I mean, I wear my seatbelt for sure, but I don't imagine that I'm rendered safer because of my seatbelt.
	That's why I still drive as cautiously.
	My knowledge is actually enhancing my safety.
	But anyway, go ahead.
	So I'm very happy to hear that.
	Well, I don't think that seatbelts are evil because they kill people somehow.
	So using it is not participating in any evil and people should wear it.
	We can go on in this direction and discuss motorcycle helmet laws and everything.
	But I don't want to go into detail.
	I'm happy to hear this.
	The other thing I wanted to talk about It's the possible outcome of voluntary interaction.
	You repeatedly say, of course, that if interaction is voluntary, then everybody, per definition, comes out to winners out of this interaction.
	So market interaction, let's say, exchange of goods or money for service or whatever, if it's voluntary, it's mutually beneficial.
	This is the statement I hear constantly.
	I largely agree.
	I'm sorry, just to be precise.
	I'm sorry to interrupt, just to be precise.
	It is perceived.
	By the actress to be beneficial.
	I don't know if it is or isn't objectively, but it is perceived to be mutually beneficial.
	Exactly my point.
	At least once I wanted to hear this small correction.
	I said, well, it's according to their knowledge or, I mean, perceived beneficial.
	It may not be beneficial.
	It may be really damaging to both or to one or, I mean, to the other or to both of them to engage in this interaction.
	But because of their limited knowledge or For some other reasons, the interaction still occurs.
	So we have this uncertainty.
	But I think I've always described it in terms of subjective preference, right?
	So I've said, you know, if I have a dollar and you have a pen and we switch, clearly I want the pen more than the dollar and you want the dollar more than the pen.
	I don't think I say, and therefore it's objectively good that we perform the trade, but It simply is – again, it's just axiomatic or praxeological that if two people voluntarily trade, they must each perceive that they're better off for having done that trade.
	Now, whether they are or not, I don't know.
	I mean maybe I'm an alcoholic and you're selling me a bottle of rubbing alcohol.
	Is that objectively beneficial to me?
	Well, no, not really, but it's what I want.
	It's definitely my particular preference at the moment to get that bottle of rubbing alcohol, right?
	I totally agree.
	I totally agree.
	But the point, let's say, in some debates, when I hear people use this argument, well, certainly with the last debate with Peter Joseph, You were talking about different things.
	Like, I mean, I don't sort of fall into a category of fans of sideguides or whatever.
	And I clearly think that your arguments in the conversation were much stronger.
	No comparison.
	But he was talking in this particular...
	In this case, he was talking about some kind of global efficiency, which he didn't define, and so on.
	Well, it's not efficient.
	The market interactions do not correspond to, somehow, resource-based Aims and stuff.
	But you say, well, micro-interactions are good because they are mutually beneficial or perceived mutually beneficial.
	But to his point, to him, it's nothing.
	Because he said, well, I want to impose, I mean, I want science to impose certain interactions and not because science knows what is beneficial But those who are interacting, they may not know what they are doing.
	This is the point.
	In this regard, I think there was a misunderstanding.
	Don't you agree?
	I don't think that's clarified any of the misunderstanding.
	Can you try and boil it down to a principle or an argument?
	Well, in this particular segment, maybe you didn't understand each other.
	No, really, I'm not trying to be obtuse.
	Like, I genuinely don't understand what you just said.
	Can you try describing it in a different way?
	Or maybe I'm just being dense.
	I've only had a coffee, one coffee this morning, but...
	Yeah, so I repeat my argument.
	No, no, no.
	Don't repeat your argument.
	I can understand a clear argument the first time.
	I need you to try and describe it in a different way.
	So, what should I describe?
	Well, you said that there was a difference in Peter's argument and my arguments, or a difference in perspective, and it had something to do with efficiency.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	Well, my argument – sorry.
	My argument was that – OK. So let me see if I can sort of understand.
	I mean I've done this.
	So let me sort of see if I can paraphrase his argument and you can let me know.
	So his argument is, look, we have the technology and we have the resources to feed everyone in the world.
	But one of the problems with the capitalist system is that in order to do something, you need to make a profit.
	And how is feeding starving people who have no money profitable?
	And since we have all the science and all the technology and all the resources to feed everyone in the world, but there's no particular profit for the capitalist in feeding starving people, then clearly we need to have a system other than capitalism to feed the starving people because they've got nothing to trade with.
	They're starving.
	And so we have to have a different system because we have all the resources to feed the people.
	People got no money.
	Capitalism is only driven by the profit motive.
	And therefore we need another – is that a way of sort of paraphrasing his argument?
	No.
	I mean, this is the clearest way I heard.
	Well, maybe he was saying some other thing.
	Yeah, I wish he was so clear, but, well, I guess, I guess it was his argument.
	Right, now, okay, but let me tell you, there's a whole number of flaws with that argument, which I think are really, really important.
	Yeah, I know, I know.
	You don't need to sell me on these flaws and anything.
	No, no, but just for other people, because it's not just, like, one of the things that bothered me in the debate with Peter was that he said, you know, I'm going to assume everyone already knows what we're talking about.
	I'm like, no.
	For people who don't know what anarcho-capitalism is, I'm going to define it because I'm not going to assume people already know exactly what I'm talking about.
	Otherwise, I'm not reaching any new people.
	So this sounds like a plausible argument, right?
	And there's a number of flaws with it.
	First of all, people are not driven solely by the profit motive.
	They're not even driven primarily by the profit motive.
	There would be no human beings in the world if we were only driven by the profit motive.
	Humanity would not exist.
	In fact, no life at all would exist.
	It costs, in Canada, about $650,000 to raise a child from zero to age 22.
	And that doesn't even count waking up in the middle of the night for years and Having to play with blocks on the ground for years and all that.
	I mean having children is not a profit-driven enterprise.
	It is not a, quote, selfish, I get more resources.
	I mean it's not like we're growing them to harvest them for their damn kidneys, right?
	So the human beings exist at all and life exists at all.
	Because of a specific rejection of the profit motive.
	Children are not profitable.
	And at least in the modern world.
	You could maybe argue that in the past you needed lots of people to farm and maybe you could get some value.
	But the problem is every time you have a kid, you get some labor on a farm once they're sort of six or seven.
	But you also have had six or seven years of feeding them and getting up late at night and all that.
	And why not just hire people?
	Well, you don't have to pay kids.
	Yeah, but you've got to feed and board and all that kind of stuff.
	So human beings only exist for unselfish reasons, unprofitable reasons, let's say.
	So saying that human beings are driven by profit, what it is is saying that there's a specific motivation in the market called profit and then saying that all human beings are then driven by profit.
	First of all, that's not true.
	Human beings having children is not a profit-driven enterprise.
	I mean think of the guy, the first caller today, the man who is hopefully not going to marry this irresponsible and dangerous woman.
	Where is his profit in what he's doing?
	Well, I mean there may be a benefit.
	Benefit is different from profit, right?
	I mean, you can't go to your shareholders and say, I'm going to give you 3% more benefit this year.
	Because they're going to say, well, what is that?
	How do we measure it?
	I don't know.
	Let's just talk about money, profit, right?
	And so human beings are not fundamentally driven by profit.
	So there's lots of reasons to feed starving people that have nothing to do with profit.
	That's the first thing.
	The second question, of course, is why are people starving in the first place?
	Why are they starving in the first place?
	And it's for sure that they're starving because there's some warlord or some government or some tyrant or some chaos or some violence or whatever that's around them that's preventing them from living.
	Right?
	So the famines that have occurred in Africa almost always occur because of governments.
	My first question… Like the Ethiopian famine, it's people just driven off the land and forced out into the desert.
	Because what happens of course is that if you want to talk about profit for the local government warlord leader, if he can show a humanitarian disaster in his land, then he will get billions of dollars in aid.
	Right?
	So we think that we're paying to solve a problem.
	but we're actually bribing people to create a problem because it's so profitable, quote, for them to do so, right?
	So why are they starving?
	Hang on.
	Let me finish.
	Sorry.
	I'll be brief.
	I'll be brief.
	So the next question is, well, why can't we just go and hire them?
	I mean, gosh, can you imagine how little money starving people will work for?
	I know that sounds cold and inhumane and all of that, but it's important.
	If there's a huge body of people who are starving, they'll work for very low wages.
	And what that means is that a whole number of entrepreneurs will go over there and hire them and drive their wages up.
	And then rather than giving them food, which is not sustainable, what do you just keep giving them food and keep giving them food and keep giving them food?
	Well, basically you're trapping them in whatever circumstances or environment created the starvation in the first place.
	You can't think of static things.
	Oh, they're starving people.
	Let's give them food.
	I mean, that's at the level of a bird feeding its young.
	You have to look at the process and how to solve the problem in the long term.
	You don't just look at moments frozen in time.
	You look at the whole continuum of how to solve problems.
	And so, yo, just go hire them.
	Well, why can't you hire them?
	Well, because I bet you there's all these trade restrictions and laws and problems and tariffs and taxes and whatever, right?
	So, that's another...
	See, this structural violence thing doesn't...
	Figure out where the violence really comes from.
	That's why it's called structural violence, right?
	So people talked about how it's structural violence for a woman to have to sell herself into prostitution.
	Well, it's terrible that a woman has to sell herself into prostitution.
	But I don't believe that there's any need to invent something called structural violence to explain that away.
	A woman selling herself into prostitution arises out of violations of the non-aggression principle to begin with.
	You don't need this ephemeral or ethereal thing called structural violence to explain it.
	Firstly, she must have been abused as a child.
	That's almost for certain.
	Secondly, she must have fewer or no other job opportunities, which is the result of the government restricting free trade of some kind.
	Fourth, she may have some sort of drug dependency, which is quite common in prostitution.
	That's brought about by child abuse and the war on drugs.
	Fourthly, she has to go and sell herself into prostitution because the drugs are so expensive.
	And why are the drugs so expensive?
	The drugs are so expensive because of the war on drugs, which means that they can't be manufactured and handed out in pharmacies and so on.
	And fifth, why is she in this whole underworld to begin with that's so incredibly dangerous?
	Well, because the drugs are illegal and prostitution is illegal and therefore she can't practice openly and safely should that be her personal choice.
	I can't imagine why it would be, but should that be?
	So we have all these violations of the non-aggression principle which result in a woman selling herself into prostitution.
	So we don't need something called structural violence to explain it.
	That's like saying I have...
	I have cancer and I have structural cancer.
	It's like, no, I think if you say I have cancer, we've explained that one enough.
	Let's just go treat it.
	I don't think we need structural cancer as well.
	So it's just another layer designed to obfuscate the original violations of the non-aggression principle.
	But anyway, so that's sort of the question and the answer.
	I don't think we were dealing in different terms.
	I think he just wanted to layer something in to avoid violations of the non-aggression principle.
	Because if violations of the non-aggression principle solve social problems, then we know what to do.
	But then power seekers will have nothing to say and it will not serve their emotional needs, their needs for power and influence over others.
	Because if violations of the non-aggression principle are the cause of these problems, then we know what to do, which is to argue for people to stop using violence against each other and particularly against children.
	That doesn't serve violence.
	The power-hungry man's need for domination, and therefore he's just not going to be interested in that.
	All right.
	I feel bad for the guys who are waiting.
	I mean, let's close this topic.
	I have just a really interesting dessert question that I want to ask, if I may.
	Please.
	Okay, so...
	It's about the value of choices of different outcomes.
	So let's say I propose a game to you.
	You have two buttons before you.
	You can press only one button once.
	And so if you press the first button, you will get with 100% certainty X amount of dollars.
	If you press the second button, you get with 50% certainty 100 times X amount of dollars.
	Is it clear?
	Yeah.
	So which button would you push?
	Oh, I don't know.
	I mean, it depends.
	It depends on so many things.
	Yeah, it depends.
	I mean, look, if I'm rich, then I'm going to push button number two.
	If I'm poor, I'm going to push button number one.
	It depends on the value X and your wealth support.
	If X is $1, you might prefer a 50% chance of getting $100 to 100% chance of getting $1.
	Because $1 is not a big opportunity loss in case you don't get the $100.
	So, by varying X, let's say, if I start low, one cent, then go ten cents, and so on, increase incrementally, then an average person, like myself, or maybe my friends, they will say, well, I push the second button.
