Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 17, 2024 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux

02:02:39

Stop Being So 'Kind'!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good morning, 25th.
	It's a leap year, right? Yes, it is.
	So we get to 29th. So we're close to the end of the month.
	FreeDomain.com slash donate.
	To help out the show, I would most appreciate it.
	Oh, Vince starting off with a tip.
	Thank you so much.
	Give me a tip and I'll show you the tip.
	Ah, I can't show you the tip because I need a fisheye, IMAX lens stuff.
	There's no such thing as the tip.
	There's only a peninsula visible from space that dwarfs Florida, which is known as America's penis.
	So, enough dick jokes.
	Are there ever really enough dick jokes in the world?
	I don't think so. My dick is so big, it only plays stadiums.
	All right. Yeah, so can facial expressions be abusive?
	Absolutely they can.
	Yes, they can. Yes, they can.
	Under what circumstances can facial expressions be abusive?
	You all know this by now, I do believe.
	Yes, I do believe.
	There's a general principle here, which we'll cut into, and I have a parenting question to answer as well, and I'm sorry it took me so long to get to it.
	Yeah, death staring at a child.
	That's right. Yeah. So when you cause significant discomfort to others who have no choice in the matter, that's abusive.
	So if you have a baby and your baby is animatedly trying to engage you and you just have a frozen face, you can see these videos all over the place.
	The videos are of a mother who is not responding to her child's entreaties for engagement, and the child begins to cry and pull at his face and goes through intense suffering.
	When you have a child, of course, you virtually infinitely raise your moral standards, right?
	You don't have to feed everyone in the world, but you certainly do have to feed your child, right?
	You don't owe health care to everyone in the world, but you certainly owe it to your child.
	You understand this is how rights get degraded, is people view fellow citizens as children, which is why they're marginalized and excluded and sad and helpless and the victims of systemic this, that, and the other, because what happens then is that you You trigger both men and women, though a little bit more women, you trigger women to say, well, the provision of health care to the helpless is a must because the provision of health care to children who are helpless is a must.
	So there's almost no better resource strategy in a democracy where women vote than to portray yourself as a helpless victim.
	It's wild. Sticks, Hacks and Hammer has a cold and won't be posting videos today, so you can have his share of Richard jokes today.
	Oh, does he make dick jokes? What's here?
	He's a 10-inch guy, according to some rumors.
	Whatever, right? What about looking angry on the train, surrounded by random strangers?
	Nope. Nope. I mean, staring threateningly, someone could be considered a threat behavior.
	It's not immoral, because you're not initiating the use of force.
	But... No, looking angry on a train surrounded by random strangers, that's not abusive, because you're not in a position to inflict your anger upon them, whereas as a parent you are.
	All right. So, let's see here.
	Let me get to questions.
	Hi, Steph.
	Like you, I'm fascinated by people, especially about their childhood.
	And thanks to your show, I've become quite good at talking with people.
	About that, I wonder over the decades since you started, what have been your aha moments that have improved your skills the most in this area?
	Yeah, like I remember as a tech guy...
	I mean, a chief technical officer, blah, blah, blah, but a tech guy, I would be flown out to deal with clients and their technical teams, and I was in a meeting where we were ambushed.
	It wasn't like the Joe Rogan experience was out of nowhere, because sometimes you get ambushed in a business context where somebody invites you out and then I'm here to help you.
	But you can't abuse me, right?
	I'm here to help you, but you can't abuse me.
	Which is kind of... I mean, that's my whole show, right?
	I'm here to help you, but you can't abuse me, right?
	Because I wouldn't let you do bad behavior.
	It doesn't harm me, but it harms you, right?
	Ah, let's see here.
	What do we got here?
	Face to face might be my workout song That's a great song by Pete Townsend.
	Alright, solid audio and camera.
	Excellent. I landed financing for my dream car yesterday.
	Thank you again for the push to strive.
	Good. Use it to get a wife.
	Are there any singer-songwriters that you love who are not necessarily very good singers?
	I mean, Van Morrison, not the greatest singer in the world.
	But I went through a big Van Morrison phase in university.
	I had these Sennhauser headphones for some reason.
	I didn't. They were really good headphones.
	I can't remember where I got them from.
	I don't think I bought them. I got these Sennhauser headphones, but I didn't have the clip.
	So I got a coat hanger and duct tape them so that I could listen to music.
	I remember walking out of McGill one day listening to Cleaning Windows by Van Morrison.
	Sun was shining. It was the end of winter.
	And it's just, you know, one of these moments where it's just like all is right with the world and the universe and nothing can get any better than this.
	Yeah, so Van Morrison, who else is not a very good singer?
	I went through a little bit of a Bob Dylan phase, but he's kind of a deepity guy.
	You know, you're invisible now, you've got some secrets to conceal.
	It's like, okay, that sounds kind of clever, you unravel it, and it doesn't really mean anything.
	So, let's see here.
	Why do you think coveting is one of the Ten Commandments?
	Why is it high enough of a priority to list among murder, theft, or adultery?
	Very, very good question.
	That's a very good question.
	All right.
	So there's an interesting perspective that comes from the left which is can you use
	violence to defend property? And don't worry I'm going to tie it into
	coveting. Can you use violence to protect property and There's this meme of, you know, the Nordic bearded guy, right?
	And some leftist is screeching, well, what do you mean your property is more valuable than my life?
	And the meme guy is like, the Nordic guy is like, bro, I don't even know you.
	My morning coffee is more important to me than your life.
	And caring about Everyone is suicide.
	I have to be very strict.
	I have a big heart and a lot of compassion.
	I have to be very strict with myself.
	Caring for everyone is spiritual suicide.
	You will not make it through life.
	You will just be exploited. So, coveting.
	Crimes of property are very interesting because what happens is People look at the starving guy stealing the bread and they say, well, gosh, you can't prevent the starving guy from stealing the bread because the starving guy is going to die if he doesn't steal the bread, right?
	The starving guy is going to die if he doesn't steal the bread.
	So give the bread to let the guy steal the bread because he's going to die, right?
	And I understand that perspective and so on.
	But the problem is it can't be universalized, right?
	So what happens is people say, well, I want to accept, I'm going to create an extreme example to break the universality of the rule, and therefore there is no rule.
	This is one of the most common tactics, particularly on the part of the left, right?
	So what they do is they say, well, you wouldn't shoot a guy who was stealing a loaf of bread from you if he was starving.
	You wouldn't shoot him, right?
	Now, of course, if you say, well, yeah, I would, then you appear emotionally to be a monster who's shooting a starving guy just for stealing a loaf of bread and so on, right?
	And so what they do is they create extreme emotional examples and then say, well, because you wouldn't shoot a guy for stealing a loaf of bread, Then the right to life trumps the right to property, and therefore income redistribution is morally good.
	You know how this is the dominoes, right?
	If you wouldn't shoot a guy for stealing a loaf of bread, then clearly the right to life is more important than the right to property, and therefore your property can be redistributed to save people's lives.
	This is the medicine, this is welfare, health care, you name it, right?
	So that's the general approach.
	But the question is not, would you, like, individual instances, Are not violations of universal moral rules.
	Counter-individual instances are not violations of universal moral rules.
	I'll tell you how this works, and then we'll get to the Ten Commandments.
	So I myself, if I ran a bakery and one starving guy was stealing a loaf of bread, I would not shoot him.
	I would not shoot him. But that doesn't mean anything to do with universal morals.
	Because universal morals, you don't have to enforce them.
	You don't have to enforce them.
	Because I have property rights doesn't mean I have to enforce property rights.
	Because to force someone to enforce property rights would be to initiate the use of force against them.
	You have to shoot that guy who's stealing your loaf of bread.
	And if you don't, I'll shoot you.
	That's not choice, right? So the universal moral rules exist independent of individual choices to enforce them.
	Did you see what I mean? If somebody believes he can fly, that doesn't invalidate the law of gravity.
	He's just wrong, right?
	If somebody chooses not to enforce a moral rule, that doesn't invalidate the moral rule.
	Right? So the question is not, would you as an individual...
	Enforce shooting someone who's stealing your loaf of bread.
	The question is, can everyone in need steal whatever they want?
	Well, clearly no, right?
	I mean, absolutely not. Because then all people will do is not work, be in need, and steal.
	And also, there won't be anything left to steal, the sort of consequentialism, right?
	There won't be anything left to steal if everyone can claim need and steal whatever they want.
	And nobody, right? I mean, we're doing this.
	I mean, this is an experiment happening in various places now.
	Around the world at the moment where criminals can take whatever they want and there's no particular repercussions.
	So, of course, economic activity is grinding to a halt.
	Stores are leaving particular neighborhoods and you're going to have to take nine buses to get a bag of groceries.
	No, it doesn't. It can't work, right?
	Also, universal and need are opposites, right?
	So, a universal moral rule is independent of need because need is subjective and universal is objective.
	So, it doesn't matter if somebody enforces a moral rule or not.
	The question is, can the moral rule be universalized?
	So, if we can say, because then we have A subjective thing called need, which can be claimed by anyone that violates the universality of property rights, right?
	So you have property rights if you're not in need, or you have to respect property rights if you're not in need, but you don't have to respect your own property rights.
	You can't respect your own property rights, so you have to respect property rights if you have enough money.
	You can't steal from the grocery store if you have a middle-class income, so you have to respect property rights If you are not in need, but you can't respect your own property rights if other people are in need.
	So property rights must both be respected and not respected by the same classification of organisms called human beings.
	So you have to respect other people's property rights, but you can't respect and enforce your own property rights against those in need.
	So the same person must both affirm and deny the validity of property rights, which is a contradiction, and therefore...
	It does not pass the test of universality, therefore it cannot be moral.
	Hopefully that makes sense. So covetousness, what is covetousness?
	Covetousness is wanting what you cannot have.
	Sorry, that's not quite the way of phrasing it.
	I'm trying to run through my scenario brain and making sure I'm going to cover all bases.
	It's wanting to take what you have not earned, or wanting to take things against Universal values against property rights, against contract law.
	That's what covetousness is.
	So if you want the bread and you don't want to earn it, you also don't want to ask for it.
	See, if you ask for the bread, if I run a bakery store and some starving guy, let's say he's just been kidnapped because he's been starved for a week.
	He comes to my store, he's emaciated, he's smelling, he's got flies on him, and he's begging me for bread because he says I've been kidnapped.
	Of course I'm going to give him some bread.
	Of course I am. I'm going to call the cops, give him some bread, give him some water, and with great happiness, I would save his life.
	That would be a wonderful and positive thing for me to do with my day because I obviously care about...
	The man's life more than I care about my loaf of bread.
	Now, on the other hand, if it's somebody who's a habitual drug addict who continues to not get help and shoots up, then I may be less inclined to give him bread because he's the author of his own misfortune.
	So if the man who's been kidnapped comes into my bakery and asks me for bread, then he has earned the bread because I'm giving it to him voluntarily.
	I'm voluntarily choosing, and that's the same as earning.
