All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 4, 2022 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:14:57
Red Flags in Women!
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey, everybody.
Good afternoon. Yes, just by one minute.
It's Steph. It's the 4th of December 2022.
I hope you're having a great day.
Hope you are enjoying your weekend.
Hope you're spending quality time with quality people.
And now we get to spend the greatest quality time with the greatest quality people talking about philosophy.
Yes. The drug that has given and taken so much from all of us.
So... I am happy to hear if you have questions, comments, issues, challenges, criticisms, recipes, you name it.
I'm all here for you.
And let's go and check for questions.
If you want to talk about the Kanye stuff, I can talk about the Kanye stuff.
I'm happy to hear about whatever is on your mind and how philosophy can help you today.
So if you have a question or a comment, you can just raise your hand and I can unmute you and we can take our tonsils to town.
Ha ha ha ha ha!
Oh gosh, I remember being in a nightclub many years ago as a teenager and kissing a girl in the corner and ignoring my friends because I was young and full of hormones and then later saying, I'm sorry, I wasn't too chatty.
I was a little tongue-tied. Resurrecting jokes from 40 years ago.
Close on. Delightful.
Just delightful. Alright, so let's see here.
Steph, what's your analysis on the emo culture?
It kind of came and went, but I have the impression every teenager I meet today behaves exactly like the emos of my youth.
Yeah, that's a good question.
That's a good question. So, emo culture is a subset of goth...
Well, I guess goth culture and emo culture are related.
Emo is Echo and the Bunny Man and Joy Division and Mascara, and it's not quite as hardcore as the girls in stockings and black dresses who carry little coffins as purses.
It's not quite that morbid, but it's not far off.
So, emo culture...
Is depressed and hypersensitive.
These are the two characteristics of emo culture.
Now, the depressed and the hypersensitive kind of go hand in hand.
If you are hypersensitive, then...
And I say hypersensitive like it's not a negative judgment at all.
It's just an observation of a fact.
Hypersensitive... I'm writing about this in my new novel called The Present.
One of the divisions...
I'm not giving much of a spoiler here because it's pretty clear in the novel pretty early on.
One of the divisions is between the kids raised at their mother's breasts and the children who were just brought up in daycare.
At the daycare kids versus...
Or the daycare adults versus the mothered adults.
And so if you're hypersensitive...
Then you very rarely feel in control of your own emotions.
Because there's a terrifying song.
It's an incredible song by How Soon Is Now by The Smiths, right?
There's a club that you go...
Where you could find somebody who truly loves you.
So you go home, so you go on your own, and you sit on your own.
Then you go home, and you cry, and you want to die.
I am human, and I need to be loved, just like everybody else does.
And he says, I am the son and heir of a shyness that is criminally vulgar.
It's an old line from a 19th century novel, I think.
But that line about there's a place that you go, you could find someone who truly loves you, so you club that you go, so you go on your own and you sit on your own and you go home and you cry and you want to die.
This desperation to be loved, this desperation to be valued, this desperation to be treasured.
And feeling that you have to be chosen, that you have to be picked like you're some dusty toy in an ancient arcade machine and the claw just has to come down randomly and grab you and lift you up to happiness and being loved.
The emo culture is hypersensitive.
Why is it hypersensitive?
What does hypersensitivity mean?
Hypersensitive is like the raw-skinned knee that comes out of the endless bruising of being unloved.
It's a great song by Jan Arden, Unloved.
I saw her live, actually. She's quite the storyteller.
People falling, falling, falling, and I don't know where they're falling from.
They're just unloved.
If you're unloved by your mother, how can you feel worthy of love?
I'm just listening to...
Matthew Perry's autobiography.
And it's brutal.
I mean, it's just horrendous.
The three decades of addiction that he spent nine million dollars trying to get out of.
He was unloved, perceived himself as unloved, as unlovable.
And because he was unloved, because he was unable to consume any of the more noble and higher pleasures of the life of the mind and the life of virtue, he ended up chasing sensation.
Chasing sensation is a substitute for being loved.
And if you look at sort of the modern world, almost everything that people do is a substitute for being loved.
The fact of the matter is, though, there's absolutely no substitute for being loved.
And the only way that you can be loved is to love virtue.
The only way you can be loved is to love virtue.
Love virtue, and people who are virtuous can love you back.
Aim at diet and exercise.
It's your biggest chance of being healthy.
Aim at being virtuous and it's your biggest chance of being loved.
It's no guarantee. It's necessary but not sufficient.
So why are emo people so hypersensitive?
Why would people be so hypersensitive?
Well, if you're not loved, if you don't have a strong bond with your family of origin, then you are dependent on the kindness of strangers.
This is a line from Tennessee Williams' great play A Streetcar Named Desire.
I remember doing scene studies of it in theater school.
I was not much of a natural Stanley Kowalski.
I was great as Martin Luther in John Osborne's play about Luther.
I played Martin Luther, but I was not great as Stanley Kowalski.
He was too base and lizard-brained for me.
But there's a line, incredibly famous line, I never understood why it was so famous, genuinely never understood why it was so famous, where the crazy woman at the end of the play is being dragged off to an asylum, and the doctor who's taking her, she says, whoever you are, whoever you are, I have always depended on the kindness of strangers.
This was an incredibly famous line.
It hit people in the fields, like one of those videos of the cannon shooting the fat guy in the gut in the 1920s.
It just hit people so hard.
I never understood it. I never understood it.
But if you don't have the experience of love, and you don't manifest the love of virtue, then you are dependent on the kindness of strangers.
So the way that I sort of picture it, why are people so sensitive?
Well, if you're loved, then other people's negative opinion of you reflects on them, not on you.
I mean, I'm aware that there are some people who loathe me in the world, but I love virtue and I am loved in turn, and I have the immune system, so other people's negative opinion It doesn't really, I mean, it's that old line from the movie, you're about as much trouble as a cloudy day.
So, other people's opinions don't matter as much if you are loved and if you love virtue.
Now, if you are not loved and nobody teaches you to love virtue, then other people's opinions are overwhelming to you.
Your survival requires the kindness of strangers.
Your happiness requires someone in a club coming up and falling in love with you.
You can't be happy any other way.
You are greedy for being loved, but can't act in a way that will generate love.
So the emo kids are the kids of neglect.
The kids of unbelievably emotionally distant parents.
No connection.
No guidance.
No mentoring.
No training to virtue.
No abstract ideas.
No larger view. No deeper meaning.
These are the children who are fed and watered occasionally like the dying house plants of an indifferent bachelor.