	And then when X gets bigger, they say, well, now I press the button A, because...
	Can you ask me, sorry, I just want to make sure I understand what the point of the question is.
	I mean, this is not a gambling show.
	This is a philosophy show.
	So if you can tell me what the philosophical issue is, that would be great.
	So I wanted you to elaborate on...
	The mathematical value of the second button is always greater.
	It doesn't depend on X. Probability times the possible outcome is always greater by pressing button number 2.
	But people don't go to the second button all the time because, well, sometimes they choose the first button, which is mathematically always worse than the first one.
	But in real life, the value of pressing the first button sometimes is more attractive.
	Wait, wait.
	Sorry, what does it mean when you say it's mathematically always worse?
	Because the first button will always get you something, but the second button might not.
	So for each, I mean, on average, over a thousand times, right, you may end up with more money from the second button, but you talked about only pushing the button once.
	Now, if you're only pushing the button once, then you may get nothing from the second button, and you will certainly get something from the first button.
	So I don't understand how that's mathematically always worse for each instance.
	Well, you can understand the mathematical value of a choice in this case.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	Sorry.
	When we're talking about one push of the button...
	We're not talking about mathematical certainties or even – we're talking about probability, not mathematical averages, right?
	And the probability is that if you push the second button, you might get nothing, but if you push the first button, you will always get something.
	A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush and so on.
	So people – each individual is dealing with probability, not mathematical averages, right?
	But when you press the first button, you have opportunity cost.
	You are not pushing the second button and therefore losing the possibility to earn 100 times more money.
	So you have this concept of opportunity cost.
	No, no, no.
	Listen, come on, come on, come on.
	Let's say, okay, so let me put you in this chair.
	And I say, listen, if you push button A, you get a million dollars.
	And if you push button B, you have a 10% chance of getting $100 million.
	Which button would you push?
	I push the first.
	Okay, so I'm sorry.
	So then we're done, right?
	So here's a situation where on average, right, because 1 million is 1% of 100 million, but it's a 10% chance if you push the second button that you're going to get 100 times more.
	So on average...
	The people who push the second button will get more money, but for your probability you will take the million for sure over the hundred million with a small probability.
	Mathematically, I make the wrong choice.
	Because the value of pressing the second button is greater.
	The Bernoulli formula for the value is probability times the value.
	It's 10 times larger in your example.
	So the value of pressing the second button...
	Yes, but you choose the first button.
	Because certainty is better than probability for a lot of people and depending on the amount, right?
	Well...
	Like if I said the first button gives you one dollar and the second button has a 99% chance of giving you a million dollars, then everybody would choose the second button because the ratios have changed.
	The probability has changed.
	So it just depends on the probability.
	I'm sorry.
	This, again, this is not really a show about mathematics.
	I don't really understand the philosophical part of this.
	I'm going to have to move on to the next caller.
	But if you wanted to say why this is important, feel free.
	Let me say, people make choices in their lives, and as we established on the second question, the outcome of anything, any interaction or whatever, is just according to our knowledge, so it's probabilistic.
	Maybe this interaction or this choice will improve my position, maybe not.
	Or improve the state of affairs?
	Maybe not.
	So you always deal with probabilities.
	And so therefore this is relevant.
	This is one point.
	The second point is that this is a model of, let's say, choices people have.
	Like, I mean, if I get the government...
	No, no, sorry.
	I've got to interrupt you.
	Because look, if people don't make decisions based on probabilities, or at least not in terms of...
	I mean, obviously we do make some, but as a show about philosophy, we talk about principles, not probabilities.
	I mean, so people, you know, you've got to stop, okay?
	You've got to stop.
	Let me finish up here.
	People say that you could plan a great crime and you could go and steal something from someone and the probability that the government is going to catch you is extremely low and so you're going to make good money.
	And so the probability of making money as a thief if you're intelligent is quite high.
	And if you're kind of like an adrenaline junkie or whatever, you kind of like that thrill, then you get a thrilling lifestyle with very little work.
	You probably only have to – if you're intelligent, you probably only have to rob – You know, once a month or once every couple of months and you can live quite well off that and you get the thrill of it.
	You don't have to show up to a nine-to-five job, which is kind of boring and you don't have to submit to authority and you can test your skills and all that kind of stuff.
	So, you know, in terms of probability, if you're intelligent, a thief lifestyle has some significant attractions.
	And so, but I would never argue that you should choose your way of getting money In terms of probability, you should choose how you get your money because of principles.
	So you're giving examples where there's no moral element involved.
	There's no principle involved.
	It's simply a matter of calculating advantage.
	And there's times where that's fine.
	There's lots of amoral stuff that we do to calculate.
	It's not immoral to have a slice of cheesecake, but we eat it and say, well, I like the slice of cheesecake.
	I'll just do 20 minutes on the treadmill more to take away three crumbs of it or something.
	But in a show about philosophy, the probability of consequentialism has no place.
	It has no place because as soon as there's a moral element involved, which makes it really important to a philosophy show, as soon as there's a moral element involved, then we don't make decisions based upon the consequences or the probabilities.
	We make decisions based upon the principles.
	And if there is no principle involved, then it doesn't really have anything to do with a philosophy show.
	So I'm going to have to move on to the next caller, but thank you for your questions.
	I appreciate that.
	Mike, who do we have next?
	All right, William, you're up next.
	Hello, hello.
	Hello, Steph.
	Hi, Will.
	I want to thank you.
	You've really brought me out of a pretty unstable period, I guess, of just thinking about things, I guess.
	I have had many situations where I was looking at a political view, or even philosophical, I guess, and I could never find out where I really belonged, and I could never apply my I think that was my problem.
	So thank you for that.
	Oh, listen, I hope that, you know, facts are impulse power, principles are warp power, warp drive.
	And so, yeah, without principles, it's just really hard to get any kind of clarity and perspective.
	We just end up muddying and muddled around the refuse of the detritus of facts and little bits here and there, which we can never really assemble.
	So I'm very glad that it's helpful, and I appreciate you saying that.
	Yeah, and my question today is not so much of a question, but I'd really like to get your perspective on how I've been handling some problems and challenges with my life recently.
	Sure.
	So, you're free to interject at any time and alter the conversation.
	Make it go on somewhere where you're curious about the details.
	Okay.
	So, just to start off with a basic thing, I was...
	Decent in school.
	I had a learning disability and then I got behind.
	I was in special classes until the ninth grade, which I had decided at that point I was not learning anything.
	And I had kind of objectively could look at this and realize I wasted a lot of time because I was in the ninth grade and didn't know how to do basic division.
	I mean, it was that severe.
	And...
	I have credits to graduate high school.
	I mean, I could have graduated with that type of knowledge, I think, which would have been completely detrimental to my education.
	So I dropped out of high school.
	My father, he sort of disowned me for this.
	I was, you know, quite, you know, in the childhood era, I guess I was very much a...
	I guess you would use the word abused, but I was spanked pretty severely, instruments like a belt, and there was no arguing or conversation.
	It was just submit, right?
	I'm sorry.
	What did your father – I just missed that.
	What did your father disown you for?
	Drop in on high school.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	Sorry.
	Go ahead.
	So you weren't – you didn't negotiate as a child.
	You were sort of – things were imposed upon you?
	Right, and this was really my first decision I really ever made for myself.
	And granted, I had my mother's support for it, but then, you know, it was sort of just a family issue.
	He still does disown me for it, although I still live in the household.
	What does disown mean, though?
	What does disown, like, how would that, what does that look like?
	Well, it's essentially, he will never approve of my decision and always looks down on me for that decision in sort of a...
	The relationship between me and him was permanently affected by it.
	Because disowning means that you're dead to him, he never talks to you, never looks at you, you don't exist, and blah, blah, blah.
	So it's not that, right?
	He just really disagrees with your decision.
	Right.
	I have a question for you.
	Let's just back up.
	So you talked about a learning disability, and again, I'm no expert in this or really any other field, but when...
	You were struggling with school.
	How many hours a day did your father help you with your homework?
	Yeah, I didn't really receive any.
	My father's never been really present in my life.
	He's always been busy with work.
	In the early days, he worked nine months in Alaska.
	We live in Washington, so it's quite far away.
	So he was an absentee father for the most part, right?
	Right.
	And my mother really...
	She took care of that part, but really there wasn't too much help on the silence.
	Well, no, she can't take care of that part.
	Sorry to interrupt.
	She can't take care of that part.
	She can be a good mother, but she cannot be a good father.
	Yeah.
	Right?
	I mean, I can be a good father, but I can't be a good mother.
	Right.
	I mean, I wouldn't even say that she was a good mother either, but that was the...
	Sorry to interrupt, but the reason that I'm asking is you basically started off accepting a label called I had a learning disability, right?
	Right.
	Now, I'm going to tell you where I come from from a personal standpoint.
	So I don't, you know, so you know where my motivations are, and then you can discard them if they don't fit your circumstances.
	Now, I was never diagnosed with a learning disability, but everyone basically called me an underachiever, right?
	So I had a teacher who said, if effort matched ability, you'd be an A+. Right.
	And nobody, of course, ever asked me about my home environment.
	My home environment, it was absolutely impossible to study in.
	Noise, violence, chaos, abuse.
	I mean, it was just a mess all around.
	And I was hungry, you know, sometimes.
	And, you know, we were getting eviction notices and I didn't know sometimes where my next meal was coming from.
	And, you know, I really had to work.
	I had to work.
	As I mentioned in a previous show, I was working like three jobs when I was 14.
	And...
	But people just basically said that I was lazy.
	I just wasn't working hard enough.
	And so my question is, if you were diagnosed with a learning disability and if your father condemns you for dropping out of high school because you weren't doing well, my question would then be, well, what was your home environment like for learning and for studying?
	Because, I mean, the government schools are shit.
	I mean, they're just wretched and terrible.
	And the degree to which you will flourish in the government school is generally the degree to which you have positive, involved, and caring parents who help you out with your education.
	So there's this thing that public school is like the great equalizer.
	Absolutely not.
	Public school is one of the main reasons why the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
	I mean, there's the welfare state too, but public schools are a huge and uncharted system.
	Bermuda Triangle where the poor disappear into the underclasses forever because positive and involved parents make a huge, crucial difference in terms of how well kids do in school and neglectful or abusive or avoidant parents, they – those kids do really, really badly.
	And so if you come from a relatively well-educated middle-class family where the parents are involved, then you do well in school.
	And if you come from a shitty family where the parents are uninvolved, you do worse.
	In other words, because the schools are so bad, it is the quality of the parenting that makes the biggest difference in the outcomes of the children.
	And therefore, those who already have stable and productive households do really well.
	And those who have destructive or abusive or unproductive households do really badly.
	So it widens the gap between...
	The to-dos and the not-to-dos, between the functional and the dysfunctional, which is, of course, completely ridiculous.
	I mean, the whole point of education, of a productive and positive and rational educational system, if we even need a system, is that it should compensate for whatever is negative in the home environment.
	Because that's the whole point.
	You're supposed to compensate that which is difficult, right?
	Yeah.
	You wouldn't go to a gymnastics coach where the gymnast was almost entirely dependent on the degree to which the parents coached the gymnast at home.
	Because then you'd say, well, what the fuck is the coach doing?
	If it all comes down to how well the parents coach the child and teach the child gymnastics at home, then what the hell?
	Anyway, and basically then, people who were good at gymnastics would teach their kids well, and those kids whose parents were good at gymnastics would become better, and those kids whose parents knew nothing about gymnastics or didn't practice gymnastics would get worse.
	So it would widen the gap.
	So I just don't know what it means when you say, I had a learning disability.
	It seems to me It seems to me that you had a dysfunction in the home.
	Right.
	That interfered with your learning.
	The part I was trying to refer to was the fact that I said I was doing well in school.
	I had an A in math when I did not know to do division, and I was in the ninth grade.
	That is the problem I identified with.
	That's the problem I couldn't solve because I did not have teachers who were willing to teach me more, nor did I have the environment at home.
	So you're completely right at that.
	But I don't think I was...
	I'm not at all able at this time in my life to even realize any of my problems, and I thankfully stumbled upon one of them.
	No, but I'm talking about now, right?