	It's an exchange of value.
	I'm buying his life with my bread.
	I get to save his life at the expense of a loaf of bread.
	It's a good deal for me. I'm paying for it voluntarily.
	I'm buying his life for one loaf of bread.
	It's a good deal. It's a good deal.
	It's voluntarily happening, so he's earned it.
	If he begs, if he...
	Now, not if he threatens, right?
	Not if he threatens, but...
	If he begs, if he asks nicely, if he offers to work, I'll push brooms, right?
	Two hours of pushing brooms, buys a 9x12 4-bit room, 2-bit room or something like that, right?
	So if he offers to do some work or whatever it is, then he's earned the bread and therefore he can have it morally and legitimately, right?
	Because I'm voluntarily giving him the bread or trading the bread.
	Well, really, I'm trading the bread for his life or his labor or whatever it is, right?
	Or maybe he'll promise to pay me ten times a loaf of bread when he gets back on his feet.
	Whatever. It doesn't really matter, right?
	But I'm going to give him the bread. So he's not coveting.
	Coveting is when you want what you have not earned.
	Now, If you play around, and look, everyone's done this, you've done this, I assume you've done this, everyone's done this, where you know something's wrong for you to do, not like evil or whatever it is, but something that's just not good for you to do, right?
	It could be as simple as, I shouldn't eat that slice of cheesecake, right?
	And you engage in this battle.
	And the battle that you engage in is trying to talk yourself into having it.
	Or not, right? The angel and the devil on the shoulder, right?
	We all know this thing, right? So you see a piece of cheesecake and you say, oh, you know, I've been so good lately.
	It's just a piece of cheesecake.
	I'll do extra exercises tomorrow.
	It's no big deal.
	I deserve it.
	I've had a tough time.
	Like you just, you talk yourself into doing something that's not good.
	Right? You know, I'm trying to quit alcohol, but you know, I guess it's just one glass of wine.
	It's a big dinner. Everyone else is having some.
	it doesn't really matter, like you try and talk yourself into doing something
	that goes against your values.
	And it's better to have a standard that says
	don't talk yourself into vice.
	And this is one of the reasons why Christianity focuses on the life of the mind more than the life of the flesh.
	This is why Jesus says to look at a woman and to lust after her is the same as being unfaithful.
	Because where does infidelity start?
	It starts with the idea.
	It starts with the beginning.
	Sorry, it starts with the beginning.
	Not one of my most philosophically magnificent statements, but Sin starts with the idea.
	Crime starts with the idea, right?
	This is crime and punishment, right?
	That Raskolnikov has the idea, and the idea infects him, and then he ends up being a double murderer.
	So covetousness is lusting after something you have not earned that you are going to steal in one form or another.
	So coveting is when you want things without wanting to work for them, or you want things that you can't have for reasons of contract.
	So, I mean, back in the day, right, I mean, I guess even now, if you covet another man's wife, then you want something that goes against the marriage contract, right?
	You want to steal her away from her holy vows before God to remain monogamous.
	Same thing with another man's girlfriend.
	Although, to me, the girlfriend thing is less bad because if you're not going to make those lifelong vows, if you're not going to put a ring on her finger, it's a little bit fair game.
	It's a little bit fair. A little bit, right?
	It depends, right? But I have less problems with stealing a girlfriend.
	Let's say some guys dated this girl forever and anon, but he won't put a ring on her finger and you want to marry her.
	That's, you know, I think that's fair.
	But once you've made the marriage vows, that's not a thing anymore.
	Like, you can't do that anymore.
	If somebody else has a car, they've paid for the car, and you want that car, not you want to earn the money to get a car just like it, or you want to ask him if you can borrow it, which is fine, but if you want his car, then you want to take what he's earned and you don't deserve.
	So coveting to want something you don't deserve and you don't want to work for, to want what you have not earned, is...
	The snowflake that turns into the avalanche, right?
	The first little roll, right?
	So it's a lot easier to start It's a lot easier to stop sin at the beginning than later on, right?
	So if you are attracted to another woman outside of your marriage, it's a lot easier to say, well, that's a sin.
	I've got to turn away from that and I've got to stop thinking that way and all of that.
	That's a whole lot easier than, you know, you go on some business trip with her and you're both drunk and you're about to have sex in the hotel room.
	Saying no then is a whole lot harder than saying no So, the covetousness is a way of saying, to prevent sin, nip it in the bud.
	It's a lot easier to not eat cheesecake if it's not in the house.
	Whereas if the cheesecake is right in front of you and it's drizzled with that lovely strawberry sauce and it's got chocolate drizzles and you've got your fork and you've just taken it and it's coming upon water in my mouth.
	I love cheesecake. Vanilla bean cheesecake is God's gift to pie slices.
	And you got it and you're sniffing it, right?
	It's a lot harder to say no to the cheesecake that's right in front of your mouth than it is to just not buy the cheesecake in the first place and not have it in the house.
	Does that make sense? So, I'm off sugar.
	We had a house guest this last week, and the house guest and the other members of my family, in a full flight of evil, went and got a half dozen donuts.
	And I'm off sugar.
	But I did, you know, and I've been like six weeks off sugar, but it looked really good.
	And I did, I had like an eighth.
	I just cut a little slice and I had a bite.
	And I was also just curious how sugar would affect me.
	It didn't affect me. I think it was too little.
	But of course, I wouldn't have gone out to get donuts, but because the donuts were right there on the kitchen counter and everybody was like, mmm, donuts!
	And of course, you know, they were like, do you mind if we, you know, and I'm like, no, no, that's fine.
	So, they were very considerate about it, but nonetheless, they were donors in the house.
	So, covetousness being one of the Ten Commandments is just saying, don't lust after things that you don't want to earn and you don't deserve.
	Covetousness is not, my friend has a cool car, I'd like to get a cool car, maybe I'll work harder.
	That's not covetousness. Covetousness is when you want to take what you have not earned and what you do not deserve.
	Going against contract or property rights, contract being marriage or whatever.
	It's a lot easier to...
	I mean, I used to say this in my presentation to clients back in the day in the software world.
	So we customized our software and we'd have these specifications of what was going to change.
	And I said, look, it's 10 times cheaper to fix something in the design stage than it is to fix it afterwards, right?
	Like, it's a lot cheaper to build the car with the sunroof than to get the car delivered and then take it back and have a sunroof put in, right?
	So, it's just a lot cheaper.
	Hopefully that helps.
	So, regarding facial expressions makes you wonder if there are long-term effects of adults being masked around young children.
	Yes. I assume that there'll be less empathy and slower language development.
	Hi, Steph Esquire. Oh, yeah, that's right.
	Still not eating sugar? How is it going?
	I would say it's going...
	It's a plus. It's a plus.
	I just... Of course, I'm still adjusting to the mindset.
	It's not a temporary thing.
	Like, I can't go back. I just...
	I can't go back. And...
	So I would say it's a net plus.
	I mean, obviously better for my dental health.
	I still have some mid-afternoon lulls, but I, you know, it's been a lifelong sugar habit.
	Obviously, it's been more than half a century.
	And again, I'm not a catastrophic sugar guy.
	I mean, I don't have dessert every day or whatever it is.
	But, you know, a little nibble here and there would just kind of happen, right?
	So I think that...
	It's a net plus.
	I would certainly recommend trying it.
	And of course, my daughter's like, well, what about coffee now?
	And I'm like, hey, let's not get crazy here.
	So I think consider it a plus.
	Taylor Swift has not let her being a fabulous singer stop her from being...
	has not let her...
	I think she's a good singer. She's a good singer.
	I mean, not everyone has to be Celine Dion.
	She sings country, which is a different kind of style, right?
	So... I just left a follow-up remark to the call, am I my brother's keeper, in the comments on this video.
	I don't know what that means.
	Sorry. The left does that with abortion too.
	You must allow abortion in the case of rape.
	So abortion is okay. Right.
	Right. Rape is...
	So if you engage in involuntary, consensual, procreative sexual activity...
	Then you assume that risk yourself.
	And even if you say, well, I had a condom, well, condoms break, condoms leak, and so on, right?
	So it is not invasive for you to be pregnant if you engage in that, right?
	It's sort of like somebody's not a home invader if you're a B&B. Breast and butt, right?
	So, okay, I guess breast and butt would not be procreative.
	But If you invite people into your home, they're not home invaders.
	If somebody invades your home against your will, they are home invaders.
	So, given that you have self-ownership, if you invite people into your home, you can't then call the cops and have them arrested for being in your home.
	Like, God, there's strangers in my house while I run a B&B. Well, they're not strangers in your house.
	You have a contract. So, on the other hand, if a woman is raped, then the baby is there against her will.
	It is a home invasion, and you could make the case, right?
	But, of course, you know, I mean, it's one of these things where, of course, a lot of women who want that will just say that they're raped.
	Look at California. Companies are fleeing left, right, and center.
	Yeah, you know, it's really sad because, of course, dealing with crime is ridiculously simple.
	Like, dealing with crime is ridiculously simple.
	Crime follows the Pareto principle just like everything else.
	So the vast majority of crime is committed by a very small minority of people.
	And if you simply jail those people, your life becomes paradise and you can have a high-trust society.
	All right. Thank you, Billy, for my favorite philosopher.
	Thank you for the tip. They are more than gratefully accepted.
	All right. Hey, Steph, I just love the way you can break down complex ideas to their simplest forms.
	Thank you. What books or training would you recommend for improving communication or reasoning from first principles?
	Yeah, reasoning from first principles is you have to self-annihilate.
	You have to self-annihilate.
	It's why it's so difficult for a lot of people, why it's so unpleasant for a lot of people.
	Because when you think about your personality or your worldview, your worldview and your personality and how you interact with people is based upon a bunch of conclusions.
	It's based on a bunch of conclusions.
	I'm worth talking to.
	I know the truth. I can argue.
	I can debate. I know what's right and what's wrong.
	Like you have all of these conclusions that are foundational to how you interact with people.
	You get into a debate with someone. It's because you think you know that you're right and they're wrong and you know how and this and that.
	So if you date a woman, you assume that she's going to be attracted to you and you're worthy of some level of attraction and so on, right?
	Even if you lie, then you're faking that level of attraction and you think that you're good at lying enough to...
	So you have all of these conclusions that are the basis of your personality.
	So, if you look at the story of Socrates, who was told by the oracle at Delphi, said that Socrates is the wisest, and Socrates says, well, I can't be the wisest because I don't really know anything.
	And then he went to all these sophists who claimed to have all this knowledge, and he peeled away, this is Socratic reasoning, right?
	He peeled away their pretense of knowledge and showed that they didn't really know anything, and they got enraged, and along with the pederasty, as a motivation, killed him.
	Now, why did they want to kill Socrates?
	Because Socrates had killed them.
	I know that sounds dramatic.
	That's how I experienced it.
	And I think that's how a lot of people experience it.
	The death of the false self.
	The death of illusion.
	The death of the conclusions you take as physics that turn out to be superstition.
