Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux - Why Don't You Listen?Twitter/X Space

Nov. 29, 2025 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux

01:57:28

Why Don't You Listen?Twitter/X Space

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good evening, everybody.
	28th of November 2025.
	No reason to yell.
	No reason not to yell.
	And we are talking Black Friday.
	Black Friday.
	And you know what that means?
	You know, you know what I like.
	Come on, babe.
	All right.
	So what that means, of course, is that we have a Black Friday sale.
	That is correct.
	I'm going to put it right in here.
	But you can go, if you want, shop.freedoman.com slash promo slash all caps FDR promo 10.
	Promo Shlomo.
	Shop.freedoman.com slash promo slash FDR promo 10.
	Not 9, not 11.
	Not 10.1 rounded up.
	But in fact, 10.1 rounded down, as you might vaguely guess, it's 10% off your merch.
	Your merch.
	And we are working feverishly.
	And by that, I mean other people are working feverishly to get peaceful parenting available for Christmas.
	Peaceful parenting for Christmas.
	Peace on earth.
	Goodwill to all children.
	That is going to be going along beautifully.
	All right.
	So I hope that you will check that out.
	Freedoman.com slash donate to help out the show.
	And we are going to our first caller of the evening.
	Of course, you are more than welcome to join us to call in and see how philosophy can help you the best, the most.
	And with any luck, I get to hear this caller.
	Hey, Steph, can you hear me?
	Yes, sir.
	Go ahead.
	Hi, Steph.
	Thank you for taking my call.
	My name is Jake.
	I actually spoke to you two and a half years ago.
	You did a call-in show with me.
	In my show, I told you that I had D-Food from my family and I had a love interest at work and I did something stupid and she took me to HR.
	And at the end of the call, we did a roleplay scenario.
	And it didn't go very well for me.
	I remember.
	I remember.
	How's it going?
	It's going okay, Steph.
	It's nice to talk to you again.
	I was just kind of wanting to fill you in a little bit on what's happened since then.
	And then I wanted to tell you about something that happened this week that's like really bothering me and see if you can help me figure out why I let things like this bother me so much and what I can do to not let them bother me so much.
	We'll do our best.
	We'll do our best.
	Now, you seem, you're coming through quite quiet for me.
	Am I?
	Yes.
	I'm just looking at the levels here.
	I don't think it's just me.
	But it's not the end of the world.
	We can always up it post-production.
	But yeah, so go ahead.
	I don't want you to fuss with the tech in case there's anything obvious.
	That's great.
	But if not, no worries.
	Then just tell me what's on your mind.
	Can I try to see if it sounds better with my headphones in?
	You want to try switching over to headphones?
	Okay, let me just turn my, I've turned you up here, so let me just turn that back down again.
	So go ahead.
	Yeah, just in general, if you're calling into the show, if you could use a headset, that would be great.
	I have my headphones in.
	That's your headphones.
	I have my headphones.
	Yes, sir.
	Okay.
	So, and are you calling in on a phone?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	We'll just have to go with it as it is because I don't know how to change headphone volume on phones.
	So don't worry about it.
	Tell me what's on your mind.
	Okay.
	So I just kind of wanted to fill you in on just a little bit on everything that happened since then.
	Do you remember when I told you that I pretty much got off scot-free after that incident?
	No, I don't remember that in detail.
	So if you want to remind me, I'd appreciate that.
	What ended up happening was I had a crush on a girl at work.
	I guess there was somewhat of a misunderstanding.
	I ended up asking her phone number.
	I contacted her on her time off and because I thought we were supposed to meet at an event and then she ended up reporting me to HR and it was like really called into your show.
	We talked about it.
	HR called me and questioned me about it.
	I'm sorry to interrupt you, brother.
	You're garbling up.
	Hang on.
	Hang on.
	You're garbling up quite a bit.
	Are you on Wi-Fi or are you in some remote cell area?
	There's shouldn't be much data to just get your audio across.
	Oh, I don't know if you can hear me at all.
	Can you hear me?
	You know, it's a funny thing.
	This is just sort of an interesting tech thing as a whole.
	So you sort of think about people who've had call-in shows for decades, right?
	Like when Rush Limbaugh was doing his call-in show, I think he started in the 80s.
	And there were people, I guess, like Tom Lykus and so on, that did call-in shows.