	You introduced yourself to me now with a label that you were disabled.
	Right.
	Well, I do have dysgraphia, which just means I see things backwards when I copy things over, and I also have dyslexia, things that just make...
	I didn't work hard for me to do, so I didn't work well in the environments I was in.
	That's the only label I was trying to apply.
	I was not doing well.
	Okay, but I would assume that those challenges would be heavily aided by having involved parents, like heavily involved parents in your education.
	Okay.
	Right.
	I mean, when I was learning to write, I mean, one of my earliest memories actually is, you know, I was learning to write when I was very little and My grandma slamming her hand on the table saying, do it!
	I'm like, I can't.
	And then she's just screaming and I'm crying and trying to write.
	What a fun learning development, huh?
	I'm so sorry.
	It's horrible.
	It's just horrible.
	Yeah, to move on though, I dropped out of school.
	I used Kahan Academy.
	I'm fairly competent at math now.
	I learned programming from a A very cheap online school called Game Institute.
	$100 for just all kinds of books and knowledge about it.
	Absolutely great service there.
	Pursuing the game development career for myself.
	And I'm doing quite well after my decision, and my father doesn't recognize any of that success, I don't think, or doesn't want to acknowledge it to me, right?
	So, uh, the, the, uh, That part is—I've bettered myself on that part.
	And then the second part to this real stage was then I—when I dropped out, I had a period of about four years where I just really didn't do anything, right?
	I just sort of pondered and thought and sort of just lived and existed.
	I didn't really— I'm sorry to interrupt, but you're basically, you know, to analogize, it's like you're coming to a doctor and saying, well, it doesn't hurt here.
	This is fine.
	My ankle is great, as you can see.
	So if you could tell me where the issues are in your life, I think that would speed things along a little bit.
	Okay, then.
	So my issues in life is recently I – this is the now issue, I guess.
	I decided to remove some friends from my life because they were not – Supporting me in the ways that I needed them to.
	Mainly just...
	They would not...
	They weren't really respecting me, I guess, in a certain way of...
	They just didn't...
	Okay, I don't need to disagree with your causes or reasons, but what's the issue that's coming out of that?
	Right, the issue with that is I've now sort of drove out a large portion of my friends, and I'm not a little bit lonely, I guess, from that point.
	But I'm sort of expanding from that now, and the...
	The point I'm trying to make is I've done this with a lot of my friends that I've overall now that it's sort of over with.
	I'm happier with that result.
	But now that I have much more filtering, I guess it's people who I really allow to spend a lot of my time with is that healthy, I guess, that I'm removing people from my day-to-day life that were previously just not really accepting me for me.
	Yeah, look, it's a great question.
	Great question.
	Thank you for getting to it.
	The great thing about economic thinking...
	Everybody should just study economic thinking.
	And again, economic thinking comes from a bunch of basic realities.
	Resources are finite.
	Human desires are infinite and so on.
	And I think one of the central values of economic thinking is...
	The seen versus the unseen, and this is going back to Bastiat, and you can certainly read a lot more about this in Henry Hazlitt's book, Economics in One Lesson.
	But the seen versus the unseen is really, really key.
	Right, so to go back to the earlier example of the seatbelts, so you see people whose lives are saved by seatbelts, but you don't see all of the people who wouldn't have gotten into accidents If there weren't seatbelts, because they'd be driving more carefully.
	I mean, as the economist who first pointed this out, whose name escapes me at the moment, he said, you know, we might as well just have a big giant razor sharp spike pointed at everyone's chest from their steering wheel.
	Imagine how carefully everyone would drive then, right?
	So with friends, this is very important.
	So you have friends in your life and maybe they're not respecting you for who you are or they fail the against me argument, which is if you're a statist, you support the use of violence against me for disagreeing with you and following my own conscience.
	And so you have those people in your life and it's easy to look at that and say, well, I have people to go see a movie with.
	I have people to go to parties with.
	I have people...
	To go to bars with.
	I have people to go dancing with.
	I have all these kinds of things.
	I've got warm bodies around me.
	And the economics, right?
	The economic thinking is to look at the unseen, right?
	The really important part about friendship and social circles is not who's there, but who's not there.
	But who's not there.
	That's the really important part of...
	Of that.
	Or it's Christmas, you know, maybe I got no friends or I guess Christmas is not really a friend's thing.
	New Year's Eve or whatever and, you know, you have people to go out with and maybe you don't really like them.
	Maybe they drink too much.
	Maybe they just talk about a bunch of stupid shit that doesn't really matter endlessly.
	Maybe they're kind of caustic towards your beliefs and so on.
	But they're there.
	But the way of thinking economically is to look at who's not there.
	And who's not there...
	It's the people who will respect and love you for who you are, with whom you can have deep and important discussions in a respectful and positive way, in a win-win kind of way.
	And so, saying, well, I have friends now, I have fewer friends now that I started with philosophy, well, that means that there's room for better friends to move in.
	But as long as the crappy friends are around, the better friends won't be there.
	Because the better friends don't want to hang with your crappy friends.
	And the better friends look at your friends and say, well, you know, water finds its own level.
	I guess if this is the guy's friends, this is who he is, right?
	A man is judged by the company he keeps.
	This is an old adage.
	There's so many of these great old sayings that have kind of fallen by the wayside.
	And a man is judged by the company he keeps is really important.
	So if you're losing friends who didn't really like you...
	That's like cancelling programs which fund government jobs.
	Well, the moment that somebody says government job, you know it's not a real job.
	Any more than rape is real lovemaking.
	And so if you say, well, I'm dropping these friends who, you know, kind of dissed me for who I was.
	Well, they weren't really friends.
	Any more than some coerced relationship is actually a relationship.
	You know, it's like calling the prisoner a house guest in a jail.
	It's the wrong word.
	They weren't friends.
	If they didn't love you for who you were, if you couldn't be completely honest about your thoughts and impulses and ideals and passions and fears and all that, well, they're not friends.
	They're just warm, proximate bodies and you can get that anywhere.
	You can get that in Times Square if you don't mind people rubbing up against your leg.
	You can get that anywhere.
	But real quality friends, bad money drives out good money, right?
	And bad friends keep away good friends.
	So it's always really important not to ask who's in my life, but to ask who's not in my life.
	Yeah, and it's also really important to ensure the people you surround yourself with have the thinking...
	to be able to critically think and analyze something that you say because it's just terrible to build a relationship off of this fake relationship for – like for me, it was four or five years.
	And when it came to me realizing that this really wasn't real, it absolutely tore me apart emotionally because – Because I felt like I was losing something.
	Thankfully, though, I had others around me who were prime examples of, like you're talking about, people who just are there for you, accept you and support you and just really take you in and embrace you for everything you are.
	And it's absolutely great for me.
	And look, friends are lifesavers.
	They can literally be lifesavers.
	I mean, it's great.
	You have great chats and all of that.
	But friends can really save you.
	Some friends helped me not marry the wrong woman, which would have been a complete disaster for my life.
	There's a song by Elton John, Someone Saved My Life Tonight, about a friend of his, a musician...
	Long John Baldry, I think it was.
	I can't remember the guy's name.
	Because Elton John was gay.
	He was about to marry a woman, and this guy basically said, don't do it.
	And he said, someone save my life tonight.
	He wrote a whole song, and that's how he felt.
	That's very true.
	So, to hark back to the first caller, if I could keep the analogies within the show, so much the better.
	So, he was talking about this Moroccan woman, who was a Christian, and she married this...
	Well, what does that tell you?
	It tells you exactly that her parents did not teach her how to see and process lunatics, which means her parents are lunatics, but she doesn't know it, right?
	I mean, lunatics will never warn you about how to stay away from other lunatics any more than somebody who wants to hand you over counterfeit money is also going to hand over a counterfeit detection machine, right?
	They're just not going to do it.
	Thieves don't install security devices, right?
	I mean, unless they want a Trojan horse and disable them, but...
	And so that tells you that her family is crazy and she doesn't know it, which means that she is not only undefended against crazy, but will be inevitably drawn towards crazy.
	It also tells you that her friends aren't helping her, right?
	So if you say, well, I want to go marry this guy in the US, then...
	Your friends who care about you will grill you six ways from Sunday to make sure that you're doing the right thing.
	Because we all get hormones, right?
	We all get lust and there's a genuine endorphin high that comes out of the initial stages of a romantic relationship.
	You know, from the beginning to about six months.
	And your friends know that, or at least know that at some level.
	And if you are Hell-bent on making a decision that is certainly questionable, like I'm going to go marry this guy in the US that I've barely met or this guy who's saying, well, you know, I'm talking about I want to get married with this woman.
	I've never met her.
	We've talked over Skype for a couple of months, and she has this obviously highly disturbed and dysfunctional history.
	Well, as a friend, I'm going to say no.
	This is a bad idea.
	And just in case he ends up listening to the end of the show, I know he bailed because he wasn't getting the answer that he wanted.
	But it's a terrible idea to marry this woman.
	And I guarantee you, like, there's not even a doubt.
	It's not even a little bit of a bad idea.
	It's 100% for certain going to end in disaster and possibly ruin your life, particularly if you have children.
	It's a terrible, terrible idea.
	You should absolutely not do it.
	In no way, shape or form should you pursue this relationship.
	Now, that's what friends do, right?
	And so if someone marries the wrong person, that tells me that their family is crazy, that they're crazy, and that their friends are not friends.
	Friends don't let friends marry the wrong person.
	And so having people around you who can give you that 360 view, and I rely on it all the time.
	All the time.
	I ask friends their advice.
	I ask them to check my back, to watch my back, to get my back.
	And it's essential.
	You know, my wife is essential to the decisions that I make in my life.
	And I have doubt.
	I have insecurities.
	I have uncertainties.
	You know, it's kind of a high wire act being out here so far ahead of society and all.
	And so I need people around me who are going to tell me the truth, even if it's not a truth I particularly want to hear at the moment.
	It's absolutely essential.
	So if you have crappy friends around you, you are flying through life blind because we will always have – we always have the capacity to fool ourselves, but it's harder to fool other people.
	Who have integrity and perspective and who aren't being run through the same hormones or desires or irrationalities that we are currently subjected to.
	So you really are missing an essential safety net if you don't have clear, deep, and virtuous friends.
	Yeah.
	And then on my last thing I wanted to talk about was I've decided to recently – I haven't told my mother my philosophical views on government or really much of anything.
	I think she still thinks I'm a Glenn Beck fan type of guy.
	I was very much into him.
	He's really one of the things that brought me into libertarianism because he liked to call himself one, but that sort of didn't really...
	I just wanted to point out I'm actually listening to an audiobook by Glenn Beck.
	Which one is that?
	Um...
	An inconvenient book?
	Oh, yeah, I have.
	It's kind of an older one.
	He's actually kind of funny.
	I mean, not exactly stand-up comedian funny, but he's actually kind of funny.
	He's pretty grounded.
	He's very self-critical.
	And he is – he's got a lot of good arguments.
	And because, of course, you see him parodied on The Daily Show and you just think he's this glassy-eyed lunatic uncle that nobody should let down from the attic – In the same way that if you listen to The Daily Show, you'll just think that Rush Limbaugh is a fat squat toady racist asshole.
	But yeah, I think it's quite a pleasant surprise to hear his writing style is entertaining, his reading style is entertaining, he takes on some very difficult subjects, and I think he does a good job.
	So, you know, I mean, obviously, you know, there's lots I would disagree with him on, but his arguments and presentation and style is very good.
	And so he's getting some important ideas across to the masses.
	And, you know, kudos and props to him for doing that.
	I just wanted to point that out.
	And now everybody who hates Ken Black can email me, but I'm simply talking about from – I'm a professional communicator now, I guess – And he is too.
	He's far more successful than I am.
	And that has something to do with his subject matter.
	But, you know...
	I always look at successful communicators and try and learn.
	And I will do that from the left, from the right, from wherever.
	Whoever is very successful at communicating, I'm going to have something that I'm going to try and learn from them.
	So yeah, I mean, oh, Glenn Beck, that's bad.
	I mean, I think he's actually very passionate and intelligent and really a very good communicator.
	Yeah, I think another point to mention about him just real quick is that he is willing to listen to other views.