	I love it when sentences like that come out.
	It's incredible to me.
	I just love surfing this language thing with you and yours.
	It is death.
	It is death. And I mean, we see this all the time.
	Death and rebirth, right? I mean...
	Han Solo dies, gets resurrected.
	Jesus dies, gets resurrected.
	Socrates dies and gets resurrected in the realm of ideas, the eternal death of the ego, the end of the ego.
	The ego is that which takes the unearned, which is certainty without proof.
	The ultimate covetousness is certainty without proof.
	Those who lack self-doubt, usually as the result of vanity, are utterly destroyed by philosophy.
	If you pour too much effort and energy into your false self, which is conclusions without proof, when someone comes along and demands proof, it feels like they're attacking and murdering you, and therefore, in a psychological sense, killing Socrates, killing Jesus, killing those who doubted the cosmology of the Pope, was a form of self-defense.
	Because your identity is your conclusions.
	And if it turns out your conclusions are false, then your identity is false, which means you've kind of stolen everything that you have by lying.
	And it's very hard to go through that process.
	It's very hard to go through that process.
	I felt I was dying.
	The worst kind of death, like an eternal death.
	And that's what hell is.
	Hell is when...
	It is revealed to you that everything you have is a stolen lie, and everything you are is a lie who steals, and it's too late to change, and you can't ever fix it, and you can't deny that fact.
	That's hell. Reasoning from first principles, you just have to accept ego death.
	You have to accept that everything you were told and everything you believe is almost certainly false.
	I mean, philosophically, I don't mean empirically.
	I don't mean like the world is not the world and the sun is not the sun.
	I don't mean that. But everything you're told about right and wrong, and we can see this playing out in real time.
	We can see this playing in real time right now.
	People are going through immense psychological crises because not only is what they believe in the present being regularly undermined, but because of that process we are beginning to genuinely accept that almost everything we've been told about in terms of history is an utter falsehood.
	Because we can see a false narrative attempting to be created In the world, that is.
	In real time, we can see the lies attempting to stick in people's souls, and we can see people battling to dispel the falsehoods.
	Attempting to dispel murderous falsehoods was what got me deplatformed, right?
	As you know, I did an interview with a friend of mine who's a police officer and his friend who happened to be a black police officer, and we were talking about George Floyd.
	And they were talking about how excited delirium is just something that happens, we don't know for sure what killed him, and it was really a great conversation.
	I remember there being some very funny jokes in the midst of all of the grim, And because I had done this with Mike Brown, I had done the same sort of dismantling of propaganda with Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman and so on, which had all been very popular.
	They needed their riots, right?
	They needed their violence. And it was very tragic, of course.
	Most of what I do, almost all of what I do in the public sphere, particularly back in the day, was around preventing violence.
	And there was a huge amount of violence that came out of these riots, of course.
	And so... Attempting to undo false history.
	If you compare this to something like I mean, something we're probably somewhat familiar with is Joseph McCarthy, right?
	That Joseph McCarthy was considered to be a crazy guy who saw communists in his marmalade and had witch hunts and there were no communists.
	And of course, it's completely false.
	I mean, there were more communists even than he suspected in his wildest dreams.
	I mean, the Potsdam Conference, it was all infested.
	But the communists... But right now we can see history attempting to be lied about and then truth, or at least counter-narratives, and this battle over history, which has never really happened before.
	The battle over history has rarely, if ever, happened before.
	because history would be established by the victors and then there might be
	some counter narratives here and there but they never really take
	so we can see people's identity is based on lies which turns them into
	haters of truth to whom the honest are predators
	If you base your personality on falsehoods, you are a slave to lies.
	And you view as anyone who tells the truth, you view them as a predator who will destroy everything you know.
	Because when you base your personality on lies, it's not just your personality, it's your entire social circle.
	And you have to realize, if you base your personality on lies, that everyone around you is participating in those lies, lying to you, praising you for those lies, and that everyone around you who claims to love you We'll fuck you over if you tell the truth.
	I mean, we all know this, right?
	I mean, we, of all the people in the world, know this the most intimately.
	I'm not going to back down from that factual statement of reality.
	That all the people who claim to love us will fuck us up if we tell them the truth.
	I mean, if we're in a place of falsehood.
	So they prefer lies to you.
	They prefer falsehood to truth.
	That's tough, right? Hi, Steph.
	What is the solution to the problem of shirt sleeves to shirt sleeves in three generations?
	Sorry, I only answered one of those questions.
	Let me just get back to this.
	Improving communication? So, improving communication is asking questions and trusting that the answers will come.
	I have, when I do call-in shows, I just did one for two and a half hours yesterday about a guy who's in a sexless marriage.
	17 years, although not all 17 years of those have been sexless.
	And I don't know exactly what path I'm going to take.
	I don't know. I have some ideas ahead of time, but I found that the ideas that I have ahead of time in the call-in shows turn out to be mostly useless.
	Because I have like a paragraph or two, and then when you get into the history, the...
	The route that I think I'm going to take doesn't exist.
	It's too much new information.
	So, in terms of improving communication, curiosity is the best way to improve communication.
	Just keep asking and asking and asking, and don't provide any feedback until you have some genuine impulse of feedback you can provide that is of value.
	Like this guy, we talked for, I think, about two and a half, I asked questions and listened for about two and a half hours, and then the last 15 minutes I gave him some feedback.
	Because I didn't really feel I had all of that, right?
	I didn't have any feedback, so...
	From Just Poor.
	For my novel Just Poor, which you should absolutely get to.
	Crime, corrected Mary.
	There is only one crime in the world.
	Stumbler of secrets, enlighten me.
	Why the wish to have what we have not earned.
	This is Mary's big complaint about Lord Lawrence.
	He didn't earn it. Hi, Steph, what is the solution to the problem of shirt sleeves to shirt sleeves in three generations?
	Why is it a problem? Why is it a problem?
	Intelligence is like vocal ability, right?
	So, if you listen to, say, Sean Ono Lennon or Julian Lennon, they can sing.
	Can they sing as well as their father?
	I don't know. I thought Julian Lennon's Too Late for Goodbye song was good.
	Can they write songs as well as their father?
	Nope. Sorry.
	I mean, I remember Moon Unit Zappa or one of Frank Zappa's kids was like, I can play anything on the guitar, but I can't write songs.
	Or if you look at Sting versus Stuart Copeland, right?
	Sting wrote great songs.
	Stuart Copeland wrote a couple of okay songs.
	I actually really, really like...
	Does everyone stare this way at you?
	I only stare...
	I change my clothes ten times before I take you on a date.
	It's a Does Everyone Stare.
	It's a good song.
	I really like that song. And he wrote Miss Grudenko off Synchronicity, which was, of course, infinitely better than the abortion of a song called Mother by Andy Summers.
	And so he wrote a couple of okay songs, and then he did this whole Clark Kent side project, which was appallingly bad.
	I want to be rich.
	I don't want to live in a ditch.
	It's like, oh my God, terrible, please stop.
	So that particular struck-by-genius songwriting ability, and of course singing ability, though not a great performer, of Sting's, Gordon Sumner, Tim Sumner's Tales.
	So... Or Annie Lennox does duets with her daughter.
	Does her daughter sing well?
	Yes. Does her daughter sing as well as Annie Lennox?
	And can she write songs like Annie Lennox?
	No. Annie Lennox does great cover albums, but her solo albums are fantastic.
	Just jaw-droppingly great.
	So, she's one of the only performers who's imitated Aretha Franklin while singing a Clash song.
	Stand by your man or whatever.
	You say you stand by your man.
	Tell me something I don't understand.
	But it's really, she just does great stuff.
	So, the talent peaks and the next generation won't be as talented.
	Right? I mean, my family tree on my father's side had to wait 400 years for another philosopher, right?
	My ancestor William Molyneux, best friends with John Locke, was a great philosopher.
	And I remember just coming across him in a psych textbook, William Molyneux.
	And I think I'm better than he is, or more dedicated, or, of course, I have more access to an audience, which helps me a lot.
	But it's like it's been 400 years or 300 years, so you have to wait.
	So why is it a problem?
	You know, tall parents are going to have kids taller than average, but probably not as tall as themselves if they're very tall.
	High IQ parents are likely to have smarter kids, but the IQ 160 parents aren't going to have IQ 160 kids.
	They might have IQ 130 kids, but there's a regression to the mean.
	So I don't know that it's a problem.
	People who have that peculiar kind of productive genius that some people have, I mean, obviously Elon Musk and Tesla and Warren Buffett to some degree and so on, the Iacocca, Jack Smith, Like, the people who just have this productive genius, right? The Pareto principle, Midas touch.
	Their kids aren't going to have that.
	Right? Their kids aren't going to have that.
	So, I mean, if you look at Ringo Starr's son is also a drummer, but he's not as creative and certainly not as part of a great supergroup like the Beatles.
	You look at Roger Taylor's brother tours with them.
	When I saw Queen, Roger Taylor's son was also a drummer, but he's not going to be writing Radio Gaga.
	He's just going to be a good drummer.
	There's nothing wrong with being a good drummer, but he's just not going to have His father's, I mean, the peculiar thing about Queen was, obviously they're all very smart and very well educated, but the peculiar thing about Queen was that every single member wrote hit songs, like wrote number one songs.
	So, Brian May did We Will Rock You, Freddie Mercury did We Are The Champions, and of course, Bohemian Rhapsody.
	And Roger Taylor...
	Did Radio Gaga and some of their other songs, of course.
	John Deacon did You're My Best Friend and a couple of other songs of theirs.
	John Deacon, of course, I think came up with the original bass line for Another Mom Bites the Dust, of course, Dragon Attack, which was his favorite song of Queen's.
	And it's actually a really underrated song.
	And John Deacon, of course, also came out with that dum-dum-dum-dum-dum-dum.
	That was sampled by Vanilla Ice and was the basis of the wild recording sessions for...
	Under pressure. Under pressure was very interesting because Bowie insisted that they all record their vocal parts without, like their vocal ad-libs without listening to anybody else's vocal ad-libs, which was very cool.
	So it's not a problem. It's just a simple fact.
	I mean, there's things you can do.
	There's things you can do. Most parents will say to their kids, we can't afford that.
	The kid wants something expensive. They say, well, we can't afford that.
	But you don't say that. I mean, if you have some money, you probably can't afford it.
	And you say... You know, my approach to getting my daughter to save money, because saving money is one of the basics.
	It's one of the basic things of being free in this world is saving money.
	You're not free if you're paycheck to paycheck.
	You're a slave to circumstance and accident.
	And you can never really relax because you don't have any fridge for your food, so to speak.
	You don't have any excess for your choices.
	So, I would buy my daughter stuff when she was younger, and then let her have it.
	I remember when she was very young, she was desperate for a fake diamond, and she loved the stone called Tiger Eye, which is a pretty stone.
	And so, I think for about $25, we found a place online where we ordered her a Tiger Eye stone and a fake diamond.
	And they were both pretty, and she loved them.