	And I don't know if it's just modern technology or what people are doing, but I feel like there just seem to be a lot of problems with call-in shows these days.
	I don't think anyone's got the thumb on our data pipeline, but it just seems to be interesting that there are all of these sorts of challenges with call-in shows because I swear they worked 40 years ago.
	I used to listen to call-in shows.
	I mean, I guess Leonard Peekoff has had one.
	A bunch of people have had call-in shows.
	And it even happens when I'm doing sort of call-ins, like when I'm just doing one-on-one call-in shows, that there seems to be this something to do with the microphone, something to do with people garbling and so on.
	And the amount of data that is required for audio is pretty low.
	Like it's like 40K a second and all of that.
	And I just, I don't know what the difficulty is with people.
	And, you know, if you're going to call into a show, just have some decent audio.
	That's all.
	Like, nobody's asking for you to stream 4K video or anything like that.
	You know, just have some decent audio and maybe try a test call or something like that.
	But I just find it odd that there are so many issues with regards to call-ins.
	I'm trying not to get too much HTSD, host-traumatic stress disorder, but I'm going to see if this fellow is coming back or not.
	Otherwise, if other people.
	Yeah, maybe some people don't have a good data plan.
	It would have been a landline.
	Yeah, for sure.
	Okay, I get all of that.
	But how is it, I guess, because landlines were going over copper and they weren't going over cell towers and so on.
	Or maybe it's just, you know, so much immigration they didn't build for that sort of stuff.
	Says it's because the internet doesn't have dedicated audio channels and voice over IP is UDP, so it can drop all the packets at once.
	I don't know what UDP is, but it doesn't sound like dissimilar from a Michael Jackson Jackson 5 song.
	But yeah, it's strange, right?
	It's strange.
	I don't know if this guy's coming back or not.
	I do not know.
	And so I'll cut all of this from the show and all of that.
	It's just a bit of a drag to do all of this stuff after the fact.
	I don't know what it is.
	I don't know why.
	Why is it that 50 years into the telecommunications revolution, you still can't get phone calls?
	I mean, do you know what I mean?
	It's just completely bizarre.
	It's just completely bizarre that this long into you just can't get some basic calls.
	Just crazy.
	All right.
	So if you've got questions, comments, you can type them in here.
	Questions.
	Welcome.
	I don't think we have.
	I asked Darwin to Jesus.
	I think Darwin to Jesus wanted to do a debate on UPB, but sadly, he did not seem to be available.
	Or has not shown up yet.
	At least I haven't seen him because I'm sure he would request.
	So I don't think Bro is coming back.
	Oh, so UDP basically means that it doesn't require confirmation of receipt of packets.
	Oh, so it's not like a what do they call that?
	A CRC check or something like that, right?
	IPv5 was an experimental protocol to dedicate audio channels on the internet, but it's long gone as it would have eaten up a lot of bandwidth.
	What, compared to porn?
	I don't think so.
	It's just wild to me that I assume that porn and streaming videos and Netflix, that they can all get their data across.
	But a simple phone call apparently is just absolutely beyond the pale.
	Just can't happen.
	Can't be done.
	Can't be achieved.
	It's just kind of funny.
	Because yeah, you can stream in 4K and it doesn't seem to have an issue, but you try to get a phone call and it's a complete disaster.
	All right.
	So while we're waiting for that, if he's going to come back, glorious, fantastic, lovely, and wonderful.
	We shall see.
	All right.
	So this woman, a regretful mom, laments that gentle parenting was a mistake.
	I raised anxious, entitled kids.
	Now, this is kind of a diss on, I know gentle parenting is not the same as peaceful parenting, but there does seem to be kind of an overlap in people's minds.
	So this is from today, written by Marisa Matozo.
	Marisa Matoso.
	This is from New York Post.
	She has some tough words about gentle parenting.
	A mom who says that she accidentally raised, quote, anxious, entitled, people pleasing kids, says she confused gentle parenting for permissive parenting and is now desperately trying to fix her mistakes.
	All right.
	What are we noticing so far?
	Just out of curiosity.
	What notice?
	What notice?
	Oh, it could change.
	It could change as we go forward, but what notice?
	That's right.
	That's right.
	That's right, my friends.
	It is no father.
	Auger.