	He has Penn Jillette on his internet TV station show a lot, or often back in the day.
	And he's an atheist.
	He sort of said he leans on the anarcho-capitalist side of the spectrum, I guess, which I think would be awesome if you talked to him, Penn Jillette, that is.
	Yeah, I think that would be interesting too.
	He's a pretty funny guy.
	But the last thing I was going to mention though before that was that I'm going to be talking to my family, being open with them about my beliefs and all that.
	And that also comes hand in hand with me finally getting my mother to ask my father to go to a family counseling thing.
	And she said she was going to try and do that.
	Try to salvage their marriage and salvage the entire family, I guess.
	Hopefully that will work out.
	I hope so too.
	I hope so too.
	Is there anything else that you want to ask about?
	No, thank you.
	That's been a very nice talk.
	Oh, good.
	I'm very glad it was helpful.
	And I certainly wish the best with your mom and therapy and all that.
	That's fantastic.
	All right.
	Meester Mikey Mikey.
	All right, Ian.
	You're up next.
	Hello.
	How are you doing?
	I'm very well.
	How are you doing?
	Very well.
	Good, good, good.
	Actually, I wrote down some notes, and as I was listening to the previous calls, there may be some linkage between my issues and what everybody's kind of spoken of just now.
	But one of the things that kind of struck me recently, I remember you released a video of mental exercises, three mental exercises you can do to live like you're dying.
	Yes, with the knowledge that you're going to die, yeah.
	With the knowledge, yes, yes, yes.
	Actually, I watched it twice.
	I favorited it.
	It was just a very powerful video.
	And I got a strong emotion from it.
	I just actually cried.
	I wept.
	That's good.
	That indicates a lively sensitivity to your environment.
	I think that's great.
	And of course, this video I recorded eight years ago, when I was 39...
	And, you know, having just come through cancer, it sort of has a resonance to me now that was to some degree theoretical back in the day.
	So I'm glad that you found it helpful.
	Yeah, thanks.
	I do get that much as well.
	It must have been an older one.
	Did you do it in some kind of a presentation hall?
	No, no.
	I just recorded it in my study.
	Oh, okay, okay.
	Well, the one thing is actually having that strong emotion having watched the video and, you know, the economic thinking argument that was posited earlier.
	I'm wondering if that's maybe, you know, the consciousness that I'm maybe pissing away my potential.
	Is that something like my body is telling me that I'm like...
	You think you're pissing away your potential?
	What's your potential?
	I don't know.
	I don't know yet.
	Like, there's people recognize that, I guess, not so much that I've told myself, but other people have told me that, you know, I'm capable of doing great things.
	I'm just not really getting that.
	Because, like, recently I've also lost motivation to study for CPA, which is something in the accounting field that...
	Oh, I know.
	Certified public accountant, right?
	Right, right, right.
	Yeah, in the U.S. I think it's different outside, but...
	I lost my motivation to do it after chapter 4 in audit.
	It feels like I could probably read obituaries that are much more entertaining.
	But, yeah, I'm just...
	Why are you doing accountancy?
	Well, I started back in college as a finance person.
	Why did you do finance?
	I must admit, I got into accountancy for the money.
	But, um...
	Yeah.
	That's terrible.
	Going into a career for the money is like sleeping with a woman for the tits.
	I mean, it's probably a lot less fun than that, right?
	But, I mean, it's simply not going to sustain you.
	It's like marrying a woman for the tits, right?
	Because you're in it for the long haul, right?
	And it's simply not going to sustain you, right?
	Well, you know, it...
	It hit me several years later that, yeah, it was a very bad idea.
	The current job I'm at, I'm actually a government worker, of all things, even worse.
	I was shut out because of the shutdown.
	Right now I'm retailing books to try to make ends meet.
	Yeah, just all through the years, as I was working that job, I just kind of, you know, never really felt a jive.
	And it became even more acute.
	Okay, so let's go back to, I think we're wondering now, so let's go back to, you made a decision to pursue a career for the money.
	Now, who did you talk about that decision with?
	Nobody really.
	Why?
	Ultimately, I even went into college because I was forced into it.
	I didn't even want to go.
	What do you mean, forced into it?
	You were kidnapped?
	Dear God, somebody had a gun?
	Don't you use these imprecise words with me, my friend.
	I was emotionally manipulated into doing so.
	And how old were you when you went into college?
	18.
	So you were an adult?
	I guess so, yeah.
	Well, yeah, I was, yeah.
	Okay.
	Okay, so you received some pressure to go into college, but you made the decision.
	Yeah, ultimately, yes, I did.
	Right.
	Okay, so you decided to go to college.
	And I'm sympathetic if you got pressure and all that.
	I really am not trying to say that this has no influence, and you were certainly a young adult.
	But at some point, you've got to start owning your decisions, right?
	Well, it was such that my mom was kind of telling me I had to go to college.
	Everyone around me was telling me I had to go to college.
	I didn't want to.
	And I would like, you know, very much delay the process of doing so.
	Applications for...
	Oh, so you do the passive-aggressive thing, right?
	You say, fine, and then you just kind of don't do it, right?
	Oh, I'm telling you, you are setting yourself up for a life of misery and frustration if you keep that habit up.
	I'm just telling you as a friend.
	You are going to just have passive-aggressive people.
	Oh, my God.
	Oh, my God.
	It's terrible.
	It's all this indirect resistance.
	It's not the same.
	Passive aggression isn't the same as violence, but this indirectness is really the cause of so many of the world's problems, right?
	I mean, what is government other than indirect violence?
	And people who say they want to do something, but they will never talk about the methodology.
	Oh, wait, who does that remind me of?
	I can't remember.
	Anyway, so you really have to work on that.
	You really have to work on that.
	Like, if you don't want to go to college, then say, I don't want to go to college.
	That doesn't mean you're not going to go to college, but it's called being honest in a relationship, right?
	I don't want to go to college.
	I don't even know why.
	Maybe it's a great idea to go to college, but I don't want to.
	And then people who love you will ask you questions about that.
	Well, I don't know.
	That's interesting.
	I wonder why.
	At the time, I did, but I didn't really have any good alternatives to tell you the truth.
	No, no, no.
	The point of honesty is not to solve problems.
	The point of honesty is to connect with other people.
	The point of honesty is to connect with other people to exchange truth until you understand what the problem is.
	You can't solve a problem until you understand what it is.
	So whether you should or should not go to college cannot be solved until you know why you don't want to go to college.
	Do you understand?
	And you can't figure out why you don't want to go to college.
	Except in conversation, usually.
	I mean, maybe you can write, spend six months journaling or whatever, but it's just a whole lot easier to have somebody who's objective and who loves you keep asking you questions.
	I mean, you can see how quickly we get to some kind of truth here in this show, and I don't even know these people.
	I mean, I didn't have that opportunity, though.
	I mean, it was like, go to college or go to college.
	That's kind of the choice that was presented to me.
	No, I understand that, but what I'm saying is I'm asking you to move your goalposts here.
	So what I'm saying is that you need people in your life who are going to be curious about your thoughts and feelings so that you can make better decisions.
	Let me give you an analogy.
	So let's say that I'm very susceptible to sales pressure and I go to a car dealership and the guy is going to make a big bonus if he sells me a sports car.
	And he just tells me all about how great the sports car is.
	He never asks me any questions.
	He puts a lot of pressure on me to buy the sports car.
	I buy the sports car.
	I drive it home.
	And my wife and four children say, what the hell did you just buy?
	What, are we going to strap them on the roof rack?
	Are we going to put them in the trunk?
	Where the hell are we going to put the four kids in a sports car with two seats?
	Right?
	How is the salesman going to help me buy the right car?
	He's going to ask me some questions.
	Right, right, right, right, right.
	And I'm saying that wasn't there.
	And so kind of like...
	But it's important that it wasn't there.
	That's what I'm saying.
	Don't take it as a given that it wasn't there.
	Sit down with your mom and say, Mom, I have a problem with our relationship.
	You pushed me and pushed me to go to college.
	Did you know I didn't want to?
	Now, she's either going to say yes to that or she's going to say no.
	Now, if she says no, I had no idea that you didn't want to, then she's lying.
	Or she's like so ridiculous you can't even have a conversation with her, right?
	Right.
	So does she know you didn't want to go to college?
	She did, and that's kind of what the emotional manipulation was about.
	Okay, so sit down and say, Mom, I don't appreciate that you pushed me to go to college and now I've wasted years of my life and probably $200,000 in spent money and opportunity costs.
	Right.
	So I've wasted years of my life doing something I didn't want to do and that's my choice.
	It's my responsibility but you had a lot to do with influencing that and you never asked me any questions about why I didn't want to go to college or what my motivations were or what I wanted to do to my life.
	That's a problem because then it became about what you wanted me to do which is very selfish on your part.
	It wasn't about what I wanted to do.
	And to have a productive and loving relationship, you cannot be sitting around imposing your will upon me and telling me what I should do.
	Because you need to ask me questions about what I want and help me to understand myself.
	I mean, you're my mom.
	You saw me when I was in diapers.
	You know more about me than anyone except me.
	So I need that resource.
	I need that wisdom.
	I need that perspective.
	I need that curiosity.
	But you can't just be ordering me around.
	The thing was she actually took on most of the burden of the college.
	No, she didn't.
	No, she didn't.
	Did she go to class for you?
	Did she go and earn money that you could have earned and then give it to you?
	The financial burden of it.
	No, you took on the majority of the financial burden of it.
	Even if she paid for everything, you took on the majority of the financial burden.
	Oh, okay.
	I think about it.
	Opportunity costs.
	Yeah, that's true.
	Right?
	So you probably could have got a job for $30,000 or $40,000 a year, right?
	Yeah.
	And so those costs were entirely borne by you.
	Also, it takes about 10,000 hours to become good at stuff, which is why I'm very helpful when other people want to do podcasts because it's great.
	Go start because then in five years we can compete, except I'll be further ahead.
	Right.
	Okay.
	But the opportunity cost, if you had gotten a job, then you would be significantly wealthier by now.
	You wouldn't be unhappy.
	You wouldn't be frustrated.
	And you would have had significant experience in a business environment.
	So even if your mom paid for everything, most of the costs have accrued to you in lack of experience and lack of income.
	True, true, true.
	There is no free lunch.
	Okay, that's true.
	That's an unseen cost, I guess I didn't think.
	The question then is like, what can I do now perhaps to back or reclaim some of these costs or something?
	Well, I mean, I think that this is sort of tying into how difficult it is to fly blind.
	In other words, without friends, without family, without people who really love you to the point where they're going to help you.
	I mean, stop trying to think of doing it all yourself.
	You need a support group.
	You need a support system.
	You need people around you who are going to help you to understand your motives, your thoughts, your desires.
	And you do the same for them.
	I've got my song on one-sided, right?
	Yeah.
	Right, right, of course.
	But the big lesson, and this can turn this into a positive, because most people sail through life without ever learning this lesson.
	They waste their time on non-relationships, and they waste their lives conforming without objective and curious feedback on their motivations.
	So again, this is a goalpost moving conversation, at least from my side.
	Which is to tell you that you need people in your life who you will really trust to really care about you and to really help you make better decisions.
	I say this as someone who, when I didn't have these people in my life, I made really bad decisions.
	You can't see yourself only from the inside.
	Okay, yeah.
	You need other people's feedback.
	You need other people's feedback.
	And those people's feedback, it needs to be about you and your happiness.
	They need to be fully committed to your long-term happiness.
	Right?
	I mean, if I go to the doctor, if I go to the doctor, if I'm 20, 30, 40 pounds overweight, I go to the doctor and he says, listen, you've got to lose some weight.
	You're getting fat.
	Right.
	Am I unhappy in the moment?
	Yeah, I'm sure you are, yeah.
	Yeah, but he's into my long-term health.
	Right, right, right.
	He's telling you the truth about what you want to hear.
	He's telling you the truth about things that maybe I've never really understood.
	I mean, how do people even get fat?
	That's always confusing.
	I mean, don't you notice that you can't see your toes anymore?
	Don't you notice that your clothes don't fit?
	Don't people around you say, hey, man, what's going on?
	Why are you gaining so much weight?
	Like, I can't understand fundamentally how people get fat.
	I don't know.