	And then she stopped loving them, and she, you know...
	So when she would like something else, it wouldn't be hostile or anything.
	I'd be like, okay, so where's your diamond and your...
	Remember how much you wanted those things?
	And listen, I like that you wanted them.
	There's things that I want too, and sometimes I end up not using them as much as I think.
	But where are they now?
	I don't know.
	Oh, this thing that you absolutely have to have that's been moldering in the basement for three years.
	And again, the fact that you want it is great, but have some perspective, right?
	Just circle back and remind your kids that all the things that they wanted are probably moldering away.
	Now, some things that she wanted, like she wanted a tablet and she ended up using that tablet for communicating with friends.
	She uses it for drawing. She doesn't really play any games on it, but she uses it for drawing.
	She uses it for communication and all that.
	So that's a good purchase, right?
	Still using it. But some of the stuff that you desperately want, you end up not using it, and we can all think of those things.
	It's impossible to control your thoughts.
	Actions can be controlled, I think, however.
	What do you mean it's impossible to control your thoughts?
	I don't think that's true. You can train yourself out of things.
	I mean, I know that, and I can think, I can feel my mouth watering, right?
	So, just so you know, I mean, my obviously amateur understanding of nutrition is that sugar feeds certain bacteria in my gut, and if I don't eat sugar, those bacteria don't get the food they want, so they'll make me uncomfortable until I damn well give them, I'm a hostage, right?
	For my gut bacteria, I'm simply a delivery mechanism for sugar, and they'll make me uncomfortable, hold me hostage if I don't give them sugar.
	So, Honestly, this is the physiological response.
	If I sit there and think about, I don't know what would be nice, I like dark chocolate-covered almonds or raisins, right?
	So if I think of those, my mouth starts watering and I have a hankering for sugar.
	If I don't think of those or say, okay, let's think about something else, then I will forget my hankering.
	Whereas if I sit there and focus on it, it would just get worse and worse, right?
	To the point where, you know, I may be really, really tempted or may, in fact, even have sugar.
	So I don't know what you see.
	Impossible to control your thoughts.
	I don't...
	Since action results from thought, if you say you can't control your thoughts, then you also can't control your actions.
	Actions arise from thoughts, right?
	Alright. Calorie count on the Cheesecake Factory dessert menus are ungodly.
	Right, unless your god is sugar, in which case they're ultimate.
	I don't need a long answer.
	That's optimistic. Don't need a long answer, but I'm curious.
	On episode 5417, why did you say that leading a moral life is ups and downs?
	I would think that it's an exponential curve, difficult for a while, and then massive benefits.
	I'm curious why you'd say I don't need a long answer.
	That's very interesting. I can't answer that in a short way very easily.
	So, I'm not sure why you would cripple me in a way.
	I mean, I know it's just a request.
	I'm free to do whatever I want.
	But I'm not sure why you would ask this incredibly complicated and deep question and then say, don't need a long answer.
	So, if you can answer me that, then I'll know how to calibrate.
	Alright. I fully acknowledge that diabetes is a consequence of choices 20 years ago.
	My bad choices must be paid today.
	Good choices today can pay off tomorrow.
	Yeah. Do you avoid bread entirely?
	I minimize bread, but I don't avoid it entirely.
	I quit sugar for eight years, but this year I started allowing myself to have a few desserts per week.
	Seems to be going well. Why would you go back?
	I don't know why. Alright, let's see here.
	Really appreciate these questions.
	Delightful to spend time with you today.
	Steph, is it also a good argument to make that there's no point in debating people who wouldn't try to dismiss property rights by using instances like the bread example because at that point we are no longer in the realm of rational discourse?
	Would a society that follows UPB really have this problem?
	Is this bread problem really what is getting in the way of someone accepting that rape, assault, murder and theft are wrong?
	If so, no logic can help them.
	Well, you can't debate concepts with people who are concrete.
	I mean, sort of the three tips for debate are, does somebody think that providing an exception to a general rule is intelligent?
	If so, don't debate with them.
	They simply don't have the intelligence to debate.
	Number two, do they understand per capita?
	And number three, do they understand that debating instances is not the same as debating...
	Principles, right?
	So if you have a principle called things fall down and then somebody says, well, clouds lay up in the air and bubbles go up and hot air balloons go up and helium balloons go up and smoke goes up and it's like...
	So, yeah, people who, when you have a general statement and people think that providing exceptions is massively beneficial, that's pointless, right?
	I watched your Why Women Go Woke video.
	I noticed you didn't go over the idea of resentment and ask you about why men do not approach.
	Yeah, that's too general.
	Resentment, men, women, resentment.
	Resentment about what? I don't know.
	A society that follows UPB can be as uncharitable as you want because humans have free will and lots of people might die by not being helped out.
	To what degree do you personally care about status?
	How do you know if you care too much about status?
	I hate status.
	I really, really dislike status.
	status is responsible for a massive amount of immorality in the world.
	I downplay status.
	I'm happy when people don't recognize me, even back when I was more positively viewed in society as a whole.
	I don't want people to think about me.
	I don't want them to care that much about me.
	I do want them to think about virtue and morality and so on and how they can be better people themselves.
	But no, status...
	If you want a status, you can't tell the truth.
	Status is about denying the need for status, right?
	I mean, if some big public figure were to say, I'm desperate for people's approval and attention, they would lose status, so they can't ever be honest about what they're doing things for.
	Your identity is your conclusions.
	Well, yeah, it's true, right?
	A StephBot AI won't be able to do what I do.
	Thank you for the tip.
	I watch Locals. I appreciate that.
	I live in a society that is pre-brain-dead Eastern Europe.
	Think 1950s England.
	How do I influence people to maintain standards and safety?
	Show them how bad it is in Sweden, UK, Germany?
	If people have a moral mission, empirical evidence is irrelevant.
	So you have to attack the principles or undermine the principles.
	Thank you, C2Spark, Steph on fire, great wisdom and analysis.
	Thank you, I appreciate that. It's a problem if there is a fall from grace in the next generation because of abusive parenting.
	Yeah, so sorry, some of the rags to riches to rags stuff happens because men who are incredibly productive, it can happen to women too, but it's mostly men, men who are incredibly productive often get more benefits from work than personal relationships.
	They get more of a high, they get more sense of traction and value add.
	And so they tend to focus on work at the expense of their personal relationships, which means their kids are often neglected, so then there's a fall from grace that way.
	I was thinking mostly in terms of money, avoiding that the next generations blow the wealth and get back to zero.
	Well, you don't let...
	So if your children are loved, then they won't need to blow money on status, right?
	So you look at all these Instagram kids from the wealthy families with their, you know, here's me on the steps of a private jet flying off to Acapulco.
	Why are they doing that? Well, they need status because they're not loved.
	And being loved means giving up on status because it means accepting low status for telling the truth and being honorable.
	And... Having moral courage, which means being attacked.
	People always tell you what they fear most based on how they attack you.
	So the people who attack my status, they themselves are terrified of losing status.
	so they think that by attacking me they're inflicting the worst punishment, when they're not.
	I'm not going to do it.
	Oh yeah, her raccoon look for a rendition of Under Pressure.
	Not sure who else could have done it or done it so well.
	David Bowie was a ridiculously toxic fellow in Western culture as a whole.
	Just ridiculously toxic.
	Alright, individual thoughts can cross your mind.
	You do not have to park them in your brain.
	You can change your mind. Yeah.
	If you try not to think about a pink elephant, you will think of a pink elephant more.
	Psychology. Really?
	So if the thought of a pink elephant comes into your mind, and every time the thought of a pink elephant comes into your mind, you consciously redirect your mind towards something else, are you saying that a pink elephant will then continually and obsessively come into your mind?
	No, that's just not true at all.
	That's just not even remotely true.
	So when you first quit smoking, I hear, right?
	You first quit smoking, you think about cigarettes all the time.
	I remember a friend of mine who was quitting smoking saying that, you know, movies with characters who smoke should come with warnings.
	Warning, if you've just quit smoking, you don't want to see that glow that would make his hands shake or whatever, right?
	And so when he was quitting smoking, he thought about smoking all the time.
	Another friend of mine, and I use this little snippet of information because I store information like a caribou's ass stores burrs.
	She said that her father quit smoking.
	Her father was a tree surgeon. And when he quit smoking, it took him two years to stop reaching for his breast pocket where he kept his cigarettes.
	So when you first quit smoking, you think about cigarettes all the time.
	And then it fades away, and eventually you don't think about cigarettes at all.
	Or if you do think about them, you think about them in a negative context, like it's kind of gross, right?
	So I don't know what you mean, that you have no control over your thoughts.
	This is not true at all. This is not true.
	It would be interesting if there was a short answer but would love to hear a
	long answer.
	I That doesn't give me any more information.
	Why would you include...
	Is it because you feel like you don't want to...
	I just want to understand. Is it because you feel like you don't want to impose by asking me a big complex question?
	Like, it's fine if it's a short answer.
	I just want to understand because that's a very unusual thing to hear and there's nothing wrong with it or anything.
	It's not a criticism. I'm just genuinely curious.
	Why would you say, don't need a long answer, but I'm curious.
	Is that because you don't want to impose?
	I just want to sort of understand where you're coming from.
	How was David Bowie toxic?
	Because he was a chameleon with no fixed sense of identity and he spread that lack of identity across.
	He went through these entire phases, right?
	He went through Ziggy Stardust, the Thin White Duke.
	He went through a whole series of reinventions and he was constantly morphing and changing his look and his identity and everything about it.
	And there was no David Bowie there.
	I mean, he was very good looking, had a great head of hair, was a I think a chainsmoker when he was younger, he died of lung cancer.
	So he had no identity, no stability in his personality, no stability in his public presentation.
	And so he was a changeling which destabilized people's sense of self,
	because he obviously had no stable sense of self either.
	I don't want to derail the show.
	Okay, and I appreciate that, but let me understand this.
	So, the show, I say that philosophy in its essence is about morality, and you have a question about leading a moral life.
	I'm curious why you would consider a show that's focused on morality asking a moral question to be derailing the show.
	You know, it'd be like going to a singer and saying, I really want, who's saying, tell me a song that you want me to sing.
	And you say, well, I want you to sing this song, but I don't want to derail the show.
	And it's like, but it's a singing show.
	So asking a singer to sing a song at a singing show, I'm not sure how that derails the show.
	and again I'm happy to hear that.
	I got some great answers by the way just while waiting for that to come in.
	I got some great answers from people when my show last show was Am I Too Mean?
	It was Wednesday. And people were like, no, it's fine to be And I've basically just said, look, I'm going to be honest.
	I am genuinely curious about why, don't need a long answer, right?
	I want to know why the person says that.
	It's not a critical thing. It's not a negative thing.
	I'm genuinely curious.
	The perspective of, I don't want to derail a show about morality by asking a question about morality.
	Annie Lennox is a feminist and a socialist, so personal faults abound, but they can sing.
	Uh, well, what was it, um...