And they rot in their rooms, online, on drugs sometimes.
And they drag themselves through life, hoping that in the desert of their existence, a cloud will form and water only them, for reasons unknown, the chance of reproducing it also unknown.
They have no way of guaranteeing any move towards a future where their happiness will be even remotely under their own control.
Neglected. Abandoned. Raising.
Themselves. There was a nineteenth-century German philosopher who said, I had to raise myself, and like all who had to raise myself, I did a very bad job of it, as if it's possible to do a good job in raising yourself.
As my daughter is navigating her social life, we have a lot of conversations.
We went for a nice long walk and had a chilly walk and had really great conversation about, you know, things that are going on in her social life and the pluses and minuses.
And she's got a great social life and great friends.
But, you know, she needs her feedback and she needs her thoughts shared.
And it's a wonderful thing to be able to chat with her about these things.
So, if you are raised...
Without any feedback, if you are raised trying to invent the wheel and language and interactions, it's exhausting.
It's exhausting.
You know that, I guess it's fairly old now, iPencil, which is a study in economics, which basically says, no one knows how to make a pencil.
Because you think of the ingredients you need for the pencil, you need the paint, you need the graphite or lead or whatever it's going to be, you need the eraser, you need the little metal rim around the eraser, you need a way to burn in the lettering, and you need a way to sharpen it, keep it sharp.
Nobody knows how to make a pencil. There's not one person who knows how to make a pencil.
How many people know how to invent a society, how to create a society?
It's exhausting trying to figure out how to interact with people when you're utterly untrained.
It's like trying to invent your own language.
And exhausted people are very sensitive.
We all know this when we're kids, right?
When we're kids, I used to hate this if I'd be emotional about something and you'd get this condescending statement, oh, he's had a big day.
Like, no, maybe you're all just being jerks.
So children who are tired tend to be more emotional.
And when you're raised without any feedback, without any instruction, You stagger through life fairly exhausted.
That exhaustion means that you want to be replenished by love, and that exhaustion means that you're prone to depression.
Now, when you're not taught how to live, how to interact, and this has really been the great boomer abandonment that happened starting in the 1970s, really.
Oh, 1960s, 1970s.
1970s in particular. The boomers just tossed the children to the four winds.
Screw it. We're going to key parties.
You could be raised by television.
Just completely. They gave up.
Just gave up. Trying to give any kind of moral, intellectual, social, or productive instruction to their children.
They just gave up.
Just gave up completely.
And the accumulated wisdom of thousands and thousands of years turned to ash dust and nothing.
Fairy farts and unicorn eyeballs drying out in the sun.
It all just faded to nothing.
They turned over their children to the management of leftists in the media and hyper-ideological teachers.
And so they were uninstructed.
They were unraised. Untutored.
It's exhausting. So when you're exhausted because you haven't been taught how to live, What do you do?
What do you do? Well, you look for a tribe.
You look for a pre-existing identity that you can bolt onto yourself in the pretense of having a personality.
You can't be yourself because you can't invent yourself.
You have to be something.
I mean, what do you do if your arm is broken?
You put it in a cast. What do you do if your personality is broken?
You insert it into a collective.
You create a shell of cliches around an absence of structure.
Collectivism results from neglect, abandonment.
If you are not nurtured into becoming who you are, then you have to become someone else.
You have to become something. You have to become something.
You can't just turn into vapor and sit in your room not existing.
Not for long anyway.
Not forever. So when you're not taught how to live, you gravitate towards a tribe.
The way to think of it is the Oliver Twist story.
It's a completely terrifying story.
Oliver Twist. It's worth reading.
Absolutely worth reading. This kid who's lost, this kid who's abandoned, this kid who's neglected, this kid who's alone.
He's on the streets in London to join a criminal gang just to survive.
If you're a beggar, how dependent are you on the kindness of strangers?
Well, to keep body and soul together, strangers have to be kind.
No other chance of living, of existing, surviving.
And if you are a spirit beggar, if you are an identity beggar, then you are dependent upon the approval of others to survive.
And so the emo culture is people whose identity has not been formed through love, nurturing, investment, gravitating towards a pre-existing identity that So that they feel less alone by being in the proximity of others who gravitate towards the collective identity because they do feel alone.
They feel the worst kind of alone is not when you're separated from others, but when you're separated from yourself.
That's the isolation in a crowd.
That's the haunting loneliness in a party that drives people to drink, drugs, sex, self-abandonment of every kind.
The emo culture is people who have to congregate in cliches because they cannot meet in reality.
And the misery loves company.
Lack of identity needs other people who lack identity.
And how do you signal that you lack identity?
How do you signal that you are not yourself, that you've not been nurtured and grown into who you are?
How do you signal to people that you don't exist?
I mean, you have to have a signal. You have to have a signal for two reasons.
One is that you need a fake identity desperately, so you have to signal first that you have no identity.
That way people can be drawn towards you to give you a fake identity, a cliched identity, a collective identity, which is an oxymoron.
That's the first thing. The second thing, which is more subtle, why do people signal through mascara and coffin purses and particular types of music, the Nine Inch Nails?
Why do people signal their lack of identity?
Well, to draw those who also lack identity to them.
That's number one. That's the most obvious, but the more subtle.
And the real reason that this occurs is to keep people who have an identity far, far, far away.
And this is true of all obvious subcultures, right?
A flock of seagulls, swirly-haired subcultures, The jock subcultures, the nerd subcultures, the punk subcultures, the goth, the emo, all the subcultures.
You see, the parents...
Don't want anyone to criticize them and they want to keep their children very firmly away from anyone who might float into their proximity and aid them in their rational criticism of the parent's neglect.
The parents need to brand and mock their children to keep authentic and deep people away from their children so that their children don't accidentally come into contact with somebody who might Unearth their buried criticisms of their own parents.
So if the child, and this is usually in sort of early to mid-teens, but if the child is gravitating towards a clearly delineated collective identity, right, this could be, you know, shaved head for girls, the short blue hair, the weird hoop earrings, the thick black glasses that always seem to be the grave marker of a history of sexual abuse, in my opinion.
Parents need to encourage, in a sense, the children to mark themselves out as empty so that rich and deep people steer clear of them so that criticism of the parents is never summoned or provoked or unearthed or revealed or encouraged.
So yes, the neglectful or abusive parents are more than happy in their tragic way to have their children fall into a clearly delineated collectivist identity.
This is why I think parents keep sending their kids to these brain-mashing indoctrination camps of higher education.