	I think it's because they're told not to tell that stuff to others, though.
	And I think that's probably where I get my passive aggression from, too, is I'm kind of told not to really tell the truth because it can be hurtful to others.
	No, what that means is that people always say others when they mean themselves, right?
	People say, well, you need to sacrifice.
	Politicians will say, sacrifice yourself to society.
	Who does society turn out to be?
	Well, them.
	And people say, well, don't be rude to others because it makes them uncomfortable.
	What they're saying is the truth makes me uncomfortable, but I don't want to say that.
	So I'll talk about generic others.
	They say always means I say.
	Sorry?
	Right.
	I'm normally in those situations too where like if I do tell the truth, it'll hurt someone or it'll actually come back to me because it'll be such a lash back towards that effect.
	Yeah, and what that means is that whoever told you that says that if you tell me the truth and it upsets me, I'll fuck you up.
	Right, that's kind of more or less, either directly or indirectly, I have that kind of thing being told, yeah.
	Yeah, most people will put forward principles to mask their own selfish desires.
	Right, right, right, right, right.
	I mean, the people who say, well, you know, that's a social contract, what they mean is that I want to impose violent obligations on you, and it sure is cheaper if you believe that it's a contract.
	It's easier to enforce, and it's cheaper for me if you believe that you're somehow obligated to obey my weaponry, because then I need much less weaponry.
	I don't need to pay the enforcers as much.
	It's just profitable.
	And they put it forward as a principle, but it's just following their own selfish desires to control other people.
	And if you can get the slave to forge his own chains, that's just one less trip to the locksmith, right?
	Or to the smithy.
	Right, exactly.
	But kind of going back to how do I find my callings?
	I know it's not in accountancy.
	I know it's not in the CPA, despite what everybody tells me.
	The whole different motivations from, you'll get all this women, you'll get all this money, you'll get all this, you'll get all that.
	Wait, wait, sorry.
	Did you go into accountancy for the women?
	No, no, no, no, no, no.
	But somebody used that as a motivation for me to get the CPA. Right.
	Oh, like, so if you get money, then you can afford a prettier woman, right?
	Right, because of the status.
	Ah, you gotta love those Tom Likas listeners.
	Anyway, go on.
	But I mean, like, I don't know, just something about that didn't jive to me.
	I got into it.
	I got into studying for CPA for a little bit, and then it just didn't, it didn't really stick.
	Yeah, look, I can't tell you obviously what you should do with your life, but I'll tell you what I would do if I were in your shoes.
	Well, I'm not looking for what to do, but how to find what to do.
	Well, yeah, that's what I'm going to tell you, at least from my perspective.
	The problem that you have in your life is not your motivation, it's not your ambition, or anything like that.
	The problem that you have in your life is your relationships.
	You know, we are nothing.
	We are nothing without others.
	I mean, I really, really want people to understand that because voluntarism or anarchism or whatever it is, it's all about community.
	Right.
	Philosophy is all about community.
	Did I teach myself English?
	No.
	No.
	Did I come up with all the words for everything?
	No!
	Did I invent logic?
	No!
	Did I invent the internet?
	No!
	The headphone?
	The computer?
	No!
	The clothes I'm wearing?
	No!
	A man born alone on a desert island grows up mostly indistinguishable from a bald ape.
	We are nothing without others.
	You find a part of your personality that has not been influenced by By language, by society, by community, by reading movies.
	You can't!
	We are nothing without others.
	Like this woman who drove the car, this high-speed chase or whatever in Washington.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I'm in the area, so I remember her on Zero Hedge.
	That's scary as hell.
	Can I just point out what's kind of weird?
	So yesterday, it was two days after it happened, and some people – I was reading a couple of the comments on the video I put out about it, and some people were saying, ah, Steph, you got it totally wrong, and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	So I thought, okay, maybe new facts have come out.
	Maybe I'll offer a retraction or whatever if I've made a mistake or been premature.
	Well, so I went to look for the story.
	So I looked on the Drudge Report.
	I looked on Huffington Post.
	I looked on Yahoo.
	I looked on Fox.
	I looked – and it was gone.
	Nothing.
	Zero story.
	There was one thing on Fox about how we need to set up more resources for the mentally ill.
	But the story was gone.
	In a day and a bit, the story had vanished.
	From at least the news sources that I checked out.
	I mean, it wasn't an exhaustive search, and maybe it was all on TV. But compare that to the Zimmerman trial, which is where another black person got shot, and this was just plain gone.
	I just want to point out, by the by, it's just fascinating.
	I bet you there was no rule that went out and said we can't talk about it, but it's interesting how the media is like a bunch of birds in flight.
	They all turn at the same time, even though there's no leader, right?
	It's gone because it doesn't serve anyone's narrative, right?
	Zimmerman served a narrative, and this woman's death serves no narrative.
	It doesn't serve anyone's cause.
	It doesn't allow anyone to extend power.
	It doesn't allow anyone to insult anyone else.
	It doesn't serve anyone.
	So it's just dropped.
	And that's really important to understand that this is not news.
	It is news that this happened, and there's lots of important things to be talked about in the incident.
	Right.
	But it doesn't serve anyone's agenda.
	Right.
	And therefore, it is dropped.
	And that's what's really important.
	When you see news, you just replace it with the word agenda, and you're in the ballpark of what's actually going on.
	But anyway, so...
	Yeah, that's true.
	So with this woman, right?
	So she was in postpartum depression, they say.
	She did have a head injury, apparently.
	Fell down some stairs, and she was...
	And head injuries can be associated with increased aggression.
	And so, yeah, she may have had a physical brain injury, all of which I completely admitted to in the video that I made, by the way.
	This is what people don't understand.
	A, they think I'm defending the cops shooting her, which I never did in any way, shape, or form.
	Or B, they think I'm jumping to conclusions, which I wasn't.
	I mean, I don't normally defend what I do, right, because it's sort of pointless.
	But just at this instance, for people so they can understand, what I was saying is that the media was jumping to conclusions that absolved the woman of moral responsibility immediately.
	When they didn't have the information to.
	And that's telling.
	No matter what information...
	If it comes out that this woman had a brain tumor, the media was still wrong to excuse her without information.
	That's all I was talking about.
	And that had already occurred in the media coverage.
	And so even if it did...
	So if it founds that if they find out where she had some horrible lesion on her brain that made her this aggressive, let's say they find that out in the autopsy, Then people are going to say, ah, Steph, you jumped the gun.
	No, I didn't.
	Because I was talking about something objective that had already occurred, which was the media already forgiving her and creating excuses for her without that information.
	So even if it turns out that she was truly brain-damaged...
	It still doesn't matter at all in terms of what I said.
	And if the cops shot her entirely unjustly, that still has no effect.
	It's still wrong, but it has no effect on what I said.
	I was talking about something that had already occurred, which was that the media were inventing endless excuses for her behavior with no knowledge.
	And that stands no matter what happens afterwards, right?
	Right.
	I mean, I tend to go in that way that's part of the cultural mores that we have, and I agree that's wrong too, that they just kind of tend to forgive women for every kind of moral misgiving that they commit.
	Which is so insulting.
	I mean, the fact that, I mean, I have a daughter.
	I don't want my daughter to be insulted by people telling her she's not responsible for her life or to her decisions.
	I don't want that for my daughter.
	That's toxic for my daughter.
	People might as well be putting a slow poison into her drinking water.
	It's deeply offensive to me that this would be occurring and that it's not even a subject of debate.
	I mean I want my daughter to go into a world that treats her with respect and that means giving her responsibility.
	I do not want this world where she can just do whatever she wants and people will almost rush to her defense and justify her.
	That's terrible.
	I mean, I don't think that she'll turn out to be a bad person even with that, but I still don't want that.
	Because, you know, most people seek for advantage in an amoral way.
	And you can see this happening with women constantly.
	Like, almost 70% of child abductions are done by women.
	Are women called kidnappers in society when this happens?
	No.
	Well, you know, or people say, my God, I mean, people say about this woman, well, she panicked.
	You know, guys are yelling at her, they've got guns, and so she panicked.
	I mean, my God.
	Again, maybe she has a brain damage.
	I don't know.
	But nobody knows what the hell she did.
	Nobody knows why.
	But the coming up with she panicked turns her into an idiot victim.
	You know, panic doesn't make you drive a car and maneuver it out of a parking lot, drive it 80 miles an hour down the street.
	That's not panic.
	Yeah, I mean – but the idea that, well, women are so feeble-minded that if they do something that they know is going to cause a violent response – in other words, they drive into a barricade right next to the White House with nine million police around.
	Everyone freaked out because of the Fort Hood shooting and everybody terrified of car bombs.
	I mean how many of these guys who were at the barricade were Iraq vets or – Events of Afghanistan where car bombs were a huge problem.
	How many times have they been told and had they been trained?
	Well, you've got to watch out for car bombs.
	People say, oh, they should have shot out her tires.
	I mean, give me a break.
	You try and shoot out just a tire in something that's moving 80 miles an hour.
	road and hitting someone else.
	People just say the most insane things.
	Plus, cops are not allowed to discharge their guns at a moving car.
	Cops are not allowed to discharge their weapons at a moving car.
	At least, city cops.
	I don't know about the capital cops.
	But it is not allowed.
	Because if you shoot the person in the moving car, then you have a moving car with a dead driver.
	Oh, that's not good, right?
	Or if you miss, which you're most likely to do, the ricochet is going to hit someone else.
	Because if the car is around people, in other words, if it's really dangerous, if she was doing this in the middle of a desert, I'll go drive until your gas runs out, right?
	Fine.
	Hit a cactus.
	Who cares, right?
	But if she's driving around people and you're trying to shoot out some woman or the triers where there's a bunch of people, you're going to miss and hit the people most likely.
	But people are just, oh, she panicked.
	You don't know that.
	But the fact that you're saying that means that you're treating her like...
	A complete retard.
	I mean, it's like saying, I pull a gun out on an airplane.
	Hi, NSA. I put a gun out on an airplane and then I'm like really freaked out.
	I panic because everybody reacts negatively.
	Right.
	You know, if she drives into a barricade by the White House and then she panics because people draw weapons at her and tell her to get out of the car, that's saying that she's functionally retarded.
	Of course that's what's going to happen.
	Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, mm-hmm.
	I mean, she completed whatever training you need for it to be a dental assistant.
	She did all of that.
	And then the idea that she's just going to panic because she drives into a barricade by the White House and experiences a negative police reaction is to say again that she's like a child would know that.
	She panicked.
	I mean, come on!
	It's like walking through a TSA scanner with all these wires and things attached to your body and then panicking because you experience a negative response.
	No!
	I mean, oh, anyway, it's just tragic, of course, how uncomfortable.
	And it just shows you, right?
	I mean, if you ever want to know who rules over you, simply look at who you are not allowed to criticize.
	That's what Voltaire said, and he's right.
	I'm sorry, are we not allowed to call women...
	Possibly immoral?
	Anyway.
	Sorry for that sideways rant.
	I think I'm also kind of – I'm wondering if – like the last caller, if I may have a diminished capacity to find those unstable people or those crazies and so forth.
	Well, this is what he was saying about – yeah.
	I mean it's what the first guy was saying about this Moroccan woman he was interested in.
	She married a guy who threatened suicide if she left and who was a racist and who was unstable and who was white.
	But she had no way of knowing that ahead of time.
	Okay, well, if women are so emotional – this idea of panic is just this old thing that just women are so emotional – They're so hormonal.
	They can't think.
	They can't reason.
	They just make decisions emotionally, blah, blah, blah.
	Okay, fine.
	Then we obviously need to rescind the vote, right, for women because they don't reason.
	They don't think.
	They just make decisions emotionally.
	So clearly they can't vote on the rational long-term interests of their country.
	They're just going to snap like frogs at a...
	Fly, go and buy of whatever goodies the government's going to hand them at the moment, which I guess is sort of the argument against – one of the arguments against Obamacare is simply a – it's a transfer of wealth from those who use the healthcare system the least, i.e.
	young men, to those who use the healthcare system the most, i.e.
	the older and women.
	Women in their 20s and 30s, as Peter Schiff has pointed out, are continually going to the doctor if they could – For various things and endometriosis and, of course, if they are pregnant, the 20s and 30s, they go to use the healthcare system a lot.