	John Cougar Mellencamp was on Bill Maher, trying to get Bill Maher to sing the praises of the Communist Manifesto.
	It's just fucking vile.
	It's just absolutely fucking vile.
	Porn star Kekne Lynn Carter killed herself with a shotgun in the mouth.
	I assume that that's because she was forced to perform fellatio as a child.
	So she was killed by oral means, spiritually, and then she killed herself.
	I don't know obviously but that would be my guess.
	A status of course is a form of slavery because you're defining your value by
	other people.
	you You are defining your value by the eyes of other people.
	Steph, can you please do a review of Rob Henderson's new book?
	He had a massively tragic childhood, Ten Foster Homes, and it's inspiring how he made it through to become the man he is now.
	Ugh. Dave says, you've annoyed me by not responding to my point and talking about my parents instead.
	On one occasion at least, I feel that was mean.
	Well, that's interesting. It's a little tyrannical, to be honest.
	Like, who the hell are you to tell me how I should respond to your point?
	I can respond to your point however I see fit.
	Now, you may not like it. But saying, well, I have this point.
	I want you to respond to my point in the way that I want you to.
	And if you respond to my point in the way that you want to, you're being mean.
	I don't quite follow that logic.
	I don't quite follow that logic.
	Maher knows nothing about politics.
	Self-admitted, he knows nothing.
	But he had a whole show called Politically Incorrect.
	So then it's just a fraud, right?
	And he talks politics all the time and has political guests on all the time.
	So that's just nonsense, right?
	Yeah, so it's kind of funny when, so let's say somebody says something and I think it has to do with their parents and I respond to that.
	What's wrong with that? I don't understand.
	It's like, literally like saying, hey man, you can get me anything you want for my birthday and then you get me something and I'm like, well that's mean.
	I'm like, who are you to tell me how I should respond to your point?
	And get mad at me if I don't respond in the way that you want.
	That's just weird. I mean, that's saying that I have to follow your train tracks of conversation or I'm a mean guy.
	No, if I think it's to do with your parents, what am I supposed to lie?
	And like, I genuinely feel that your question had to do with your parents.
	Am I supposed to lie and pretend that that's not the case?
	Or am I supposed to be authentic in myself and tell you what I actually think?
	Do you want me to just lie? Do you want me to just lie?
	I think it's to do with your parents.
	Well, you can't say that. That's mean.
	Okay, so you just want me to lie because you don't want to talk about your parents.
	Sorry. If you want someone to lie, go watch some Pfizer ads.
	I mean, don't come here.
	I'm not sorry to you, right? I'm just saying, right?
	It's kind of funny, right? Train in Vain.
	Yeah, yeah. Yeah, it was a great song.
	Let's see here.
	To specify on the why women go woke call, you were talking to a caller and asked him why he didn't approach in this conversation.
	You didn't talk about the idea of him feeling resentment.
	What do you think of resentment as a reason men don't approach?
	Yeah, I get that. I understand that.
	Resentment, women are often selling sex to an alpha for the status of being with the alpha.
	You know, alpha, fucks, beta, fucks, you know, the sort of coarse phrase that has some grain of truth in it for some people.
	So yeah, I get that there's resentment.
	But why would you approach a woman you resent?
	You would approach a woman you're enthusiastic to approach.
	If you resent the woman, it's because you're approaching her for the wrong reasons.
	So, resenting a woman is a great reason to not approach her.
	I guess it's fair, as long as we can theorize that you're making a point because of your parents.
	Oh, aren't you a tit-for-tat guy?
	Of course, yeah. Absolutely.
	Absolutely. You're free to be annoyed at me and think it has to do with my parents.
	Yeah, totally. You can make that case.
	it's great. I mean, of course.
	I joined later, that's why I added that disclaimer.
	Not to say that I want a short answer, it's a habit.
	Okay, I get that. Why has it happened?
	You joined later, that's why I added that disclaimer.
	No, no, joining later, if you join later, that's totally fine.
	If you join later, I don't care.
	Honestly, if you show up at 12 for an 11 o'clock show, that's totally fine.
	What I don't want you doing, in my particular perspective, I don't want you demanding that everyone explain what happened in the first hour if you show up late.
	That's all, right? Don't go to someone's lecture and then stand up in front, interrupt the lecture, and ask everyone what you missed, right?
	If you show up late, then suck it up, show up late.
	But if you're asking me a question, you can show up 20 minutes before the end of the show, And ask me a question, that's totally fine.
	I've got no problem. I've got no issue with that whatsoever.
	Because you're not asking, you're not interrupting my show to ask the audience to focus on your
	needs which you generated by being late.
	So why would you say don't need a long answer?
	you Because that, I mean, that's going to condition what I say because I'm, you know, sensitive to what people want and I just want to know why.
	And again, it's not a criticism.
	It's nothing negative or wrong in anything you did.
	Don't need a long answer, but I'm curious.
	And also, how could I possibly say, how can I explain that leaving a moral life has its ups and downs in a short way?
	It kind of puts a constraint on both of us.
	Now, of course, I can completely ignore your constraint, but I don't want to because I want to understand your constraint.
	Steph, regarding you being mean, I also think that what you're doing is very new and there shouldn't be assumptions about what works.
	Truth can provoke some deep pain and a soft, gentle approach isn't always enough to wake people up.
	You're not only dealing with us, but our history and parental egos.
	This is all new, especially in this format.
	That's true. And, of course, negative feedback is so often associated with abuse that when I criticize someone, it feels abusive to some people.
	I get that. But that's treating me as an abuser, which is unfair and unjust.
	Right? If you're treating me, who's being honest in my feedback, and, you know, critical, If you're treating me as abusive for being honest, when you were lied to by abusers and manipulated and punished by verbal abuse, if you put me in the category of abuser when I'm being honest, it means that being abused is now conditioning all of your responses and you can't be free in any fundamental way until you deal with that, right?
	So, you know, obviously I grew up with a raging, violent, abusive mother.
	So when people are angry at me, you know, that it doesn't trigger me anymore.
	It's been, I mean, gosh, it's been like 40 years since I, over 40 years since I lived with the witch.
	But... I'm not going to treat, you know, if my wife is upset with me for some reason, I'm not going to treat her as abusive because she's not my mother.
	She's not my mother. But that's there, this is here, right?
	So you've got to differentiate the two.
	If you can't get any constructive criticism because your parents were abusive, then they still run your life.
	They still run your mind, right? I wonder if he's used to minimizing his own wants because his parents were self-centered.
	Aren't we all here for an authentic response and not lip service?
	I'm trying to, I mean, I'm certainly not, you know, I'm not trying to be inauthentic.
	I'm not trying to, I'm just, this is my honest and genuine response.
	If someone annoys me, what am I going to say?
	I'm either going to fake and pretend I'm not annoyed, which is a form of falsehood.
	It would also be a falsehood to say, I'm annoyed because of you, right?
	That's also a falsehood. I have an interpretation of your behavior that results in annoyance.
	That interpretation could be false or just or fair or incorrect or unjust or false.
	So, I'm just going to say, after you did what you did, I got annoyed.
	I'm not saying it's because of you and I genuinely say that all the time.
	Like, I'm annoyed. I'm not saying you're annoying.
	You've heard me say this a million times.
	I'm annoyed. I'm not saying you're annoying.
	I'm just saying I'm annoyed. Person says, I don't know if I have a good answer for why it is a habit right now.
	I suppose just really wanting to get the question in so I see it as more likely when I add that disclaimer.
	Okay, so I'm going to teach you a little something about honesty and directness here.
	And I really, really appreciate this.
	This is very important, right?
	And just hit me with a yes or no here.
	This is too collateral. So it's very important to you that I answer this question, right?
	This is a very, very important question for you.
	Is that right? Sorry, I know there's a slight delay here, but this is a very important question.
	Self-erasing to be noticed?
	I don't think that's it. Yes, okay.
	So, let me ask you this.
	what is the most honest thing that you could say about
	how important the question is to you?
	So, you said, don't need a long answer, but I'm curious.
	Thanks for watching.
	When you are, you very, very much, and I promise you I'll answer the question, right?
	You're very, very, you're kind of desperate, and that's great, I'm desperate at times too.
	So, you're kind of desperate to get the answer.
	So, what's the most honest thing that, and this is to everyone, what's the most honest thing that collateral could say?
	about how important it is to get his question, how desperate he is to get an answer to the question.
	what's the most right rather than say oh i don't need a long answer
	what's the most honest and direct thing that he could say i mean i'll give my answer while we're waiting for people
	to type My answer would be, This question is really, really important to me.
	I would massively appreciate it if you could answer this question.
	Right? This is really important.
	I'm begging you to answer this question.
	Ask the question, that is all.
	No. No, because people have different levels of urgency.
	So if he's like, I've been thinking about this for a week, I'm desperate for this answer, please, please, please
	answer the question, right?
	So somebody says, Steph is cheating on his diet by explaining why you should not look at cheesecake, look
	Lusting by looking is the same as thinking or talking about it.
	I guess why lent is so good, training to resist convenience.
	I'm cheating on my diet.
	I'm off sugar. I had one-eighth of a bite of...
	Donut. And I'm cheating on my diet.
	Boy, you live in a pretty strict world there, brother.
	Oh my God. Well, so another thing he could do, and this is of course not necessary, another thing he could do is give me a sense of how important the question is by leaving a tip, right?
	I mean, I'm not saying that he has to.
	It's not a monetary thing. It could be, but he could leave a tip, right?
	I mean, this person who's very desperate to get this question answered hasn't left, hasn't given me a tip the whole live stream.
	Now, it's not a big criticism.
	Maybe he's broken. I respect that.
	I understand that. But maybe he doesn't want to spend the money to show me how important the question is.
	And again, you don't have to buy an answer.
	I'm just saying, you know, if somebody said the juicy tip, and this is how important this is to me, here's my tip, please answer this question.
	That could be. Right now, again, I'm not saying he has to tip.
	I'll answer the question either way.
	But if he's not going to tip...
	But he really wants the question answered, then he has to be direct.
	Right? Hopefully that word sales will help with your diet.
	Yeah, yeah. And also, don't need a long answer, but I'm curious.
	Curious is not a very emphatic statement, right?
	Curious is like, yeah, I'd kind of like to know, but I don't need a long answer.
	So he's downplaying how important the answer is.
	And this is really, really important.
	I'll answer the question. It's really, really important.
	Be honest.
	I did actually, the system doesn't always work for me.
	Okay, that's fair. Oh, you left coins?
	You said the system doesn't always work?
	I don't know if coins show up.
	Here. So, that's totally fine.
	I appreciate that. I appreciate that.
	So, don't bother tipping. If you didn't get that, that's totally fine.
	That's not your fault. If there's a technical issue, I appreciate that and I appreciate that clarification.
	So, question.
	I'm very concerned, worried, scared about a time-sensitive issue.
	Can you help me as soon as possible?
	How about that? Yes.
	PDOT sent a $10 tip for a dumb statement prior.