Otherwise, gosh, just maybe, just maybe, they might run into someone who's like, oh, tell me about your childhood.
Oh, gosh, that sounds pretty bad.
What did your parents do? Oh, what were their thoughts?
Oh, wow, they really let that happen.
They didn't intervene. They didn't stop the bullying.
They didn't get you out of that dangerous situation.
They chased after money and neglected you.
They chased after status and neglected you.
That doesn't seem right. What's your relationship like with your parents now?
Have you talked to them about this?
What's going on? What did they say?
I mean, everybody... Has to have honest conversations, don't they, with the people in their life, especially if they claim to love them, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Ooh, parents don't want that.
So the parents want to channel the children towards...
Groups that take their personal tragedies and turn them into universal human phenomena.
It's the human condition to be lonely and existentially angsty and depressed.
You know, it's because of climate change.
It's because of patriarchy.
It's because of privilege. It's existential.
It's wound into the fabric of post-capitalist crapitalism, right?
Whatever you want to say. It has to be something in the human condition or something in the abstract social structures.
It can't be anything in the personal existence of the family.
It can't be that. Almost all of society these days is just a cover-up of crime scenes.
It's the cover-up of crime scenes.
Keeping the ghosts of a bad conscience chained and bound.
It's the constant exorcism of constantly invasive spirits of retribution for ill deeds long gone.
It's just about managing the rebellion of the slaves.
Turning the conscience into a slave and keeping it chained forever while it fights forever.
All society is.
It's the exorcism of the conscience.
So that would be my take on the emo culture.
And of course it applies to a wide variety of cultures and subcultures.
So let me just get to the questions.
I have not heard of any new blockchain projects.
Steph, besides the fact that he is bipolar, I believe his divorce has been the main reason for his bizarre behavior.
All the red flags were there, and he still chose to get married with a woman with a promiscuous past.
You should serve as an example to men.
Your thoughts? Well, isn't it desperately tragic that the guy who put out his first big hit, I think it was, wasn't it Gold Digger?
Gold digger, man! You gotta watch out for those gold diggers, those women who just want money.
Even if they don't need it, they just want the money.
The guy who became famous because of the song Gold Digger is now paying $200,000 a month to a multi-billionaire woman.
Crazy. Yes.
Ye... I mean, somebody is just tired of his life, exhausted by his life.
His unconscious is in full revolt, I believe.
This is all just my opinion. I obviously don't know the guy from Adam, but this is just...
He's saying the most appalling and wretched things.
He's just somebody who's just tired of his life, just doesn't want it anymore.
Just doesn't want it anymore.
I mean, gosh...
Marrying a Kardashian?
My God, of all the things to do in this life, marrying a Kardashian?
Oh my God!
That's absolutely mad.
Absolutely mad to get involved in this unbelievable hellscape of a family.
Yeah, I mean marrying a Kardashian.
What can you say?
What can you say? I think that he's recognizing some of the harm that he's done over the course of his life.
And I think he doesn't know how to genuinely become a better person.
So, you know, he's on a yacht.
He doesn't know how to get to shore.
He can't stand being on the yacht anymore, so he's just sinking it.
He's just setting fire to it. He's just somebody who's exhausted with his own life.
People say, ah, self-destructive.
Of course it's self-destructive.
But this is not a self that he wants to save.
I mean, he's got everything.
He's a good-looking guy. Very talented.
Wealthy beyond the dreams of the devil.
Famous. And I would say it's pretty clear that he hates it.
He hates it. This is a demonic story.
Not that he's a demon, but this is the demonic story, right?
You get everything you could possibly want, and you hate it.
The devil says, Oh man, I got some stuff for you, man.
I got money. I got women.
I got fame.
You can't have all the talent.
I'll whisper all of this glorious music into your ear.
I'll use your talents to spread my destructive messages all across the world.
I'll use you up like a Kleenex.
And then, when you are used up and tired out and worn out, I will discard you.
And all the pleasures that were promised will dry to ashes in your soul, which is now mine.
And you will wake up wearier than you ever imagined possible.
Matthew Perry, the actor, a hugely successful actor and a truly genius comedian, like a truly brilliant comedian, Not so great with the drama.
Because the drama was all in his life.
It was like a 30-year addiction that he was battling.
But maybe it was like 55 Vicodin a day or something like that.
Completely mental, right? He had 14 surgeries on his belly to deal with the digestive effects of opiates.
And he said, what did he make, $80 million off friends or something like that?
And, you know, the guy's got to be worth ridiculous amounts of money.
Also a three-pack-a-day smoker for decades.
And Matthew Perry, in his autobiography, says, yeah, I've got a friend.
I've got a friend who is living in a rent-controlled apartment, never really made it as an actor.
He's got diabetes. Constantly worried about money.
Constantly worried about money. And he said, I would, if I could snap my fingers and trade places with that guy and live in a rent-controlled apartment, be a failure as an actor, be broke, be diabetic, I would snap my fingers and exchange places with him in a New York second.
If it meant I could leave my addictions behind.
But, I mean... He got everything he wanted.
For the first time since Michael J. Fox, Matthew Perry had the number one movie and the number one television show at the same time.
Only two people have ever achieved that.
He had the number one movie with the whole nine yards, the whole nine yards with Bruce Willis, and he had the number one TV show, of course, Friends.
I think, what was it, Family Ties, and I don't know what movie he was doing.
Maybe it was Back to the Future or something, Matthew, or Michael J. Fox.
We replaced Eric Stoltz, who apparently was just too serious for the wrong.
So, yeah, get everything you want.
And then you hate it.
Addiction plus success is a deadly combo.
Addiction plus success is an absolutely deadly combo.
I mean, this is the Jim Morrison, right?
Jim Morrison's almost a perfect example of a demonic narrative, right?
Incredibly mistreated as a child.
Raped repeatedly by a family member according to what he told his therapist.
He told his mother his mother wouldn't protect him.
His father was a military man.
Screamed verbal abuse.
Into his mind, and you can hear that screaming being reproduced in Jim Morrison singing live or screaming live with the doors.
You cannot petition the Lord with prayer.
You cannot petition the Lord with prayer.
Without a doubt. This is how we serve virtue, right?
This is why I will always have a sympathetic ear for those who were abused as children.
Jim Morrison, verbally abused, sexually abused as a child.
Went and begged for help, for safety.
Jesus, save us!
Save us! Save us!
He screams when the music's over.
And I forgot to mention when I did the analysis that he screams, Jesus, save us!
And then the devil confidently comes back and says, no, when the music's over, turn out the light.
He's screaming, save us!