	And, yeah, so I mean – so this is what I – if we're going to – there's only one lever that goes up and down.
	Everybody wants to have different levers.
	Well, when a woman does something bad, we're going to say she has diminished responsibility.
	We're not going to give her moral responsibility.
	But if you say that, well, then the natural result is if you think women don't have moral responsibility and can't think straight and can't reason and just make decisions emotionally and panic and freak out and are hormonal and get postpartum, then clearly they can't vote, right?
	Because we don't allow children to vote, and if you're going to say women are like children, then women shouldn't be allowed to vote.
	But if women are allowed to vote, which of course is perfectly fair in the state of system, if women are allowed to vote, then they get 100 percent moral responsibility.
	That's the price of autonomy.
	Anyway, sorry, go on.
	Right, right, right.
	I get that.
	I mean, I don't know.
	It's just – it's kind of weird how that works out.
	But kind of – if I was to kind of go back a few steps – How is it that I can work on that detecting capability?
	No, you need to figure out what is – talk to people about what's missing in your relationship.
	recognize that who you are and the decisions that you've made are relational.
	Now, I know, look, I know I say to people, take 100% responsibility, and then I say that your decisions are relational.
	I get that that sounds like a paradox.
	I really, I get that.
	I do have to own the products of my choices either way, though, but I mean...
	No, but you are 100% responsible for making your decisions relational, right?
	So you were heavily influenced by your mom.
	You're still responsible for choosing to go to college.
	You didn't have a gun to your head.
	But you are now 100% responsible for ensuring that you have a great circle of advisors in your life.
	Thank you.
	Which means not putting up with allowing other people to impose their neurotic agendas on you.
	Which means pushing back when you get pressure that's based upon what the other person thinks is good for you or what the other person wants or what would gain the other person approval.
	You are now 100% responsible for making sure you get a great circle of advisors in your life.
	Which means those people who are not great advisors in your life need to be brought up to speed on the new counsel of you.
	Which means you sit down with your mom or sit down with your dad or sit down with your friends and say, how could this happen that I end up unhappy in my CPA degree?
	If you end up in a bad relationship...
	You sit down with your friends and say, A, did you not see that this woman was crazy?
	If you didn't see that this woman is crazy, it means you're crazy, you're off the council.
	If you did see this woman was crazy and you didn't tell me, you're off the council.
	Because it meant that you knew I was sailing into a disaster and you didn't stop me.
	Now, if they say, oh my god, I feel so terrible, I was a terrible friend, I'm going to figure out, then they can apply to be back on the council.
	But sorry, go ahead.
	Well, yeah, let me posit this, though.
	For example, my father, I told him he's an atheist.
	He still sends me emails regarding love Jesus and religion and stuff like that.
	Yeah, so you sit down and you tell him and you say, Dad, do you understand that I'm an atheist, yes or no?
	Do you understand that you're basically telling me pray to Rumpelstiltskin?
	Right, right.
	Worship unicorns.
	Be sure to let leprechauns into your heart!
	Right?
	Kneel before the holy ghosts of the tree elves, right?
	Right, right, right.
	Does he understand that you don't believe or you accept that these things are unreal?
	Now, if he understands it and still continues sending this stuff...
	doesn't see you for who you are.
	It's about his preferences, his needs, nothing to do with you.
	Sorry?
	That's what's called erasure, correct?
	Yeah.
	I mean, it's just a blind, narcissistic push of his preferences that erases you.
	You're not there.
	Right, right, right.
	And if you're not there to people, they can't be on the council, right?
	It's like I don't get to apply to a board of directors for a company that I don't think exists.
	Correct, correct.
	But the question arises, though, like, how can I reasonably expect individuals like that, you know, I mean you can question me for keeping those individuals in my life.
	No, you give them every opportunity.
	You give them every opportunity.
	Do you know what?
	I mean I've talked about this before but it's been a while.
	So let me just mention this very quickly.
	You give people in your life every opportunity to do the right thing.
	Every opportunity to do the right thing.
	You tell them what you're unhappy with.
	You give the principles by which you think it's reasonable and fair.
	You tell them what you think and feel.
	You invite them for feedback.
	If they have real problems, you say maybe we can go to therapy or maybe you can go to therapy and figure these things out so that you can be there for me or whatever, right?
	You give people every opportunity.
	You've got a problem with your parents.
	You sit down.
	You continue to work it out.
	You continue to try and work it out.
	And after a while, and you will get this emotionally, if they don't change, if they continue to be blind to you, if they continue to impose their agenda upon you, if they continue to selfishly mess up your life for the sake of their own irrational preferences, you will get something called closure.
	year.
	Thank you.
	Now, closure is simply another word for certainty or acceptance.
	Closure is when you get that there is nothing else that you can do to stimulate change in someone else and they still have not changed.
	So if you have a big giant boulder in the way of your car and you need to get somewhere very urgently, you will get out of your car and you will try to move that boulder.
	You'll put your shoulder to it.
	You might put rocks under it and get a big stick or a log and try and lever it out the way.
	You might try pushing against it gently with your car.
	You might see if there's a way around it and so on.
	Okay, yeah.
	Now, if at some point, after all of that effort you get, that you simply cannot move that boulder, then you have closure with that.
	And you will turn your car around and you will try and find another way to get where you want to go, right?
	Because you've tried everything.
	And you know that to continue to try...
	Like, have you ever had it where you've lost something and you've realized that you're actually looking in the same place again?
	Yes.
	Okay, yeah.
	We've all done that, right?
	And that's because you're resisting the knowledge that you really don't know where it is.
	Like, I keep a pretty tidy house.
	And the reason that I keep a pretty tidy house is I have a habit of putting things down.
	Like God knows where, right?
	Why are my glasses in the freezer or whatever?
	I put things down and I need to keep a tidy house because if I put things down because I'm thinking about a show or having a great conversation with my wife or my daughter, I'll just put – and so I need to keep a tidy house because otherwise I spend my whole life looking for things.
	Yeah.
	And so the point is that with people in your life – You keep a tidy house.
	You keep it open.
	You keep it clutter-free.
	You keep it direct.
	And you give them every opportunity to change, to be invited into growing with you, right?
	With the full knowledge that it is ultimately their responsibility whether they do it or not.
	Now, once you've exhausted every possibility to get someone in your life to do something differently and they have resisted you every single time… Then you get closure and you get the certainty which is to say this person is not going to change.
	And then you make your decisions accordingly.
	I don't know what those decisions are and I don't know when this happens.
	I don't know how much you have to try.
	With parents, I think you try a lot.
	I mean, they can be so incredibly helpful in your life that to go through life without parents is a real challenge, right?
	Because they're wise.
	They've got experience.
	They know more about things than you do.
	They're older.
	They've known you since you were a baby.
	So if there is a potential source of wisdom in your parents, do what you can to get there.
	But if your parents are genuinely or even unconsciously committed to leading you astray and having you serve their agenda, then they're very dangerous because they just have so much power because they're parents, right?
	And I think that's the feeling I'm getting, too.
	I think that's the thing.
	I'm getting that feeling that through the erasure that I get, despite having clearly elucidated certain things in my parents, like the atheism, that it's just not happening.
	I mean, I stopped talking to my mom.
	mom.
	That's one thing I didn't say before, but I stopped talking to my mom for some time.
	Actually, she emailed me earlier today saying, I haven't spoken to you in such a long time.
	I stopped talking with her.
	It just didn't seem like things were getting anywhere.
	And she keeps going like, when are you going to come and be an adult and hash out this issue with me or whatever?
	I'm like, I already tried to hash it out.
	And you insulted me saying that, you know, when I'm doing this and anything to you.
	So fine, I'm out of here.
	Right.
	Well, and I'm sorry about that, but you need good people on your council.
	You need good, healthy, curious, responsible, mature people on your life council.
	Thank you.
	Having a bunch of sane people and one selfish person doesn't work.
	It's confusing and it tends to drive away the good people from your council, right?
	Yeah, I get that much.
	I'm thinking like, so qualities to look for, like curiosity, they have concern, they have principle, they care about you, that kind of thing.
	Yeah.
	I mean, look, I've got a whole book on real-time relationships, which hopefully will lay some of that out.
	And listen, we actually have two more callers.
	I think I'll only get to one more, and I appreciate your patience for those who are listening.
	There's this idea of having the council.
	Companies have boards of directors.
	Everybody has somebody who looks over their shoulder and helps them out, and helps them out.
	I mean, every time you shoot a movie, you show the rushes to everyone and say, well, what works and what doesn't?
	Nobody goes it alone.
	Nobody does it alone.
	And have a good counsel in your life or your life will become immeasurably difficult and you will end up blaming yourself for stuff, which is, you know, obviously it's 100% your responsibility, but it's 100% your responsibility to get really great advisors in your life.
	And yes, yes, I know people liked my little preacher voice praising the leprechauns and so on, and I enjoyed it too, and I could have kept going, but the reality is that this fine young man has a history of people running their own preferences and not listening to him, and although it was fun for me to do the leprechaun preacher voice, I had to make sure that I really focused on him and not ran that, which was pleasurable to me at the expense of listening to him, because that he's got enough of.
	So if we can move on to the next caller, let's do that.
	See you around, man.
	All right, Tony, you're up last.
	All right.
	Hello, Stefan.
	I've got a couple of questions.
	The first one's kind of light and kind of simple.
	The other one's more serious.
	My first question is, is the childhood game I'm Not Touching You, could that be seen as initiation of force or an NAP violation or something?
	What is that game?
	Basically, a child will point their finger at another child and be maybe an inch or so away from them and just repeatedly say, I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you.
	Usually, if it goes on long enough, the other child ends up hitting them and saying, well, I guess you win then.
	I don't know.
	I didn't have quite such gentle games when I was a kid.
	I mean, there is, of course, a personal space issue.
	So if somebody whips out their dick, masturbates themselves to erection, and then puts that erection one millimeter from your ass, is that a violation of your personal space?
	Yeah, it kind of is.
	And I think it is an initiation of force to invade people's personal space.
	The reason being that in order to deploy self-defense, you have to have the reasonable expectation that you are in danger.
	You don't actually have to wait until you're hurt.
	And so somebody who invades your personal space...
	It's committing an act of aggression against you, and it's clearly displaying dangerous and provocative behavior.
	Now, a person who points...
	But if you have the option to leave the area, then you should leave the area, right?
	So if some kid does that to you in a park, then you just go to another area of the park.
	Now, if they keep following you, that becomes a different matter, right?
	But just move away.
	Now, if somebody is jabbing their finger in my face and yelling at me or whatever and I'm cornered, then I will probably assert that and push that because they're already acting in an aggressive manner.
	They're invading my personal space.
	They're yelling at me.
	I'm cornered.
	And so it is reasonable, I think, then to push back, not violently or whatever, but to assert back your own personal space.
	So if you're in the backseat of a car with some other kid and they're doing that, then, of course, you would appeal to the parents to intervene and so on, and that would be the case.
	But I don't think that simply pointing a finger at someone close, it's kind of offensive, but I don't think that would be an act of aggression worthy of self-defense.
	But certainly if you've got some kid cornered and whatever, then yeah, I certainly wouldn't have a problem with that at all.
	Yeah, I've seen instances where a child would do that to another.
	This was while I was growing up.
	And they would actually address an adult, whether it's a teacher or a parent or whatever.
	And they'd say, they're messing with me in this way and things like that.
	And the parent would ask, so were they touching you?
	And no.
	Well, then what's the problem kind of thing?
	I guess they didn't necessarily understand the proximity.
	No, no.
	But that's irrational because to street-proof your children, you don't have to say, well, wait until someone's touching your genitals before you act to escape the situation, right?
	So we tell our children in terms of sexual abuse to – you don't wait until the touch has actually occurred, right?
	And we don't require that from adults either.
	I mean you can act in self-defense legitimately and justly without ever being touched.
	I mean somebody pulls a gun out and points it at you, you shoot them.
	You've not been touched, right?
	That's because there's clear intent for threat.
	And so if you have clear intent for threat, then self-defense is – proportional self-defense, right?
	You don't shoot a kid who's got their finger in your face, but you can – if you can't escape the situation, then you can push back.