	Thanks. So, I appreciate the tip, and all of that's withdrawn, so thank you.
	Unfortunately, the tips don't show up.
	The coin tips don't show up on this platform.
	So, I appreciate that, and thank you.
	But don't need a long answer, but I'm curious.
	Tells me, the way I interpret it, and I'm happy if other people interpret it in a different way, because it is an interpretation.
	If somebody says, I don't need a long answer, but I'm curious...
	It sounds like it's not that important.
	Does that make sense?
	It sounds like it's not important.
	You know, I don't need you to get into this in depth.
	I'm just kind of curious.
	Doesn't that sound like it's not important?
	And so, and again I know it sounds like I'm picking apart this sentence
	but in terms of it, how often do we get honest feedback on how we appear to
	others, right?
	you He replaced vulnerability with manipulation.
	Well, it sounds like they don't want time invested into them.
	So it sounds like the question is not important.
	But the question is super important.
	What's the cost-benefit of leading a moral life is one of the most important questions in philosophy.
	So, saying, I don't need a long answer, but I'm kind of curious, or I'm curious, it seems like it's not important, as opposed to, this is a burning question in my brain, please help me.
	So, vulnerability to ask for things, right?
	Yes, very important to talk about cheesecake right now.
	Very important. So, to downplay your need or your vulnerability or to be raw in your requirements.
	Very interesting, right?
	Thanks, David. I appreciate that.
	Well, AI won't be able to replace me because AI is about the past.
	It's a word guesser based on the past, whereas there's a massive amount of inspiration that happens in a way that I don't even fathom.
	There's a massive amount of inspiration that happens in what I do that I can't tell you how it happens or why.
	I mean, the why is something to do with training and so on, but...
	So...
	Do you downplay what you need?
	I mean, I'm pretty frank with my wife about how much I need her and how much I love her.
	And, you know, my life is in her hands.
	Like, I need you guys as an audience.
	You really help me be better at what it is that I do.
	These are great questions.
	Meaning of life in five seconds or less.
	Stop everything. Recap, please.
	LOL. That's pretty funny.
	That's very funny. Dude Man got comedy.
	Dude Man got comedy.
	No, I do. I mean, honestly, if I've forgotten that she's gone somewhere in the morning, you know, I just text her.
	No, I never want anyone I care about to be in doubt of how much I care about them.
	And I really care about you as an audience.
	I think we're doing fantastic work here.
	It is a combined effort. And I may be the hub of the spoke of the wheel, but it's nothing without the spokes, right?
	So no, I never want anyone to be in doubt how much I care about them.
	And I just, there's something here that's important.
	And I promise I'll answer the question.
	It is, can you be direct in what you need?
	Somebody says, if you don't mind, if not too much trouble, I was pondering the need for O2. As it so happens, I'm choking on my food.
	And do you think that you could get around to the topic, maybe relate it to first aid, priorities, please?
	Right, right. I agree and I do appreciate the feedback.
	Don't you think that sometimes getting your foot in the door in an asymmetric relationship, it's polite to give them an out?
	I agree that it doesn't make sense for this stream because the whole point is to discuss and it's not real life.
	I agree, and I do appreciate the feedback.
	Getting your foot in the door in an asymmetric relationship.
	Oh, so you view this as an asymmetric relationship?
	Like, so I'm up here and you're down here?
	Is that right? But that's absolutely false.
	It's the exact opposite of the truth.
	It's an asymmetric relationship.
	So do you view me as higher status than you?
	Do you view me as...
	Being up here and you're down here, is that right?
	and genuinely want to follow this, right?
	You view me as, I don't know, an intellectual titan that you have to beg
	for scraps? I'm trying to...
	You're like a philosophical father.
	I've certainly heard that before.
	Okay. Let's say that I am your philosophical father.
	Do you view your father as high status and you as the child as low status?
	If there is a father thing going on, and I know that that happens for some people.
	Is your father high status?
	you and you are low status
	somebody says had a twin sister we did not have good parents
	The result was that I was not direct enough and my sister took much, looked for confrontation.
	This preamble in asking a question is a sign of some past trauma.
	It's not really a status thing, but wisdom and experience.
	Wow, okay. So this comes out of school, right?
	This is school where the teachers are, quote, high status and they can punish you and maybe your father was high status and looked down on you or put you down or something like that.
	Holy crap! I'm begging for questions and working for tips and you're elevating me?
	What? It's incomprehensible to me.
	I'm completely dependent upon you as the audience.
	I mean, especially in live streams, right?
	I mean, I did a great show this morning, Philosophical Paradoxes Part 4, about how beauty is ridiculously inefficient but the only thing that makes life worthwhile.
	So, you view me as high status and you as the audience as low status.
	Some of you, not all of you.
	Whereas, I'm here to serve you.
	I'm like a waiter.
	I'm serving you knowledge and working for tips.
	Like the waiter serves you. Well, without the waiter, I'd starve.
	No, no. You're equals.
	You're both exchanging value, right?
	I think we are equal, but I'm asking you for something.
	No, you're not asking me for something.
	You're fulfilling my request.
	I'm asking for questions.
	Right? So, if you go to a hot dog stand, which is there to sell you a hot dog, and you buy a hot dog, are you low status because you're asking for something?
	No, you're equals. You're equals.
	We're equals here. I'm not high status.
	If I go to the dentist, yeah, my dentist is better at dentistry, but we're equals.
	I'm paying her and she cleans my teeth.
	There are a lot more people in the audience, so although we may be more important, the importance is spread thinner.
	Oh, so you're saying that if you weren't present on the live stream, the live stream would still be continuing, but if I wasn't present on the live stream, the live stream wouldn't be continuing.
	But I'm still here to...
	But the purpose of the live stream is to answer your questions.
	I'm here to serve you.
	I say this a million times on the call-in shows.
	Hey, how can I best help you?
	I'm here to bend my will and my intellect and my thoughts and my wisdom and my experience.
	I'm here to help you.
	Yes, yes. If you're waiting for the waiter, you become the waiter.
	I get it. So clever.
	But try and stay with the conversation.
	So it's funny. It's not talking about status and everybody starts making jokes because they want to raise their status in the conversation by being funny, right?
	No, no, somebody says, quote, no, no, this philosophy is too well done, send it back and bring me something more raw, right?
	So it's funny how when we start talking about status, people bring out their inner jokesters to, I haven't stopped thinking about donuts, right?
	See, no, see, this is, you understand that we're talking about high and low status, right?
	Oh, thank you. Thank you for the question.
	I appreciate that. I was looking, looking, looking that.
	I will get this question as well, I promise you, about your daughter.
	I was looking for that this morning.
	I couldn't find where I had stored it, so I appreciate that.
	Thank you. All right, I will put that right there to remember.
	But we're talking about where you guys were humiliated.
	And if it's any consolation, where I was humiliated as well.
	Wherein our teachers were high status and they punished us for not paying attention.
	They punished us for not enjoying the lessons.
	They punished us for being absent.
	They punished us for not completing the work they assigned that we didn't care about.
	I think it's similar to the way a religious person goes to a priest for spiritual guidance and advice.
	Okay. Let's say there's some analogy.
	Why would the priest be higher status?
	Why would it be higher status?
	this.
	you If I go to a financial advisor to ask for advice, is he higher status than me?
	I'm not sure that I could see it that way.
	I mean, without customers, he's nothing.
	So I'm part of his customer.
	I'm part of why he has a business.
	I'm exchanging my value for his value.
	Isn't everyone you voluntarily trade with basically an equal?
	I mean, maybe I'm missing something here and maybe it's something obvious and I could just be blind to something clear.
	But whenever you exchange something voluntarily, is anyone superior to you or inferior to you?
	Because that's what we've been taught from a young age.
	I'm really striving to be of service to you.
	I mean, you could make the case, look, I show up and I didn't pay that guy a penny and he answers all my questions.
	I'm totally exploiting him.
	I'm ripping him off. I'm winning.
	He's losing, right?
	And there are lots of people, again, the majority of people don't donate to the show and they get the benefit of decades of hard-won wisdom for free, right?
	So they could say, I'm winning, you know, Steph bends himself backwards to help me, and I don't have to pay him a penny.
	I'm high status, he's low status.
	Like he works for free and I get all the value, right?
	The priest is not actually high status, he just has a different role and responsibility
	I guess the question is whether having respect for someone indicates a difference in status.
	But if I think your question is fascinating, and it is, I have respect for your question.
	How does one of us have more respect than the other?
	It's subjective who is superior and inferior, so in theory you can be superior for me if I believe you're superior.
	Well, that's what I'm questioning.
	I don't really think the priest is high status since he is also serving the congregation, but people really respect and value his advice.
	Right. Let me ask you this.
	Have you ever had it in your life where you've given advice to someone who just
	doesn't bloody well listen?
	Have you ever given advice to someone in your life, poured heart and soul in trying to help them and they just
	don't listen?
	you you
	Of course, we all have, right?
	Of course. Now, all the time, all right, do you stop giving advice to someone who doesn't listen?
	John Tutoro style, who just doesn't listen.
	Do you stop giving advice to someone who just doesn't listen?
	Of course you do. Because you no longer respect that person.
	Because they ask her advice, you give them good advice, they don't listen, they repeat the mistake, they come back, they ask her...
	We understand, right? So, if I'm answering your question, it's because I respect both the question and your ability to listen.
	Do you follow? If I answer your question, it's because I respect the question and I respect your ability to listen to the answer.
	So how is that not mutual respect?
	Collateral, this original questioner says, I actually think these podcasts are so important, so I think in a way I was triaging myself.
	I will be okay either way, but sometimes people here really need advice.
	Oh, so you're deferring to, well, other people might have more want or need than me.
	That's a terrible way to live, man.
	Sorry. I'm so sorry.
	You can't live that way. It can't be universalized.
	You cannot live that way.
	Right, so let's say you're attracted to some woman.
	And you say, well, you know, other men need a date more than I do, so I'll just defer to them.
	No, you go win that date.
	You go for a job, say, well, there could be somebody, I'm sure there's somebody worse off than me who needs that job more than I do, so I just won't go for that job.
	Well, I guess I could live theoretically on a very small amount of food, so any excess food, there's more hungry people in the world, so I guess I'll just be half-starved for my entire life.
	Well, I could get this apartment, but there's somebody else who needs this apartment more.
	You can't live like that.
	You can't live like that.
	Or, to put it another way, you wouldn't be here if your ancestors had lived like that, so stop self-erasing, given that you're only here because your ancestors took what they damn well wanted at the expense of other people.
	Come on, man.
	No, no, other people have needs bigger.
	Oh, my God. Please, don't.
	Can you imagine? I started the show this morning, and I said, well...
	You know, I do want to do a show.
	You guys do have a lot of questions, but my concern is that if you're watching me, you're not watching other people, so I'm going to have to shut the show down because other people have need for your eyeballs and maybe donations more than me.
	Come on, you can't live like that.
	I mean, I think a lot of people would be very happy if they were married to my wife because she's so wonderful.