He screamed to his mother, save me from this sexual predator, this molester.
And she wouldn't. Nobody would acknowledge, nobody would lend a hand, nobody would save him.
A wounded, deeply wounded man, with a hatred for society, the society that refused to lift a finger to save his unbelievably brutalized childhood.
So he takes his vengeance on society, and in a way, who can blame him?
Why should he work to save or elevate a society that handed him over to child molestation and verbal abuse when he was a kid?
Did nothing to protect him even when he begged for help.
So he cries out for his mother to save him from being raped as a child.
He cries out for God to save him.
Now God can't save him directly because of free will.
So God instructs, through Jesus, the world, to say, Whatever you do to the least of you, the children, so do you also do unto me.
And any who harm the least among you, the children, it is better that a millstone be strung around his neck and be thrown into the deep water.
Makes those instructions clear.
All the Christians in his world go to church.
They pray. They have all the time in the world to say grace before every meal, but no time in the world to protect him from a man raping him as a child.
And Jim Morrison's addiction to anal sex is screaming.
Of the song, I'm a backdoor man.
The men don't know, but the little girls understand.
His common knowledge of children.
As an adult, 14-year-old girls in his hotel room when he was a star.
Children, particularly boys, are inevitably drawn towards power.
And if child abusers hold the power, and those Sworn by loyalty to God to protect you as a child do nothing.
Why shouldn't you join the ranks of evil if they rule the world?
Jim Morrison takes a lot of drugs with no musical training.
Doesn't know how to play an instrument.
Doesn't know how to write a note.
Summons from somewhere within him or some might say without him.
Wonderful music. Starts a band and spreads his demonic messaging across the world.
And then at the height of his fame, the Doors were the biggest band in the world for a time, certainly in America.
Bigger than the Stones, bigger than the Beatles.
The height of his fame. He starts fondling himself on stage.
He's charged with exposing his genitals to an audience.
He's facing some pretty hard time.
And he leaves.
He flees. Goes to France.
And drinks himself and drugs himself to death.
He has no intention, really, of returning.
He wants to write. He doesn't even care about his writing.
He has a whole plastic bag full of his notebooks of his writing.
He leaves it at the friend's place.
His friend rushes to the balcony and says, Hey, Jim, you forgot your bag of stuff.
He's like, Ah, you keep it. He goes to die.
There's nothing left to live for.
He got everything he wanted.
And it scooped him out.
It excavated him. And he never had any chance of connection.
See, the lust for fame is the lust for a lack of connection.
It's the lust to remain in splendid isolation.
That's what Freddie Mercury said.
Isolation, isolation. I can sit in a hotel room.
I can't go anywhere. I can't talk to anyone.
And, I mean, the best solo song he ever wrote is called Living On My Own.
Living On My Own. Sometimes I feel I'm gonna break down and cry.
Nowhere to go, nothing to do with my time.
I get lonely.
Oh, so lonely.
Living on my own.
Now, Sting, too, every single song he writes is, well, at least half of them are about loneliness.
A thousand rainy days since we first met.
It's a big enough umbrella, but it's always me that ends up getting wet.
isolated, alone.
So lonely.
Just a castaway, an island lost at sea, oh.
Another lonely day, no one here but me, oh.
I actually misheard one of his song lyrics.
Thank you.
From Fields of Gold.
I never made promises lightly, but there have been some that I've broken.
I thought it was, I never made promises lightly, an Arabian summer lies broken.
An Arabian summer lies broken?
That's a much better line. Although it doesn't make much sense, of course, but after Bob Dylan, what do lyrics need to mean at all anymore?
You're invisible now. You've got no secrets to reveal, to conceal.
Anyway, so, yeah, there's people who want fame.
They want to be well paid for their splendid isolation.
They don't want to pierce their neglect and their vanity.
Sting with his father. He said, his father, he said, my father died angry and I was angry with him.
How do you know, somebody, how do you know Kanye is blowing his life up unconsciously?
He could be doing it deliberately.
No, I don't think so.
Obviously, I don't know.
Obviously, I don't know. I don't think it's doing it deliberately.
There are ways to withdraw from bad decisions.
There are ways to withdraw from a life you don't want anymore without blowing it up.
Right? So he could have withdrawn from public life.
But now, what is he being sued for?
Oh, my gosh. George Floyd's relatives are suing him.
I don't know if that's going through or not.
Adidas is suing him. I mean, so he's not going to get a chance to withdraw from public life.
So if he wanted to withdraw from public life, he could have done that with grace and aplomb.
He could have wound things down.
He could have found a way that he could retreat from public life without being chased by all the lawyers in the known universe.
So if he wants to retreat from public life, he's doing a pretty bad job of it.
So I do think it's unconscious.
Let's see here.
Steph, I'm at a phase in my life where I'm looking for a partner.
One of my biggest fears is divorce.
What are the main red flags I should look for to avoid that?
Yeah, it's funny because I just, on freedomand.locals.com, which is totally a community that you should try out.
I mean, you can try it out for free, but you can go and join for free and do everything you want there.
But for the premium stuff, which is really great stuff, you can use the promo code UPB, all caps, UPB2022. Join for months, see if you like it.
I just published The Truth About Sex.
Facts you just won't believe.
So, the biggest red flag for divorce is unprocessed trauma.
Unprocessed trauma. So, unprocessed trauma is trauma that has occurred that is justified by a moral opposite.
So, if you had, let's say you had an abusive mother and she did you great harm But you grow up saying, I love her, I forgive her, she did the best she could, but we make all these excuses, right?
Well, you have a problem.
Because if forgiving people and making excuses for their lack of capacity to do better is a virtue, then your mother is doubly evil for abusing you as a child, right?
So you have this split, right?
Forgiving people is a virtue.
I have to forgive my mother because she never forgave me as a child.
But if forgiving people is a virtue, then surely forgiving children is more of a virtue than forgiving adults because children are not to blame when they're very young for what they do.
They're just trying to struggle to survive in their environment.
So when you have these brain-twisting, absolute Mobius strip contradictions going on in your brain, somebody pays for anti-rationality.
Somebody pays for anti-rationality.
Always. Always. The simplest example is this.
You live in Scotland.
You've got a short growing season, a short hunting season, a short season to lay up food for the winter, and you're a long-ass winter.
Okay. Anti-rationality, right?
Ant versus the grasshopper. The ant stores up food for the winter.
The grasshopper lays his ram, plays guitar with his 19 legs all summer.
Okay. So, the grasshopper has no food for the winter, the ant has food for the winter.