	I certainly wouldn't – I wouldn't have a problem with that.
	Creating these rules – Like, well, did they touch you and all that?
	I mean, it's not how adult life works, and it's just another way that what you do is then the bullies say, oh, okay, so I can do anything I want as long as I don't touch, and then the bullies invent all these sadistic little games where they don't quite touch you but almost do, you know, just shit like that.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	All you're doing is giving the rules for bullies to continue to harass people, and you've given them the rules by which they can get away with it, so I would not follow that one.
	Okay.
	My next question, I'm not really sure how to word it.
	Basically, I've been having a growing rift in my family.
	It's pretty much always been there, but basically since I've been learning from you and things like that, it seems like that rift...
	I think it's because I've been able to start identifying where different things come from.
	And I'm kind of on the verge of making that decision whether to cut off contact with them or not.
	My mom, that contact is already severed.
	The relationship with her was even worse than with the rest of my family.
	She's addicted to prescription drugs and things like that, so I'm not even talking to the person anymore.
	Was that the case when you were younger too?
	Um...
	I think she started on that stuff.
	I think she started taking prescriptions for depression and things like that when I was around my early middle school years, maybe.
	I can't say for sure.
	It was kept away from me for a while.
	I don't know if that was some kind of cohesion of authority or something like that.
	But definitely hit its lowest point when I was in high school.
	She would...
	We'd never get out of bed except to go to the bathroom, and we would always have to run food and drink and things like that up to her.
	We would have to take the dishes and trash back down, and she kept the room as dark as possible.
	So it definitely hit a low point.
	And eventually, after my dad finally divorced her, she started going into some of the illegal stuff.
	So it just...
	I'm sorry about that.
	That's just terrible.
	I mean, how heartbreaking that you should have to take care...
	be concerned and worried about her and so on.
	I mean, my mom also would take to bed for weeks at a time and I'd sort of come home.
	I'd actually check her pulse when I would come home from school and make her some tea or whatever.
	I don't know what she was doing in bed.
	And it was just her and me at that point.
	My brother was in England for a couple of years.
	And it is.
	It's really a pretty – it's so terrible and terrifying that there's just this silent bell echo in your soul that you're just in this state of caution and paralysis.
	And I didn't even feel that strongly about it.
	But it definitely in hindsight was like a sound so loud that all you hear is a faint ringing.
	It's a fear so great that you simply go inside yourself like a crab taking its legs in or a snail going into its shell.
	And work day by day to try and survive and hope for the best.
	And it's incredibly isolating as well because you're not in a society where anybody asks what's going on or why you smell when you come to school or whatever.
	So I'm very sorry about that.
	I know it's not quite the same.
	You had other people in the household and so on.
	With me, it was just myself and my mom.
	But it is a terrifying thing when your caregiver stops functioning and there's no explanation.
	It's very, very scary.
	She was extremely verbally abusive to my sister.
	I mean, I remember one instance where she referred to her as a slut when she was really too young to understand what that word meant.
	Oh, she called your sister a slut when your sister was a little girl?
	Yeah, yeah.
	She, I mean, she hadn't, I don't believe she was even approaching puberty at the time and definitely didn't understand what the word meant and things like that, which she was just relaying what was done to her.
	Her mother was very verbally abusive towards her and things like that.
	So, I mean, that was fairly easy to identify the source of that.
	And what did your father say when your mother was saying these just appalling things to your sister?
	They would get into arguments and fights about it, but he wasn't around a lot because he was working and things like that.
	But when he was home, he had to take care of the house because she wouldn't do it.
	She was just very disconnected and everything.
	So, yeah, they would get into screaming matches, and of course with his emotions high and everything, it would cause the interactions with us as children to be strained as well.
	And there was definitely a lot of yelling growing up.
	I'm so sorry about that.
	And when – how old were you when your father divorced your mother?
	I was already an adult.
	My dad didn't decide to finally split from her until he made sure that my little brother, who's the youngest of us, came to him and said, why are you still with her?
	Because she's very manipulative, and he felt that if any of us were still at...
	A very impressionable age that she would manipulate the child to her side and possibly face more of the abuse and manipulation and things like that.
	So he waited until his youngest said, why are you still with her?
	Because all three of us went through that with my dad.
	And then he finally called it quits.
	Wow.
	And how does he feel about you not speaking with her?
	He's fine with it.
	Basically what caused that final decision there was I hadn't seen or heard from her in a couple of months and it was through the holiday season that I hadn't really heard from her.
	I usually give a call to everybody in my family and stuff around the holidays to see how they're doing, what their plans are, things like that.
	And a couple of holidays went by and I didn't have any contact from her.
	So I went to her house And there was a car I didn't recognize in the driveway and I tried the lock and the lock had been changed so my key didn't work in the front door.
	I was able to get in through the back door and was hollering, Mom, Mom, Mom, where are you?
	Things like that.
	And finally she said something as I was approaching the bedroom.
	I go in there, and she is sitting on the bed with this guy that I never met, and the TV's on, but it's muted.
	And I'm like, what the hell?
	I haven't heard from you in forever.
	I didn't know if you were dead or anything like that.
	But basically after that event, probably a couple weeks after that event, she sent a letter to my dad's house, since that seems to be the only address she can remember, and basically said that if the three of us wanted any contact with her, we had to go through her lawyer because she fears for her safety because her children broke into her house when I was merely just concerned for her safety.
	Oh, gosh.
	Yeah.
	Wow.
	What a mess.
	I'm so sorry.
	Gosh, what a legacy.
	I mean, that's just terrible.
	God, what can I say?
	I mean, it's just wretched and appalling.
	I'm so sorry.
	I'm so sorry.
	I know.
	So I tried to maintain a relationship with my dad and with my brother and my sister, but that's becoming more and more difficult because they are so dismissive of me and my ways of thinking and everything.
	They...
	They are still in the status, religious, spankings, a legitimate form of discipline kind of paradigm.
	And they say, well, if a subject's sensitive or whatever, you just don't talk about it.
	I'm like, well, this is philosophy.
	This kind of has a place in every aspect of my life.
	I mean if I'm going to take – What that means is that they're exquisitely concerned with sensitivity and upset, right?
	They really don't want to be upset, right?
	Now, if I remember rightly, spanking a child is not exactly being concerned with what upsets that child, right?
	Right.
	So I'm not sure how that can be universalized.
	If they're like, well, don't talk to me about spanking being bad because that's upsetting to me.
	Well, spanking is upsetting the child.
	So if the child can fucking take it, maybe you can too.
	Yeah, well, that's kind of what runs – something along those lines is what runs through my mind, but I don't really say it.
	I mean, there's a certain – I mean, I feel – I have feelings of being flat out completely rejected that I don't necessarily want to face from them.
	So, I mean, there's a lot of things that I don't say to them.
	But what I do say, I do face lesser forms of criticism and ridicule over, so – I don't know.
	It's kind of a circular back and forth sort of thing.
	So I don't really have a whole lot of contact with them.
	And whenever I do have contact with them, they'll say, well, you know, the phone works both ways or the road goes both ways and things like that.
	And I tell them, well, when was the last time you came to see me?
	I have spent more time in my own place with my wife's folks than I have with my own dad.
	And my siblings have come even less.
	To be fair, my sister is living in Michigan.
	I'm in Ohio, so there's a great deal of distance there.
	But when she does come to visit, it only goes as far as my dad's house.
	She can't make it the extra half hour to see where I live or something.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Well, I mean, I don't...
	Obviously, I can't tell you what to do, but what I can say is that I just...
	I'm an empiricist, which means that I just look for physical evidence where I can't reason things out.
	And in relationships, you can't reason things out.
	You can reason out principles, you can reason out science, but you can't reason out relationships.
	Because then that would be to treat people as deterministic objects, right?
	Like I can reason if I throw a ball down a hill, I can reason that it's going to roll down until it meets too much resistance and stops, right?
	I know that.
	But I can't have a relationship that I can reason out.
	Because if I reason out the relationship, it means that I'm treating the person as an inanimate machine.
	Now, to be fair, some people are inanimate machines.
	In other words, their defenses are so strong that you know what they're going to say before they say it.
	And that means that they've given up their free will and they're simply allowing their...
	Immature emotionality to dictate, to literally dictate their responses and they're a little more free than a robot or a rock bouncing down a hill.
	So if I can perfectly predict what someone is going to say, then I'm not having a relationship with them because it's not alive.
	The only reason we have conversations with people is because we don't know what they're going to say.
	Chatting with my wife about this Washington woman, I don't know what she's going to say.
	I mean, I know she's not going to say crazy things, but I don't know what she's going to say.
	And so I ask her because I want to know.
	And so because of that, I can't reason out the relationship because she is a sovereign individual with great intelligence and wisdom that is going to only expand my thoughts and knowledge of the situation, right?
	And the reason I'm saying this is that where reason fails...
	We work with empiricism.
	Like if I said there's an alternate dimension, what temperature does a liquid freeze at in that dimension, what would you say?
	Don't know.
	Don't know.
	We're going to have to go and test, right?
	Can't reason that out.
	If I say a new tree has been discovered in the Amazon, how tall is it?
	Don't know.
	Have to go and look?
	Don't know.
	If I say a man has strangled his child, is that immoral?
	Say yes.
	Don't need to go and check it out, right?
	Spanking is immoral.
	Yes, it is the initiation of the use of force.
	I don't need to go and check it out.
	So relationships, if they are relationships, are full of unknowns, which is why you have relationships.
	I mean, discovering my friends' and family's perspectives on things is delightful.
	My daughter will, over lunch, ask me about every caller in the show and I will deliver her age-appropriate synopses and she will tell me what she thinks.
	I don't know what she's going to think, but I do know it's going to be very interesting.
	I don't know what she's going to say about this call with you, but I do know that it's going to be very interesting and we're going to have a great conversation about it.
	Oh, I wish I could hear it.
	I wish I could hear it.
	I mean, the things that you've quoted your daughter saying and things like that are just amazing.
	She is so funny.
	I mean, let me tell you something.
	This is just a by-the-by.
	She's very smart.
	So I like goofing around with her when we have dinner, like in restaurants.
	I pretend to take her food and all that.
	It's fun.
	And she giggles a lot during that.
	Anyway, so we were waiting to go to dinner.
	My wife was working and I took her out for dinner and we were waiting to go for dinner.
	And she doesn't like to be down on the ground because she's four, right?
	So I pick her up and she's sort of at my head level.
	And my wife is always saying when we goof around and she starts getting too loud, she says, hey, hey, this is a nice restaurant.
	McDonald's, who cares, right?
	But I say, oh, this is a nice restaurant.
	And we try to behave nicely in nice restaurants, not too loud and blah, blah, blah.
	And that's fair.
	I think that's reasonable, right?
	I mean, other people are paying for a quality dining experience, not punctuated by a child's giggles.
	Anyway, so I started to – I pretend to start eating her neck or whatever, right?
	And so she says, Daddy, Daddy, nice restaurant.
	Nice restaurant.
	Behave.
	And I'm like, oh, man.
	That's brilliant.
	I mean because she couldn't – I had her in my arms.
	She couldn't get away from me chomping at her neck.
	And so she used this verbal defense, a UPB defense that was just perfect.
	And so anyway, I just – yeah, so we have these great conversations about the shows.
	I don't know what she's going to say because if I knew exactly what she was going to say, it wouldn't be a relationship.
	So the reason I'm sort of saying all of this is because when we withhold ourselves from our relationships – We are acting as if there is no relationship.
	Let me say that again.
	When we withhold ourselves from our relationships, we are acting as if there is no relationship.
	And the reason we are in relationships is that we are hoping for something new, for something different.
	Now, not random, but different.
	And if you're in a relationship with someone who's alive, who's thinking, who's growing, then you always have something new.
	Like I remember when I was younger, somebody saying to me, if you don't get married, you might have 10 or 20 relationships in your life.
	But if you do get married, you'll have thousands because your partner will constantly be changing.
	And that's true.
	You grow.
	I'm a different person post-dad.
	I'm a different person since I was in the business world.
	I'm a different person since I got cancer.
	I'm a different person.
	I'm not random, but I'm different.
	I've grown.
