Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 24, 2025 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux

05:53

Cruel People on the Internet?!?

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	But let me ask you this.
	Here's another audience participation question.
	Let me ask you this: what percentage of people, let's just say online, what percentage of people online want to correct you in good faith?
	In other words, hey, you know, you're making an error.
	I want to help and here's a better argument or here's where I think you went astray or something like that.
	What percentage of people online are correcting you in good faith?
	And that is always an interesting question.
	Less than 5%?
	Is that what you're saying?
	Less than 5%?
	It's not as common as it should be.
	It absolutely is not as common as it should be.
	About 2% to 5%, I'm optimistic enough to say a whole 5%.
	How does it feel to play stadiums again?
	Feels the same as before?
	No.
	I remember Mick Jagger saying, you know, if you're playing a nightclub, it's very different from playing a stadium.
	It's a whole different focus and energy.
	So it's a little bit more.
	Joe says 10%, 10% of people online are correcting you in good faith.
	All right.
	I appreciate that.
	That's good to know.
	I was going to say to the people on X, let me know if you can't post a message.
	Kevin says, 20%.
	Nice.
	Nice.
	3% of my real audience, 80% are strangers.
	Oh, of my real audience, 80% are strangers, perhaps 2%.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	So to me, it's always interesting to know whether or not people are correcting you in good faith.
	If they're not correcting you in good faith, I mean, you can say they could have a good argument even if they're malicious.
	I mean, that's true.
	Technically, it's true.
	But you could also jump out of a plane and land without injury some way, right?
	But don't do it, right?
	Technically, you can win the lottery, but don't play the lottery.
	It's just a tax on mathematical ignorance.
	So once I have established a lack of good faith, I'm out.
	You can't heal people who manipulate in that kind of way.
	You can't fix them and you're not going to get anything valuable out of them.
	And maybe you feel like, oh, if I expose this person, then other people will see it, but that's not your job.
	That's not your sort of service.
	Other people are saying 2% to 5%, 10%.
	Somebody says 25%, but I spend a lot of my time on technical message boards.
	Yeah, that's fair.
	Technical message boards for sure.
	So on Reddit, none.
	Yeah, that's probably quite true.
	That's probably quite true.
	Putting the commie red in Reddit.
	So I posted a request for YouTube to restore my YouTube channel.
	And somebody wrote, this dude helped to rip apart so many families and relationships.
	Right?
	And I said, spreading malicious rumors is a sin, my friend, because, you know, that is a malicious rumor and there's no evidence and it's just a me podcasting, me doing some videos, me writing some books has torn apart so many families and relationships.
	I don't see how that would particularly follow, but there's no example, right?
	So I said, spreading malicious rumors is a sin, my friend.
	And he said, not sure why you would invoke fairy tale concepts.
	So boom, right?
	You know, you know, atheist, right?
	You know, atheist.
	And Fedora wearer.
	And, well, actually, right?
	I mean, you just, you just know.
	And this is what I said on the stream the other day on the Twitter spaces.
	Are you still an atheist?
	I'm like, well, I can't stand atheists for the most part.
	You know, present company accepted.
	If you're an atheist, I mean, you're into philosophy.
	But so he has no basis for his morality.
	It's really, really important to understand.
	Atheists outside of UPB, outside of universally preferable behavior, atheists have no, none, zero basis for their morality.
	Zero.
	It's all vague Darwinian in-group preference evolution.
	Although they don't accept in-group preferences in certain groups.
	It's all the greatest good for the greatest number.
	That's just a mealy-mouthed avoidance of the actual question or the actual issue.
	It's all, oh, generic being nice and being good and doing good for you.
	It's no basis.
	If you don't believe in God, your morality becomes rank superstition, which is much worse.
	Much worse.
	Religious people have a basis for their morality.
	Moral, universal, objective, not rational.
	It's religious, faith, right, not reason.
	But the moment somebody says, I'm an atheist, again, UPB is not spread like wildfire.
	I guess like wildfire in a heavy rain of anti-morality.
	But it's really, so the moment somebody says sin is a fairy tale concept, he's saying there's no such thing as sin, which is obviously immoral behavior.

▲