Who pays? Well, either the grasshopper pays or the ant pays.
Either the grasshopper pays by starving to death or the ant pays by voluntarily or involuntarily transferring resources to the grasshopper.
So, anti-rationality, somebody always has to pay.
Now, in divorce, it generally occurs because one or both parties have anti-rational perspectives with regards to people who hurt them as children.
Anti-rational. It's a virtue to forgive people, but I'm going to judge my parents as helpless for failing to forgive me.
But I'm not helpless to forgive them, but they were helpless to forgive me.
It's completely anti-rational.
You've got opposite moral standards for exactly the same species.
Right? Literally.
Literally, it is Like a biologist saying that mammals are the categories of creatures that are both warm-blooded.
The opposite of warm-blooded, a color and a rock.
Well, it's completely logically contradictory.
Someone's going to have to pay for your logical contradictions.
And the more those logical contradictions are founded in the moral arena, oh man, the more paying is going to happen.
Anti-rationality in the moral arena is the most costly hostage situation that exists.
Somebody is going to have to pay.
And they're going to have to pay hard.
So, unprocessed trauma is when you have tied yourself up in knots to avoid confronting people who harmed you and calling it a virtue.
Do not do that, right?
You've literally tied yourself up in impossible contradictory knots so that you don't confront the people who hurt you, you know, which is fine.
I mean, hey, do whatever you want.
Just be honest about it. I mean, outside of UPB violations, right?
Do what they will. Just be honest.
So if you say, look, I'm too frightened of my mom or my dad or my cousin or my aunt or whoever, I'm too frightened to confront them.
Okay, that's... That's fair.
That's honest. Philosophy is not ever going to take your free will away from you.
But you never have less free will than when you're lying to yourself.
So my philosophy says to have free will, you've got to be honest with yourself.
Because if you're lying to yourself, you have no free will at all.
You're lying to yourself. It's such a virtue to forgive my abusive mother who never forgave me.
Forgiving people is such a virtue.
Well, then isn't your mother deeply immoral for failing to forgive you as a child and instead punishing you for things that weren't your fault?
You think it's virtuous to not hold an adult responsible for things that are completely under their control?
But you're glossing over and reversing the moral judgment of people who blame children for things that are not under the children's control at all?
The fuck? I mean, it's crazy.
It's deeply crazy.
And I understand. Look, it's scary to confront abusers.
I get that. And I sympathize with that.
I really do. I really do.
And you can choose to never confront your abusers.
But it's never a choice if you're lying to yourself.
If you're drowning yourself in the maple syrup sugar-rotting Diabetes-inducing garbage of infinite and endless forgiveness is a virtue which is never applied to those who always failed to forgive you.
The universal virtue.
The people who do the opposite, well, that's not bad.
Or maybe it is bad, but I'm going to forgive them.
It's like, okay, well then when you did things, quote, bad as a kid, why didn't your parents forgive you if that's a virtue?
Particularly if they're Christians and that is the virtue.
They're told to protect children at all costs.
So, when you lie to yourself, you lose your free will.
And when you lie to yourself about morals, you lose your capacity to be virtuous.
This is the worst abuse.
The abuse that continues.
If you were abused as a child, the abuse that continues is the inducements and incitements to lie to yourself about virtue.
Once you lie to yourself about virtue, you can't be virtuous, and then the lovelessness that you experience as a child lasts, oh, how long?
Yes, indeed, it lasts for the rest of your natural life, and beyond the grave if such things are possible.
You lie to yourself about morals, lie to yourself about virtue.
Well, you can't ever be virtuous.
You are at the mercy of evildoers.
And good people will read those red flags off you like an air siren up the ass, shaking your innards with danger, danger, danger.
Unprocessed trauma, man. You've got to stay away from unprocessed trauma.
Because unprocessed trauma, if they can't confront the immorality of their parents, if it's their parents, it could be anyone, most likely parents, right?
If a woman can't, or a man, if a woman can't confront the immorality of her parents if she lies to herself about it and creates a false virtue out of cowardice, right?
Out of cowardice. I mean, it is almost always physically safe to confront your parents if you choose not to do it.
Again, it's fine if you don't want to do it, but just say, no, I'm too scared to do it.
It's too unpleasant. It's too difficult.
I don't want to re-trigger.
Okay, that's, you know, I don't think it's a wise decision, but at least it's an honest one.
At least it's an honest one.
And if you're honest with yourself, you change your own behavior.
If you say, well, not confronting my parents who abused me, that's virtuous.
It's the virtue of forgiveness.
This is what Jesus would do and it's me being morally excellent and blah, blah, blah, blah, right?
Okay. But you can't change that behavior because whatever you say is the virtuous, human beings don't consciously will themselves to do evil.
So whatever you say is the virtuous, you've simply programmed yourself to do.
You have no free will in that which you have described as the good.
I don't have free will to violate UPB. I don't want free will to violate UPB because I have defined UPB as the good.
Do I have free will to be violent towards my daughter, my wife, my friends?
I do not. It doesn't even cross my mind, of course, right?
I don't want free will in those areas.
Morality is where you carve off sections entire continents of potential actions and say we don't go there.
I don't want free will to do evil.
So morality is where you say never going to happen.
And so if Confronting people who did you harm, which is the virtue of honesty, right?
If they did you harm, then, especially if they don't know that, you should tell them.
And if you love them, you should tell them because otherwise, I mean, the Christian analogy would be you're letting them go to hell rather than tell them the truth, right?
You're lying through omission and sentencing your parents to hell for eternity because you're not giving them the facts they need to redeem themselves.
They cannot find themselves bathed in the golden light of God's grace because they don't even know the crimes they committed enough to seek absolution, redemption, forgiveness, genuine forgiveness, which is when you acknowledge, make restitution, and find ways to have it never happen again.
If you love your parents, If they hurt you.
I mean, when I talked to my parents about the wrongs they had done to me, it was to some degree out of love.
Love for the truth, love for my future, and love for them.
Because as long as they believed they never did to me any harm, they couldn't have any possibility for redemption.
I was barring them from heaven and condemning them to hell by holding my tongue.
By closing my mouth, I was opening the gates of hell to swallow them up forever.
When I told them, I gave them free will.
I created free will through honesty.
Because honesty is the only path to free will.
If you lie to yourself, particularly about virtue, again, no free will.
No free will at all. It was out of a love and a desire for the possibility of salvation that I was honest to those around me about the wrongs that they had done, just as I hope and expect and want.
You know, how do I open up these shows?
Criticisms, comments, issues, feedback, blowback, whatever you want.