	But if you withhold yourself, if you withhold your knowledge, if you withhold your truth, if you withhold your thoughts, your feelings, your perspective, your experience...
	Then you are withholding the opportunity for the other person to be different.
	And you are saying, I know exactly what is going to happen if I tell the truth about myself to this person.
	Now, if you know exactly what's going to happen, then you do not have a relationship.
	Like, I know if I chat with a statue, that that statue is not going to respond.
	I know for certain that that statue is not going to respond.
	There was an old program in the 80s called Eliza, which was a pretend therapist, like you would type in your questions and Eliza would respond and so on.
	Now, if you knew the programming, in and out, you'd know exactly how Eliza would respond, right?
	I mean, maybe there was a little bit of randomness, but if you knew all the variables, you'd know exactly how Eliza would respond, and that would not be a relationship.
	The fun was, you know, typing stuff in.
	It wasn't that much fun, but there was a little bit of fun seeing what the response was.
	And so...
	The reason that I am honest in my relationships is I want them to be relationships.
	And also, if I have a problem with someone and I'm honest, sit down and talk about it with that person, I'm seeing how they respond.
	I will not deny myself information that is important to me.
	Right?
	I mean, if I want to diet, I'll start looking up information on how to diet because it's important to me.
	And it's very important to me To know how people are going to respond in their relationship with me when I'm honest.
	I also will not allow somebody else's negative response to come between me and my integrity.
	Right?
	This is what you need courage for.
	I will not allow somebody's potential negative response to come between me And what I perceive to be honest in the moment.
	I don't know whether it's pure objective platonic honesty or whatever.
	It doesn't really matter because all we have is honesty in the moment.
	And so if I'm angry, I will express anger.
	I won't be abusive, but I will express anger.
	If I'm scared, I will express fear.
	If I'm sad, I will express sadness.
	And the reason I do that is I do not want to deny myself the information about how the other person reacts.
	Now, if the other person continually reacts negatively, makes fun of me, mocks me, withdraws from me, rolls their eyes, well, that's information and I am an empiricist.
	Then, if I don't know how tall the new tree is in the Amazon, I just go measure it.
	Then I know how tall it is.
	And if I don't know whether somebody is going to respond positively or negatively, even if I suspect that they won't, I don't know for sure.
	Then I simply am honest with them and see how they respond, and that tells me how tall the tree is in the Amazon jungle.
	That's new.
	Don't deny yourself the feedback.
	Sorry, go ahead.
	Yeah, I know that if I keep things, if I keep conversations and things like that superficial and shallow, things will be fine.
	Everything will be great.
	What do you mean everything will be great?
	What do you mean everything will be great?
	We'll be able to laugh and have fun and enjoy the time together.
	Oh, you know that you won't have a negative response if you act without integrity.
	Yeah, but if I try to...
	If you're dishonest, you will get a positive response.
	That's not the same as everything being fine, right?
	Well, okay, so dishonesty by commission or omission, right?
	But that's not the same as everything being fine.
	Because you actually have just betrayed your values, right?
	And you've broken UPB. I assume that with other people in your life, you're honest.
	And if you then break UPB and say, well, I'm going to be honest with everyone in my life except my family of origin, then you've broken UPB. You've created subjective, conditional, fear-based anti-morality, right?
	Or anti-integrity.
	Because you're saying, well, I will be honest with people in my life except...
	For the worst among me, the worst and most annoying and dismissive and scornful among me, and then I would break my integrity to aid and abet the comfort of people who are actually the worst people in my life at the moment.
	But that's disrespectful to the good people in your life, right?
	Yeah.
	So no, we have to have the highest standards for the worst among us, right?
	I mean, you need the best doctor when you have the most dangerous illness.
	You need the strongest muscles when you have the heaviest weight.
	You need the most patience when things are most frustrating.
	And you need the greatest honesty with the most difficult people.
	That's just the basic virtue of integrity and courage, which we need because it's difficult, right?
	Yeah.
	So no, don't back down from the truth of your life with people just because they're snarky or bitchy or avoidant.
	Have the respect for your values.
	Have the respect for those people who you do love, who do accept you, to say, no, I'm not going to abandon my standards because somebody might be snarky.
	No.
	And I'm not going to teach that to my kids.
	I'm not going to teach that to my wife.
	I'm not going to teach that to my friends.
	That I'm only courageous where things are easy.
	That I'm only honest where there's no negative repercussions for honesty, right?
	That is not living philosophically.
	That's living easily.
	Yeah, I'd say that's probably where the biggest conflict within myself has been, you know, trying to stay true to myself and then...
	In turn, trying to make my interactions with my family as easy as possible just so I can kind of get in, do whatever commitment I have to, and get back out again.
	Right.
	Right.
	And you can certainly do that.
	But it doesn't have integrity.
	No.
	It doesn't have a commitment to honesty.
	And it is deeply insulting to your family because you're saying that you have no possibility of reacting positively to my honesty.
	You've already written them off.
	You already have no relationship with them.
	What I'm suggesting is at least have the possibility of a relationship with them.
	Don't write them off immediately.
	Or if you have written them off completely and totally, then don't pretend to have a relationship with them.
	But don't be in this half zone, right?
	Okay.
	If they're dead to you, then they're dead to you.
	But if they're not dead to you, give them the opportunity to come to life.
	Okay.
	And they might decide to be dead to me anyway.
	Maybe.
	Don't know for sure.
	Yeah, who knows?
	But if you don't know, then continue, I would argue, continue to try until you know.
	Which is something I've said from the very beginning.
	You break through or break out.
	But don't stay in limbo.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Another aspect of it I don't know why I forgot about it, but basically within the last couple years, my dad started dating this woman who originally was married, now is divorced,
	but she's also got custody of her grandkids, and now her and the grandkids and everything live at my dad's house, and it's almost like he's got this replacement family.
	Mm-hmm.
	Why does she have custody of her...
	Hang on.
	Why does she have custody of her grandchildren?
	Because...
	Because her daughter is dead?
	No.
	Because her daughter is a shitty mom?
	Yeah.
	Okay, so she raised the daughter who became a shitty mom, right?
	Uh-huh.
	Okay, that's important.
	Yeah.
	I think one of her kids are in jail...
	Drugs.
	For drugs.
	Oh, hi.
	Yeah, I don't know if it was possession or actual use or anything like that, but yeah, basically she used the very strong biblical-type discipline, you know, spare the rod, spoil the child kind of thing, and they ended up being...
	You know, the worst of society and unable to care for their own kids.
	So she ended up taking them on.
	And so now I don't know if dad's trying to, like I said, relinquish guilt or something like that, but he's pretty much the father figure in their lives now.
	And I definitely feel cheated to some degree, like he is trying to replace his family.
	I screwed up here, so let me have these things.
	Yeah, which he won't.
	Right.
	right?
	Has he gone to therapy?
	No.
	Has he apologized to you?
	Not really.
	I say not really because it's kind of...
	No, if there's doubt about it, then he hasn't.
	An apology is such a rare and precious thing that you would not forget it.
	It would not be oblique.
	And these children obviously are incredibly damaged, right?
	Yes.
	And so he's taken on the very toughest job of parenting with a woman who was abusive when she was a mom and who now has grandkids.
	The grandkids are damaged.
	The mom is out of the picture, at least...
	To some degree.
	And he hasn't gone to therapy.
	He hasn't improved.
	It's going to be another disaster.
	Yeah, it is.
	I mean, I don't even have any...
	Just like saying, is a rock going to fall?
	Yeah, of course.
	It's going to be another disaster.
	Oh, yeah.
	Yeah, I can see it coming, like a train barreling down on a car.
	Sure.
	He's learned nothing from his experience with your mom.
	No, and that's what I've been trying to talk with him.
	I'm about in everything, but whenever I show disapproval or something, you know, it's his life.
	It's not my problem, blah, blah, blah.
	Even though he's my dad, if he wants to be in my life, it kind of is my problem, you know, because I have to deal with it, too.
	Yeah.
	And you, of course, have to live in a society where these children are going to be raised to be part of, right?
	So it's not just his life.
	He's raising kids.
	Yep.
	Hmm.
	Well, I do want to thank you for your time.
	I do think I'm going to take your advice, you know, be true to myself, as difficult as it's going to be to interact with them in that fashion.
	And if they decide to distance themselves from me, I'm going to let that be their decision.
	Yeah.
	I mean, you break through until you get, you continue to try and break through until you get some kind of closure either way, that there is a breakthrough or you just don't particularly feel like calling them anymore.
	So I wish you the best of luck with that.
	I want to tell you how incredibly sorry I am that you're in this situation at all.
	And it is tragic.
	It's not how it should be at all.
	You should be...
	Accessing the wisdom of your parents' lives, they should be making things easier for you by helping you avoid problems, not creating problems for you, as it sounds like this is not the first time they're doing that.
	So I'm sure that you will be a different kind of person to your children than your parents were to you.
	And I'm very sorry that you had to face this, but man, Tony, massive congratulations on breaking the cycle.
	I mean, that's what it's all about.
	Thank you.
	I have to credit you in that.
	I mean, if I wouldn't have come across you and learned as much as I could from you.
	I mean, the interactions you talk about with your daughter, I want to have that with my children.
	And me and my wife are talking about having kids and things like that.
	So I want to try to filter through all this bullshit and get it out of there so my kids aren't exposed to it.
	So they can be the kind of people that Right.
	Well, I appreciate that.
	And look, I appreciate your kind words, and I don't take them lightly, and I'm certainly not trying to disagree with you, but crediting me for your growth is like crediting a diet book for you putting down the cheesecake.
	You know, fundamentally, it's your choice to not eat the cheesecake.
	You provided the book saying, okay, the cheesecake really is bad.
	It is, but I've provided this book to a lot of people, and still so many people are eating cheesecake.
	You've got to take some credit for putting down the cheesecake.
	If it were causal, then everyone who listened to my show would stop abusing their kids, would live philosophically, but a lot of people don't.
	So the fact that you did, it's not my doing, because if it were my doing, then everybody would do it.
	Then I would be causal, but it's not.
	There's a choice element involved.
	So I appreciate that.
	I'm not trying to say don't thank me, and I don't want to sound ungrateful, but I do want to point out that you have made the choice to absorb this material and to live philosophically, and that is to your credit.
	That is not my doing.
	I may have provided an opportunity, but you're the one who actually did the work and is making the change.
	So if I'm a catalyst, fantastic, but you are still supplying the energy to make the change and the concentration and the focus and the courage to make the change.
	So take massive credit for yourself as well.
	I was helped by 6 million people before, so I just really wanted to point that out.
	I hate to say I'm proud of people because it sounds paternalistic, but nonetheless, I mean, I'm so incredibly amazed and proud of how much people are responding to philosophy and living in a way that makes a massive, tangible, empirical difference in the world.
	Because I'm an empiricist, I just want to see...
	Violations of the non-aggression principle diminish, and that's to do with people's relationships because we can't bust the Fed.
	So I just wanted to point that out, that good for you, man.
	Good, good for you.
	Well, I was definitely, for a long time, a very negative person.
	Very few happy times that I could remember and things like that.
	Since finding my wife and since finding you, that has...
	Completely changed the other direction.
	So, yeah, I'm glad I was open to it.
	And you are definitely a very strong catalyst.
	So, yes, thank you.
	Appreciate that.
	And thank you, everyone.
	Thank you, Mike, for fighting your way through whatever bug has currently got you four-squared on the floor.
	And thank you to the listeners.
	I really appreciate your conversation.
	To the Greek man, don't do it.
	It's one of the few times I'll actually give somebody direct advice or at least go to therapy first before making any commitments.
	Have yourselves a wonderful week, everyone.
	I will talk to you Wednesday.
	FDRURL.com forward slash donate to help out the show.
	And if you want to, of course, get on these Sunday shows, you can just email Mike, operations at freedomainradio.com.
	Set yourself up to be – we can do phone or we can do Skype or whatever to pass you in.
	And last – But not least, you can check out our Amazon affiliate links if you need to buy some stuff.
	A little change comes our way at no cost to you, which is helpful.
	We take our Bitcoins and our Litecoins very seriously.
	I hang on to them like a skeleton with a diamond in some animated Sinbad movie.
	Oh dear, I'm afraid the metaphor got away from me.

▲