	I'm not giving her up.
	Too bad. I got her, I'm keeping her, and that's it.
	You lose. Oh, my gosh.
	Yeah, don't triage yourself.
	Are you kidding me? That argument is used all the time with the starving children in Africa needing the food more, but without explaining how African governments help cause that.
	Is this issue self-erasure, then?
	His issue, I believe, is this.
	That he was abused for putting himself in a vulnerable position in the past, so he minimizes his own needs, thus not getting what he wants.
	He was punished for being vulnerable and direct about his needs in the past, and therefore he erases his own needs in the present to avoid punishment, but then ends up being punished by not getting what he wants.
	Aphra says, this resonates with me.
	I have a similar habit.
	On a basic level, it's this mistrust in my right to exist and have wants and needs and expectations, boundaries, etc.
	So you understand, you can't live without wants and needs.
	You're either going to try and get them directly or indirectly.
	But you're going to have to try and get them.
	You can't erase wants and needs.
	You can't. So you only have two choices when it comes to getting your wants and needs met.
	Direct, manipulative.
	Direct, manipulative.
	That's all there is. Nothing else.
	Now, he was trying to get his needs met indirectly.
	But you see, if it's true that he got punished for being vulnerable and wanting things as a kid, Then he's still trying to get his needs met.
	His needs are just to avoid being punished by being open about his needs, right?
	So he's still getting his needs met.
	It's just manipulative. Like, you're either honest or you lie.
	There's no other choice. There's no third choice called, I just will minimize my own needs.
	Like, you're just lying then. And again, I'm not calling this person a liar, and we all do this, and we all have this habit, so I'm not calling him a liar.
	I'm just saying that it is an act of falsification, right?
	Somebody says, reminds me of when I was a child and asked for things that I wanted on a rare occasion.
	My mom's response was, why don't you go ask your dad who abandoned me as an infant?
	I do have trouble with being too empathetic or kind or indirect.
	It's not kind. Oh my gosh.
	It's not kind. Because I don't want you to lie to me.
	You're not being kind to me by lying to me.
	By saying that something isn't important when it's desperately important to you, you're lying to me.
	That's not kindness. That's not empathy.
	It's just lying. It's just lying.
	And I'm not calling you a liar and, you know, probably not aware of this.
	But if something's really important to you and you pretend it's not, and you downplay it, If you want a proper answer, which is probably going to be long, but you say, I don't want a long answer, or it's fine if I don't get a long answer.
	I'm just curious. You're not just curious, and you don't care about the length of the answer.
	You desperately want your question answered.
	So if you say to me, this question's been burned in a hole in my brain.
	I'm desperate to answer. Please help me out.
	Fantastic. But you are saying this as being too empathetic or kind.
	No! I want you to be direct with me.
	Well, the guy who wants me to tell the truth, I'm really being empathetic and kind to him by falsifying my entire existence and preferences.
	I'm manipulative, I'm downplaying, I'm undermining, and I'm putting him in the position of someone who's abusive because the last people I exposed my desperate needs to abused or neglected or ignored me.
	So I'm going to pretend that Steph, the nice guy, is abusive.
	I'm going to manipulate him.
	I'm going to falsify my existence and I'm going to lie to him because I'm just so empathetic and kind.
	No! No! A thousand times no.
	That is not empathetic. That is not kind.
	That is the result of trauma, which I deeply sympathize about.
	I really, really sympathize with all of that.
	But please, please, don't try and tell me that falsifying your thoughts and emotions to me is being empathetic and kind.
	It's not. It's not.
	Oh, I don't want to impose.
	Life is imposition.
	Unless you share your house with a whole bunch of rabbits and wolves, Kairos says, donated 30 bucks at FDR to pick up the speed of the dono train.
	Come on, people, this is solid gold.
	Think of all the times you tipped someone to bring you a cup of coffee.
	Yeah, isn't that true, right? Isn't that true?
	If I could turn the iPad around, right?
	Turn the iPad around and people like 20% for a coffee.
	However, timeless wisdom is not, right?
	Thank you, I appreciate that. But you think it's kind.
	No. No. It's not kind.
	Life is imposition. Everything you eat is taken from, oh, I only eat vegetables.
	Yeah, well, the farm that grow those vegetables displaced all of the rabbits and field mice and flies, right?
	Life is imposition. What are you talking about?
	A man who's having a heart attack does not help anyone by ignoring the fact because some hypothetical someone is in greater need or more deserving.
	Look man, if you can't get comfortable with the fact that for you to win some people have to lose,
	you're gonna fly through this life like a just a
	nothing smoke.
	Life is imposition. For you to win, Everyone who's watching and listening to me is not watching or listening to other people.
	I win, they lose.
	If you go and watch someone else, they win, I lose.
	Life is in position. I don't follow.
	Every job you get doesn't go to someone else.
	Every girlfriend you get isn't dating someone else.
	Every dollar you make doesn't go to someone else.
	And I know it's not a zero-sum game.
	You can generate these things and all of that, but I don't follow what What this means?
	It's not polite.
	It's not empathetic.
	It's thanatos. It's a death impulse.
	I'm not saying you have a death impulse, but the desire to not impose when life is in position is a desire to not be here.
	It's a desire to not exist.
	It's a desire to not live.
	Life is in position, and we should enjoy that competition.
	Everyone who wins the gold is everyone else who didn't win the gold.
	Does that mean we should not try to win the gold?
	You understand, I want to displace and destroy the reputation of every other philosopher known to man, because they think they suck as a whole, because they didn't deal with childhood, and they didn't bring their morals to parenting.
	I want to displace and burn down the reputation of all prior philosophers.
	Maybe I will, maybe I won't.
	I think I'm doing a pretty good job.
	Yeah, I want them to lose because they delivered the world that is.
	The philosophers that were have delivered the world that is.
	The world that is is going in a pretty terrible place.
	I'm kind of pissed at them and I want to discredit them and elevate peaceful parenting, the non-aggression principle and property rights and self-ownership and free will and all that kind of good stuff.
	Yes, I want the people who delivered a world as craptastic as this one to lose.
	And I want to build the world of the future, my novel, The Future, freedomain.com.
	Yeah, I want to win.
	I want truth to win. I want reason to win.
	I want evidence to win. And I want the sophists and the falsifiers to lose.
	With no state involvement in raising and educating the youth, will the philosophers of the future be treated like the athletes and celebrities of today?
	I would like to think so.
	I don't think so.
	Athletes are for observing.
	Philosophy is for internalizing.
	Philosophy is for observing.
	Celebrities are for watching. So I think philosophy is for everyone.
	Top-tier athletic ability is for the very few, as is celebrity.
	I'm more like a nutritionist.
	I want people to care about the diet, not the dietician.
	And I want people to absorb the value of the diet, not to stare at a poster of the dietician.
	And diet is for everyone.
	Alright, so hopefully this makes some sense.
	Leading a moral life has its ups and downs.
	It's an exponential curve difficult for a while, then massive benefits.
	Well, with the massive benefits of a moral life come massive catastrophes.
	Because a moral life is not just for you.
	A moral life is for everyone.
	It's for others. It's to spread wisdom.
	It's to spread virtue.
	and spreading wisdom and virtue comes at the expense of the unwise and the immoral.
	If you are a good person you spread virtue equally.
	If you spread virtue, you will be attacked by evildoers.
	If you go to, I don't know, Wikipedia or whatever, you go and you look at Stalin.
	Now, Stalin slaughtered at least 10 million people.
	At least. I mean...
	Probably more, Holodomor overlapped a little bit between Lenin and Stalin, but Stalin slaughtered at least 10 million people.
	And in the Wikipedia for Stalin, it's like, it's complex.
	You know, we've got to look at both sides.
	There were pluses, there were minuses, good and bad.
	Like this is a guy who slaughtered 10 million people and gulagged millions and millions more.
	So, but it's a complex... and you go to Che Guevara who slaughtered children and gays and
	right and and it's all like well it's complex and there's pluses and minuses it's controversial.
	You go to my, I mean, anyway.
	You know. You can slaughter 10 million people.
	And you know, there's pluses and minuses, ups and downs.
	It's complex. Good and bad.
	Blah, blah, blah. But me, no.
	I'm just... There's nothing plus.
	No plus, right? So this is just the reality, right?
	So you are person avoidant because you were punished for expressing needs and preferences.
	And you can't have a relationship with anyone without expressing honest needs and preferences.
	Because otherwise you're just manipulating.
	Right? You can't have a relationship if you're manipulating because you can't connect with someone while hiding yourself.
	You can't connect with someone while lying to them and manipulation is a form of falsehood.
	So, yeah, moral life has its ups and downs because for you, morality is about you, whereas genuine morality is about others as well.
	Which is why I don't just live an isolated from society moral life with friends and family, but I'm out here fighting the good fight and taking the blows that inevitably come with promoting virtue.
	Promoting virtue means harming the interests of evildoers.
	If I promote the voluntary family that as an adult you don't have to spend time with abusive people, then the people who abused you, if you decide not to see them, they lose access to you and your resources.
	They lose social status.
	They're shamed. Well, why don't your kids talk to you and blah, blah, blah.
	So, of course, they're mad, right?
	Are they mad at themselves for doing wrong?
	No, of course not. They're mad at me for saying that is a true statement that you don't have to spend time with abusive people.
	Yeah. Yeah, it's really wild.
	So, you look at morality as something that isolates you from others or does not give you any social responsibilities.
	And therefore you think it's going to be nothing but plus.
	But if you don't spread virtue, you don't oppose the spread of evil.
	and you can't live a solitary virtuous life if evil is spreading, right?
	So...
	Alright.
	Hopefully that helps. Ah...
	Let me get to the question.
	Thank you. My four-year-old daughter is becoming aggressive to my wife with changing diapers.
	She's kicking and wanting me to change her diaper instead.
	We're potty training, but my daughter is still scared.
	How do we best resolve an aggressive outburst when we don't know the reason my daughter prefers one parent over the other?
	Well, I'm no parenting expert in terms of developmental phases, but four-year-old seems a bit old to be in a diaper.
	I'm not sure why your four-year-old daughter would be in a diaper.
	So, that would be my first question.
	Whenever you look at aggression in children, you have to look at Where are they learning the aggression from?
	The children are eminently imprintable.
	We're not totally blank slates, but they're eminently imprintable.
	We know this because children who grew up in a Japanese household speak Japanese.
	People who grew up in an English household speak English, so as far as that goes, right?
	So, where has she learned aggression?
	She's kicking and wanting me to change her diaper instead.
	So, she does not like something about her mother.
	What does she not like about her mother?
	Now, if her mother is a primary caregiver, And if your four-year-old daughter is around other kids, then your four-year-old daughter is going to notice that the other kids aren't wearing diapers when she is.
	Right? I do like it when you come with these great sentences too.
	Yeah, it's pretty neat. So, your wife has not potty-trained your daughter.
	Your daughter is around other kids who are, of course, were potty-trained probably, I don't know, 18 months, right?