	A hoga.
	Battle stations.
	Ooga.
	No father.
	Jackie Williams went viral after posting an Instagram video earlier this month with text that read, I can spot gentle parenting kids because I raised two of them.
	Ten years later, I'm having to undo it like my zipper.
	So this is what she wrote.
	She wrote, I did gentle parenting for years or so.
	I thought.
	That's caps.
	Don't blame me.
	I, Checkmark, validated every emotion.
	What does that mean?
	What does it mean to validate every emotion?
	I mean, I have my own emotions.
	I don't validate all of them.
	I mean, some of them are just wrong.
	Some of them are reactionary.
	Some of them are jumpy.
	Some of them are based on prior trauma.
	Some of them are based on irrational hopes.
	Validate every feel them, accept them, talk about them.
	Don't shame or attack or reject them out of hand, but what?
	Validate everything you're feeling is totally fine.
	No, it's not.
	Sometimes I get strange thoughts.
	Hey, that's a nice iguana.
	I wonder what its tail would taste like.
	Do not act on every thought and every impulse.
	Sometimes the TSA guys have to have their way with you if you want to fly.
	Just don't validate.
	So validated every emotion.
	Check mark processed feelings extensively.
	I mean, how much time do you have on your hands to process feelings extensively in your children?
	Check mark, explained every boundary.
	Checkmark, compromised on things.
	Checkmark, avoided harsh punishments.
	So validated every emotion.
	This is Therapy Speak, right?
	And Therapy Speak is the new babble fish, right?
	It's the new Pomo.
	Validated every emotion, processed feelings extensively.
	So let me see.
	Her kids, are they boys?
	Are they boys?
	We'll find out.
	If they're boys, this is particularly doomed, but it's only slightly less doom if they're girls.
	Explained every boundary?
	Sure, you got to explain rules to kids.
	Compromise on things?
	Well, of course, you have to compromise.
	Avoided harsh punishments.
	I mean, don't punish at all because your kids are not.
	I mean, this is a Christian thing.
	I don't know if she's a Christian, but it's a Christian thing, right?
	Where you say, well, kids are just born bad, man.
	They're born bad.
	They're going to be punished from a state of nature and demonic into civilized blah, blah, blah.
	She says, I thought I was doing it right.
	Then my kids got older and I started seeing the results in real time.
	One kid became anxious about everything, even choosing a snack.
	Insecure in their abilities.
	Entitled.
	Everything's up for debate.
	Emotionally dysregulated.
	outbursts constantly.
	Well, here are the basic facts.
	You should listen to all your feelings, but sometimes your feelings are total assholes.
	Sometimes your feelings are resentment, entitlement, desire to exploitate, exploit, a desire to manipulate, a desire to get something for nothing.
	You should definitely listen to your feelings, and they're helpful as a whole, and you should definitely absorb them.
	But sometimes your feelings are bad.
	Sometimes your feelings are negative, right?
	So that's the one kid, right?
	So what is it?
	Anxious about everything, even choosing a snack.
	Yeah, anxious about it.
	What would that come from option paralysis, perhaps too many choices?
	I'm not sure.
	Insecure in their abilities.
	Oh, well, that's because, I mean, if you ever want to sabotage people literally to hell, you simply praise them for everything that they do.
	And that's, you know, when your kids are very little, they make their first little lollipop people.
	Oh, that's great.
	Good for you.
	I mean, it's beautiful, right?
	Great.
	Fantastic.
	When they get older, you got to be.
	You got to be realistic because the world is realistic.
	See, one of the things as parents, you're supposed to do is help transition your children to a world that frankly doesn't care about them because it doesn't.
	Because the world doesn't care about me.
	Ooh, I want to be a philosopher.
	The world is like, we don't care.
	I don't care.
	Ooh, I want to be, I want to be a business guy.
	World doesn't care.
	I want to sing.
	The world doesn't care.
	World doesn't care, doesn't care about your dreams, doesn't care about your hopes, doesn't care about your fears, doesn't care about your feelings.
	I mean, people who are close to you, yeah, loved ones, sure, absolutely.
	They should care.
	That would be nice.
	But the world as a whole doesn't care.
	And why should it?
	It's narcissistic to think the world should care.
	You know, I remember saying this to my daughter when we went to a farmer's market when she was very little.