If I'm making mistakes, if I'm doing wrong, I'm desperate for people to tell me.
Because if I think I'm doing right, I don't have a chance to change.
If I find out I'm doing wrong, I have a chance to change.
I have a chance to change. But the whole purpose of morality is to put certain actions so deep in the rear view that you're not tempted, you don't want to, it's not on the list of possible options for the day.
Well, I could go and ask for some donations, or I could rob a bank!
Right? Okay, one is on the table, one is not.
Because morality, right?
Eh, of course only amateur thieves rob banks, the professionals own them.
So, Someone is going to be blamed for the unprocessed trauma of an individual.
Well, I've forgiven my parents and I've not confronted them and I love them despite all the harm they did to me.
I've forgiven them. But I'm still not happy and I'm still volatile and I've still got problems.
Well, somebody's got to be blamed.
Hey, look, I've got a husband over there.
Okay, well, you get blamed.
You're going to get blamed for the continued unhappiness of somebody lying to themselves about morality.
Taking that hypnotic car snake spinning eyeball delirium of, oh, just forgive.
Forgiveness in the modern context is lying.
Just lying. It's all it is.
Just lying. I'm going to give you something you can grab onto called forgiveness that you can drape over the whole of your cowardice in failing to tell the truth and even offer the possibility of salvation to those who wronged you.
If I had not confronted my mother, given the misery I assume she continues to live in, if I had not confronted my father, I would have felt guilty that I was not honest enough to tell them the truth and thus offer them the possibility of redemption.
If you have an illness that has no symptoms but will kill you, Do you want your doctor to tell you?
Well, I wouldn't want to upset you.
Well, if he doesn't tell you, he's condemning you to death, in a sense, right?
In a very real sense.
That would be malpractice of the first order.
So, ask people about their childhood.
Everybody's had difficulties in their childhood.
If you had perfectly wonderful parents, you have difficulties with everyone else who didn't, or a lot of other people who didn't.
Everybody has difficulties in their childhood.
That's totally fine. Have you processed it?
Have you dealt with it? Have you come to a consistent moral conclusion?
If you say forgiveness is a virtue, then you say, well, we should admire people who forgive then, right?
Yes, we should admire people who forgive.
Okay, well, what if people abuse children by failing to forgive the children that they are raising?
Should we have, I mean, if we should love people more who forgive, then should we not love people less who don't forgive?
If we should love people more who forgive adults, should we not love people less who fail to forgive children and punish children?
Blank out, right? We should love the good and the evil equally.
What? We should love the good and the evil equally.
Well, of course that only benefits the evildoers.
That's too obvious to even state, really.
Love the good and the evil equally.
Well, that's going to produce torture in the soul.
Who's going to pay? Who's going to pay for the torture?
If your wife is tortured by contradictions, who's going to pay?
Well, you and the kids. You and the kids.
You and the kids. So, yeah.
Unprocessed trauma, man. That's...
You gotta boogie on out of there.
Gotta do that. Sidestep, two-step, breakdowns out if you gotta.
Ryan says, how do you think people should handle family members who refuse to separate from another abusive family member?
Interesting. Interesting.
So Socratic reasoning is the way to go.
It's usually the case, right?
So, you know, if somebody says, I don't know, let's say you've got an Aunt Ethel who was just mean and vicious and yelled at the kids and hit the kids or whatever, right?
Aunt Ethel. Ah, well, an Aunt Ethel, you talk to them, you talk to her about what happened, but she just doubled down and escalates the abuse and then starts setting other family members against you and so on, right?
And then people have a choice, right?
So the people who are malevolent in this world love provoking extremes where people are either with them or against them.
Love provoking those extremes.
It's not just in families, trust me.
So Aunt Ethel is going to start seeding other people with lies about you, slander against you, defamation against you, and...
She's going to demand that people make a choice.
And then people will come to you because Aunt Ethel has proved that she's dangerous and you, as a virtuous person, are not perceived to be dangerous.
And since most people simply appease the dangerous by Getting the virtuous to change their behavior, then they won't go to Aunt Ethel and say, well, you hit children, you scream to children, you abuse children.
That's terrible, right? No, they'll come to you and say, man, you've got to soften it up.
She's an old woman, man. She's really upset.
She's really, really mad.
She's really losing it.
This is really cruel. This is all in the past, man.
You've got to chill, man.
You've got to ease up.
All they'll try and get you is to drop your standards because...
Your standards are highlighting an evil in the family.
Of course, right? I mean, cat burglars don't like it when the lights go on.
I mean, sorry to sort of say things so obviously, but...
So then they'll come to you and say, but man, you've got to be loyal to family, right?
You've got to be loyal to family.
You know, she's not perfect, but you know, you've got to be loyal.
I'll say, okay, well, should we be loyal to family members who don't abuse children in the same way that we are loyal to family members who do abuse children?
Should there be zero difference?
Right? Just basic tough questions, that Socratic reasoning, right?
And... Okay, so what I'm saying, which is true, is upsetting Aunt Ethel.
What Aunt Ethel said about me when I was a child and what she's saying about me as an adult is false and it's upsetting to me.
So should we elevate those who are upset by the truth over those who are upset by lies and abuse?
These are just, you know, basic 101 moral questions that staggeringly have remained outside the purview of philosophy pretty much until we came along as a community and started unpacking this obvious stuff.
Oh, I was really upset, man.
You shouldn't be upsetting Aunt Ethel.
It's like, well, when Aunt Ethel called me a lazy parasite when I was eight years old, that was upsetting to me.
Why are you only concerned about Aunt Ethel being told the truth when she verbally abused me as a child and you said nothing?
If upsetting people is such a big deal, why didn't you intervene when I was being upset as a child by being verbally abused by Aunt Ethel?
Well, it's different. You know, just people being upset.
Oh, you shouldn't upset people.
Okay, well then surely the people you should upset the least are children who aren't in the situation voluntarily, aren't in the environment, aren't in the relationships voluntarily.
So surely, absolutely, completely and totally, Aunt Ethel is infinitely more in the wrong.
If you have a standard that says you shouldn't upset people, well, she upset children by hitting and yelling at them.
And you said nothing. Don't come to me with your, oh, don't upset people.
That's bullshit. It's absolute empty, cowardly nonsense.
Because you didn't care about Aunt Ethel hurting and upsetting children, but now that those children have grown up and are telling the truth, suddenly it's, oh, don't upset people!
No. You're scared of Aunt Ethel, and you find it easier To try and manipulate me into lying again than looking in the mirror and seeing what you did and didn't do when moral courage was required of you.