	So... Two and a half years ago.
	So, your daughter is like, well, why am I still in diapers when the other kids aren't?
	My kids were late to get out of diapers.
	It varies, not necessarily an issue.
	Well, that's very passive.
	What do you mean they were late to get out of diapers?
	Are they buying their own and putting them on themselves?
	Are they driving in diapers to go and get diapers from the diaper store?
	No! What do you mean, late to get out of diapers?
	I mean, you as a parent can potty train.
	Maybe I'm missing something.
	I mean, if there's not developmental issues, I'm not sure.
	It's sort of like, well, my kids eat a lot of sugar.
	It's like, no, they eat what you put in front of them.
	They eat what's in the house.
	What do you mean? Maybe this is the passive thing that's being, we try to potty train, we let them lead.
	Okay, so that's a choice.
	That's a choice. But it's tough for kids if everyone else is out of diapers and they're still in diapers, right?
	That's bad. That can be bad.
	It will happen eventually.
	But you're the parent. You're supposed to be in charge a little bit, right?
	I mean, did you teach them how to read or did you just say, well, they'll figure out reading eventually on their own, right?
	I mean, you're supposed to be a leader as a parent, right?
	And potty training sooner rather than later is a plus.
	Now, of course, you shouldn't apply any aggression or, you know, whatever, right?
	But I'm not quite understanding what this means.
	So, it says, my daughter is being primarily raised by my mother-in-law when we both work during the week.
	My daughter attends a few hours of community school for a few hours Tuesday, Thursdays, and is starting kindergarten in September.
	Yep, I lead. They're doing fine.
	No, you said that they did it on their own schedule.
	So in that particular instance, you didn't take the lead.
	You let them do their own schedule.
	And, you know, I'm just saying that that's a fact.
	That's not the same as leadership. So this is from Andrew.
	Why is your daughter being raised by your mother-in-law?
	I don't understand that.
	Why are you and your wife working and your mother-in-law is raising your daughter?
	And I guess your mother-in-law is not potty training her.
	So why is your wife not home with your daughter?
	I'm not sure I follow that.
	I'm happy to hear.
	Yep is, I'm defensive and I'm not going to listen to any feedback about this.
	Just so you know, I'm not going to pursue this topic.
	Whenever I see yep, I'm like, okay, so that person doesn't want any more feedback.
	And that's fine. All right, so he's, I know, so you can do a call in if you want, of course.
	FreeDomain.com slash call.
	FreeDomain.com slash call.
	You can set up a call-in, but...
	And it's interesting because you said my four-year-old daughter is becoming aggressive to my wife, not to her mother.
	Right? So she has maternally bonded with your mother-in-law, I assume, right?
	My wife and I are both full-time.
	My mother-in-law is trying her best to encourage potty training, but she is feisty and scared.
	I don't know.
	Maybe you didn't get the question.
	Why is your wife working when you have a baby or a child or a toddler in this case?
	Why is your wife working?
	She's choosing money over her child?
	I don't quite understand. And also, you are having your child raised by somebody from a Certainly a long ways prior to modernity mindset, which has its pluses and minuses, but you are raising somebody who probably is the furthest thing from a peaceful parent, like a non-peaceful parent is raising your child, almost certainly, right?
	So, I don't think that's a fair statement to say about grandmas, and I wouldn't take that too seriously.
	So, I'm sure he'll type, but why would you have a child and then choose to work?
	I mean, maybe there's a good reason, but you can afford daycare a couple of times a week.
	So, Steph, I've donated on Free Domain, really enjoyed the topics on status and self-racial.
	Thank you, I appreciate that. That's very kind.
	Tanky, tanky, tanky.
	Mostly muchly.
	Thank you.
	My wife is the breadwinner.
	That's an ugly statement, Dave.
	you It's very unpleasant.
	Alright, yeah, I think that's ugly enough that you may be gone.
	may be gone.
	Alright. My wife is the breadwinner.
	I earn much less. We are in her 40s.
	People have their opinions.
	I'm helpful, some not. I don't feel defensive.
	Maybe it seems defensive.
	I earn much less.
	We are in her 40s.
	Okay, so if you're in your 40s, don't you have some savings?
	So, why don't you stay home then?
	If you earn much less, why don't you stay home?
	If you're not earning much, then...
	I mean, I've been a stay-at-home dad, so why don't you stay home?
	Why are you working if you're not making much?
	Like, why are you choosing, I guess, a relatively low paycheck over raising your child?
	I'm a little confused. Maybe there's a good answer for that, but I'm not sure why.
	And if you're not making much money, then raise your kid, right?
	I mean, because of course, if you're not raising your child, you'll be viewed as the
	babysitter, right?
	So, if you're not raising your kid, then you're not being a babysitter.
	We will have our home paid off in six months and we would feel more financially secure after that.
	Yeah, but in six months, your daughter's almost five and personality is largely set by five, right?
	I mean, if you have your home paid off, I mean, at worst case scenario, you could take a Second mortgage and use that to stay home?
	I mean, why is your mother-in-law raising your child?
	Again, maybe there's good reasons and I'm open to hearing them, but I haven't heard any yet.
	I mean, you're not even making that much money.
	Let's say that instead of having your home paid off in six months, maybe your home gets
	paid off in a year or two or five.
	So again, I'm happy to hear, but she's angry at her mother because her mother is choosing,
	like from a four-year-old's perspective, mommy prefers working to spending time with her.
	So wouldn't she be angry at her mother?
	Now, I'm not sure why she'd prefer you, but maybe she's just angry at her mother because her mother is choosing money over her.
	My mother-in-law offered to help and she loves the time with her.
	That's not a reason. You're the parent.
	You're the parent.
	Why would you want to have your kid bond with someone else?
	Okay, I mean, obviously I'm not going to get any particular answers here.
	These are just questions for you to consider.
	So, yeah, four is old to be in diapers, in my opinion, right?
	It's just my opinion, right? And your daughter is angry at her mother because your wife has chosen work over motherhood.
	Not obviously completely, there's weekends or whatever, right?
	So...
	She's... your daughter is angry.
	angry.
	you And it's a pretty simple thing to do, right?
	I mean, it's a pretty simple thing to do, which is you sit down with your daughter and you say, would you prefer if I stayed home?
	And you still see grandma, but would you prefer if I was your parent?
	Now, if your daughter, there's only really two answers, right?
	If your daughter says, no, I would rather spend time with grandmother than with you, that's important to know.
	That she's bonded, obviously, more and has more affection for and connection with your mother-in-law than you or your wife, right?
	So if you just say, how would you like it?
	How would you like it if I stayed home and you spent the day with me and not grandma, right?
	Either she's going to say, no, I want to spend time with grandma, which is a little heartbreaking but important, And also, if she says, no, I would very much like to have you home with me, I'd very much like to have you home with I still want to see grandma.
	I care about her a lot. But I would much rather you and or mom come home and spend time with me.
	And that's important. And I think you should respect that because your child's needs are what you serve, right?
	Your child's needs are what you serve.
	Now, needs, of course, she also, I assume, at some point needs to get potty trained at some point.
	So it doesn't mean her immediate emotional needs or whatever, right?
	But, yeah.
	It is... It is quite a sad story.
	Either she wants you to be home, but you're not being home, which means that you're not serving her needs in that sense for bonding with you.
	Or, she would rather go to her grandmothers, in which case she prefers her grandmother to you.
	The other problem, of course, with having grandparents raise kids is that grandparents aren't as mobile, they aren't as energetic, they don't have, you know, they can't go to playgrounds and vault around and run around, they can't go to trampoline parks, they can't do the active stuff as much, right?
	As much. And the other thing too is that if you have a daughter who bonds with a grandparent, then the daughter is going to go through the death of a caregiver 40 years or 30 years before she should, right?
	Because if a daughter is going to bond with A grandmother, then the grandmother is going to age out of being able to take care of the child that's going to get sick and is going to die, obviously, decades and decades and decades before her mother does.
	So it's going to prematurely, in a sense, age the kid.
	And look, obviously, having grandparents involved is statistically very good for kids.
	Having grandparents as primary caregivers is tough.
	They don't get the activity. They don't get the enthusiasm.
	They're in an old school type of parenting environment which has some real minuses.
	And they're going to go through illness, decay and death decades before they should.
	So there are some real challenges.
	Everything comes...
	At a cost, right?
	And if you're just looking at the benefits, well, I get to work a little, we make a little bit of money, grandma likes.
	Okay, look at the benefits.
	But the whole point of this show is there aren't any solutions, there are only trade-offs, right?
	So, at least in terms of these situations, this is not morality, this is consequences.
	So, what are the consequences that are negative of your daughter being effectively raised by your mother-in-law?
	You're going to be viewed as babysitters.
	The only way you can have primary authority over your children is if they bond with you.
	And also, is the grandfather around?
	I don't know if the grandfather's around or not.
	I don't know. Why is the typing not coming in?
	I'm trying to figure out if people are typing and I'm just not seeing it.
	Yeah, it doesn't sound like...
	I think people are typing, but nothing's coming up.
	up. Alright, let me go check here. Alright, I'm just going to see if anybody else is coming
	up. He is, he's less mobile.
	Oh gosh. So wait, your grandmother has to take care of her husband and a four-year-old
	and a three-year-old at the same time.
	Somebody says, unprofessional parent advice.
	Oh, this is his unprofessional parent advice.
	Potty training can be done in a week.
	You just need to be okay with a few accidents and get rid of your stress face.
	We did it, I mean we did it when she was very young and we did it with...
	Praise and the odd M&M. And it worked out pretty quickly, pretty well.
	All right. Thanks, everyone, for your comments, your questions.
	Listen to the dad.
	You know, I'd love to help if I can.
	And if you want to, you can email me, call in at freedomain.com.
	Or you can go, I'm just going to check this because I know this is kind of a new thing.
	Let me just see here.
	freedomain.com slash call.
	No? Yes, freedomain.com slash call, freedomain.com slash call.
	I would really appreciate that.
	And so...
	Yeah, so, and just for Dave, just so you know, like, you did really accuse me of something deeply immoral there with no evidence, so that's not good.
	That's not good, and that's not something that I particularly want on these streams.
	So, yeah, I appreciate that.
	Thanks, everybody, for dropping by, freedomain.com slash donate.
	To help out the show, please, please don't forget, I will post the links here.
	Please don't forget to check out all of these great things that you get for becoming a subscriber.
	I've mentioned them before.
	I won't go over them all again, but there is some just delicious stuff that you get for being a subscriber.
	Have a great rest of the day for everyone.
	Really appreciate everyone coming by today.
	I love your frankness. I love your openness.
	Wonderful. And thank you for your support, for allowing me to do what I do for now and for the future.
	And don't forget, if you subscribe, you get to check out StephBot.ai, which is a really cool tool, particularly if English isn't your native language, because it's multi-language, and you can get replies from my work in your native tongue.
	It's really a very cool thing to play around with.
	All right. Lots of love, everyone.

▲