And you should have told Aunt Ethel to stop or get lost when she was abusing children 20 years ago.
But you didn't. So, you are an accessory to the crime of harming children.
Now, I don't have a millstone, and there's not deep water around handy, and I'm not quite that much of a literalist when it comes to biblical absolutes.
But the splash damage of me standing up to Aunt Ethel is that you feel bad too.
Now, you all want me to stop saying things that make you feel bad.
And you're trying to put that forward as some moral principle?
You've got to be kidding me.
You absolute court toadies of immorality.
Oh, you should stop saying things that upset people.
Do you remember when Aunt Ethel was screaming at us kids 20 years ago?
You didn't say smack about that.
We weren't there by choice.
We couldn't get away. She was an adult.
We were a child. You don't think being hit by Aunt Ethel was upsetting?
You don't give a tiny rat's sphincter about upsetting family members.
You just feel bad because I'm telling the truth.
And you want me to stop telling the truth and you're trying to cloak it in some moral nonsense that you don't even believe yourself.
If not upsetting family members is so important to you, why did you let Aunt Ethel scream at me for 15 years straight?
Don't even try. It's ridiculous and embarrassing.
This is why I'm loved and loathed, right?
I mean, to me, it's also blindingly obvious.
It's almost embarrassing to talk about.
It literally is me trying to teach philosophy like a math teacher saying to 20-year-olds, let's go over two and two make four again.
So if family members remain bonded to abusers, then those abusers will use their lackeys to harm you.
No question. No question.
No question.
Just ask Matt Taibbi about politics, not family.
But yeah, so if...
If family members remain enthralled to abusers, then those abusers will use those family members to harm you.
They've turned themselves into willing weapons of ugly people.
And if you don't mind being harmed, I guess you can all stay in touch and all that, right?
All right. Can you do a how to write a story in audio version?
Oh yeah, so I'm working on this new book.
I'm really pleased with it.
I'm really pleased with it. Just because it's so new, it's such a different style for me that I'm really finding it exciting and interesting to work on.
So, yes, I am...
Very interested in doing that. What I'm going to do is, I can't really do an audio of how I write because I'm actually doing the writing, but I'll do video on how I go about with the edits and why I'm sort of doing what I'm doing.
And I'll do that and you can sort of view and watch that.
You are very welcome. Yeah, I mean, to be able to write stories and just to be able to see, here's the thing, writing stories is wonderful because so much of life is narrative.
So much of life is narrative.
I mean, my God, look at Samuel Bankman Freed.
With his effect of altruism, well, I only want to make money so that I can do good for the world.
I don't care about...
Okay, it's true, I live in a multi-million dollar Bahamas mansion and my parents bought homes richer than Crocius, but I just want to do so much good in the world.
I'm only wearing t-shirts and I only drive Hyundai, whatever the Corolla, whatever they claim to drive.
So that's the narrative. That's an incredibly powerful narrative.
Now the new narrative is, well...
Okay, it looks like he took funds from his cryptocurrency trading business, which he was never supposed to touch, and put it into his girlfriend's hedge fund.
Totally illegal, as far as I know.
I'm no lawyer, but it's my understanding.
It's like, oh, you know, it's really tragic that, you know, he made some mistakes and things didn't quite work out.
You know, just a narrative.
Powerful narrative. Powerful narrative.
The narrative that women are just unjustly underpaid relative to men who are greedy and patriarchal and won't pay women what they owe.
Trillions of dollars have been transferred over this, right?
Trillions. Narrative, in the absence of philosophy, narrative runs the world.
So, because that's the world we live in, you've got to be good at storytelling.
Literally, it's a survival mechanism.
You have to be good at storytelling.
Because narrative runs the world.
This is the postmodern world we live in.
Philosophy follows necessity when you can print and create money and borrow money.
Necessity vanishes for a couple of generations and then people can go insane.
They can indulge in postmodernism because they don't have to deal with reality, because they get paid either way.
You think that people would be obese if they had to hunt and gather and farm for a living?
No. But because they live in cities and they get money stolen from the next generation, they can indulge in postmodern insanity.
They get resources anyway.
This is an argument from one of my characters in my last novel, Roman.
Roman basically says it's child abuse to raise your children in what they call civilization because it's unsustainable and your children will be soft and weak and eaten by wolves when everything collapses.
You think we're abusive?
No, we're out here in the harsh wilderness raising our children according to reality.
You are raising them in a fantastical and unsustainable situation and then he He has this great speech about what happened to all the people, two million people who lived in Rome when the empire fell.
And he's got this great speech.
I've listened to it like 20 times.
It's a great speech. What happens?
What happens to these people?
They wander out into the wilderness, followed by wolves.
Nobody wants them.
Their hands are soft. Their knowledge of the land and of reality is non-existent.
What happened to them? This happens over and over.
Civilization, right? All falls apart.
Wealth brings unreality.
Unreality brings insanity.
Insanity brings collapse. You're an amazing writer, Steph.
Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
I think it's generally when you're driven by moral considerations, you get great kindness from the muse in the same way that the devil may have motivated Jim Morrison.
Hopefully, the angels are motivating my writing to some degree.
I mean, you want to take that allegorically, that's fine.
But I view it as if you are kindly committed to improving The morals of the world.
You are given great gifts of eloquence.
Whether that's unconscious or external, I leave to your judgment, but it does seem to be the case.
The striving for moral excellence brings eloquence almost second to none.
Alright, I will put it out there, my friends, for questions and comments.
This is most of what I wanted to talk about today, and I really, really appreciate the great questions that you have been providing me.
You feed the beast that feeds the world, and thank you so much for all of that.
You provoke and stimulate me into great stuff.
I had a discussion with my father, someone says, about economics last night.
It's both astounding and frustrating how little people understand about reality.
Well, this is Elton John talking about Freddie Mercury saying, oh, he doesn't understand the price.
He has no idea what the price of milk is.
No idea. To become wealthy is to disconnect from reality.
Human beings, how did we get to the top of the food chain?
Through brutal necessity.
Philosophy follows necessity.
Civilization, at least fiat-based currency civilization, civilization removes necessity from people's lives.
And when you remove necessity from people's lives, they can indulge in the most anti-philosophical nonsense and have no problem surviving.
You know, one of the worst things to happen to civilization was Freon.
Freon was a complete disaster.
And again, I'm talking about a state of society, not, I mean, if you want to know a good society, you can read the future available at freedomain.locals.com for subscribers.
Freon was a complete disaster because Freon gives you fridges, right?
Fridges and freezers. Now, fridges and freezers means that you don't have to get food every day.
When you don't have to get food every day, you can indulge in all sorts of postmodern nonsense, claptrap, anti-reason, anti-empirical, Cartesian demon insanity, and you don't run out of food.
If you have to go and get food every day, you're interacting with base reality, and it's really tough to indulge in abstract nonsense when you're engaged in base reality.
This is the problem with the upper classes.
This is the problem with... The ruling classes is that they're completely detached from material reality.
Completely detached from material reality.
And therefore they are completely detached from the necessary rationality that comes out of the need to survive.
Their flights of fancy are completely unrestrained by any requirements for bare material survival.
Now, this is not true just of the upper classes.
It's also true of the welfare classes.
It's true of the middle classes who work for the state.
It's true of the military-industrial complex.
All of those who don't face bare reality in order to carve out the necessities of survival go mad.
They go mad.
And addiction and power lust and the lust for control is a kind of madness.
So... We all have a desire for resources, but without the discipline and philosophy, excess resources, well, it's mad cow.
It's sponge form in the brain.
It is the Alzheimer's of privilege.
Privilege is when you don't have to work for your daily bread.
Now, I do work for my daily bread.
I have to provide value to you, the listeners, who support me, and thank you so much for that opportunity.
But I have to come up with things that are interesting, that are new.
See, you're a challenging audience, and I love that about you.
You're a challenging audience, man, because, I mean, if you look at the standard left or right wing audience, what do they want?
They want to hear the same thing every day.
So-and-so was smacked down by so-and-so, and, you know, they're running scared, and they're, you know, like, they're just, oh, they're hypocritical about it.
They want to hear the same thing over and over again.
Like Gregorian chants. I want to hear the same thing over and over again.
Now you, again, wonderfully challenging audience, you don't want to hear the same things over and over again.
Now, if it's any consolation, I don't want to say the same things over and over again.
I'm going to come up with at least 10 new ideas over the course of just this hour.
So... My daily bread is earned through invention, through creation, not through repetition, not through reinforcement, not through giving you the comfortable Vicodin of things already known, that you have basic doubts over and therefore you have to dull the agony of doubt with the painkiller of repetition.
You hear things over and over again.
It covers up the clamors of doubt.
Now, since I embrace and love doubt, the foundation of the show was on doubt.
Hey, I doubt I'm an objectivist.
I doubt I'm a minarchist.
I doubt I know anything about morality fundamentally.
The show is based on doubt.
Doubt is the lifeblood of progress.
Absolutely the lifeblood of progress.
You cannot progress in that which you are certain of.
And it's fine. You've got to have certainties.
I'm certain about reality.
I'm certain about gravity. I'm certain about logic.
I'm certain about language.
You've got to have some certainties.
You've got to have a foundation to build a house.
No point having a foundation without a house.
And you can't have a house for very long without a foundation.
You've got to have certainties. And those certainties have to be those principles which delineate doubt, give you where to explore.
Where to explore. You know, I used to play, gosh, what's this game?
Ultima 3. Ultima 3, way back in the day.
I played it with a friend of mine. This was a very two-dimensional character mapped game vaguely similar to things like Skyrim.
But, I mean, you've moved around, you know, with that two-dimensional, you're viewing from above, but the guy's on his side.
It's the Egyptian style of games.
And in that game, you would explore.
Explore the world by land and by sea.
And wherever you had explored, you could see what it was, and when you'd go back there, you'd see what it was.
But the edges, you couldn't see.
Well, you didn't know what was there.
You had to go and see. So everything you saw and proved to yourself what it was there, then you were certain of it, and you knew what was there.
Everything else, you had to go and explore to find out what it was.
So the game delineated the known from the unknown.
And once the known was known, it was known.
It didn't change, and the unknown remained the unknown until you went there and found out what it was.
Even that simple game, 40 years ago, That simple game from Lord British.
That simple game. A franchise that should have ruled the world but was faffed up like Atari style.
Even that game had a principle to delineate the known from the unknown.
Tell you, how do you know where to explore if you don't know where you've been?
How do you know the unknown if you can't compare it to the known?
You've got to have your principles which are the known and the doubt which is what you use those principles to explore.
I know how to row a boat.
Therefore, I can use that to explore waterways I have not been before.
So, you guys bring out the best in me because if I do repetition, you don't listen.
You don't listen. So why would people bother understanding about reality if they don't live in reality?
I mean, we're people who learn Elven, you understand?
We're Klingon.
We're reality fetishists, right?
I mean, nobody lives in Middle-earth.
So who the hell learns Elven?
Well, the actors, because they're getting paid.
The fetishists, because they want to live in Renaissance festivals or something.
How many people learn Elvish?
Don't live in Middle Earth. What practical use does Alephish have?
Same thing with economics.
If you live in the crazed imaginary world of fiat currency, why on earth would you bother learning about economics?
Economics is the voodoo study of what decisions are made in hidden boardrooms by hidden people about monetary supply to benefit their friends.
So, it's a rational...
Conservation of energy to not bother studying economics when you don't live in any structure of economics that is at all objective.
I guess Freon isn't free.
Somebody says that's right.
That's right. Oh, I loved Ultima Online?
I never played Ultima Online.
I know that there was a 3D version of Ultima, but I'd given up on things.
I think I played Ultima 5.
I think that was the last one, but I didn't play it for very long.
That's the one where you could actually bake bread, if I remember rightly.
That was a wild, wild set of programming, for sure.
All right, well, I will close off today.
Thank you, everyone, so much.
Freedomain.locals.com to join a great community.
And you can go to freedomain.com slash donate to help out the show.
I would hugely appreciate it, as everyone knows.
It's been a tough couple of years.
For you, for me, for the world, for philosophy as a whole, if you can't afford it, absolutely continue to listen, enjoy, absorb.
I value that and I hope that you don't feel anything bad about anything to do with that.
If you can't afford it, I would really appreciate it.
I think also it would help you if you provide some resources to philosophy.
Your unconscious tends to take your commitment more seriously, which I think bounces back to positive things.
In your life, that certainly has been my experience.
So freedomain.locals.com.
I think I'll send out, yeah, maybe to my newsletter audience.
If you want to go to freedomain.com slash newsletter, you can sign up and later today I will send out a copy of my novel, the audiobook of my novel.
So have yourselves a wonderful day, everyone.
Lots of love. Thank you, thank you, thank you so much for this incredible opportunity to speak reason to the world.
I love you guys so much.
▲
Export Selection