	And being a kid, I, so what did we do?
	Being a kid, she wants the samples.
	Ooh, do they have samples?
	They have samples?
	She's still excited by samples.
	So as a kid, we were walking around.
	She was like walking around the farmer's market with her.
	And, you know, we stopped off and we tried a little bit of this.
	We tried a little bit of that.
	We bought a little bit of this, a little bit of that.
	And we bought.
	And so at the end of it, I said, okay, so there were about 60 stalls.
	How many did we buy from?
	Three, right?
	I said, okay.
	So three is 5%, like one out of 20.
	We bought in one out of 20 stalls.
	So 19 of the 20 stall owners just watched us walk by.
	We'd say, hi, maybe we'd stop for a sample, maybe even a chit chat.
	And we'd say, maybe we'll come back later.
	But 19 out of the 20 stall owners who desperately wanted us to buy from them watched us walk right past.
	Now, should we feel bad about that?
	She said, well, no.
	So, well, why not?
	Because we didn't want what they had to offer.
	I said, sure.
	So we didn't care about their dreams, right?
	These people might have gone into debt, run up credit cards.
	They might have taken out a mortgage on their house.
	They might have, I don't know what, done something.
	Because they weren't all farmers, right?
	It's a farmer's market.
	You don't have to prove that you're a farmer.
	I said, so all the people there, they have a dream.
	You know, when we went to Ren Fairs, there'd be these stalls, right?
	And people would have their own homemade jewelry.
	And they loved it.
	They cared about it.
	They desperately wanted you buy their homemade jewelry.
	And I said, how many times do we buy?
	Almost never.
	Almost never.
	And I said, you know, when we go to the mall, we walk around the mall because, you know, it's winter in Canada.
	You've got to go somewhere.
	So you go to the mall.
	We walk around the mall.
	How many store owners want us to come up and buy things?
	Everyone.
	How many of them want us to buy everything they've got?
	Everyone, right?
	How much do we buy?
	Almost nothing.
	We called it the Dum Dum Mall because there was a little candy place and there was, you could take a coin and you could put it into a and it went, it would go dum dum dum to dum dum to dum We called it the dum dumb mall because you put the coin in it would roll down all these places and you'd get a little big ball of gum or something coming out the bottom, which we never ate.
	She was a hoarder.
	She collected it.
	And so I just, I wanted to make it clear to my daughter, and I think it's important to tell kids about this, that they have their dreams.
	And it's nice that they have their dreams and we have no hostility to their dreams, but we don't care about their dreams.
	You know, we'd see some woman with a little, she had a wedding ring on, she had a little, she would knit things and sell them in a little stall.
	And we'd say, so she cares about it 100%, right?
	I said, unless she seems to be married.
	How much does her husband care about it?
	Oh, 100%.
	Yeah.
	I mean, probably not quite 100%.
	Not quite as much, but 95%, right?
	How much do her parents care?
	Maybe a little less, maybe 80%, 90%.
	I say, yeah, it's beautiful.
	Her friends, 60%, whatever, right?
	So it sort of raves, waves like going out from a bullseye, right?
	People care, right?
	And then we don't care.
	We don't care.
	Like, if mom had a stall here, we'd come and support.
	We'd sit.
	We'd buy stuff.
	We'd try and get people to come and buy from her.
	Like, if mom had a stall here, right?
	We'd really care and we'd really work, but we don't care.
	And there's nothing wrong with that.
	We can't care about everyone's dreams and preferences at all times.
	But it was a way of sort of introducing her to the idea that you want things in the world, and that's nice.
	That's fine.
	That's good.
	It's good that you want things in the world.
	But other people don't want those things in the world and they don't care about what you want.
	You have to make them care, right?
	To get you to tune into the live stream, I have to do something to make you have to provide some kind of value, hopefully value that you can't get anywhere else.
	I have to make you care.
	I have to make you care.
	Make you.
	In a good way, hopefully.
	So if you treat your children with these sort of extra special, you're stupendous and super and fantastic and wonderful no matter what kind of kid glove stuff, you're sabotaging them.
	You're sabotaging them, right?
	And I said, you know, when you get older and your kids make pictures, will you care about them?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Will an art gallery care about them?
	Probably not.
	Right?
	So the problem with this extra special, precious, often mom kind of parenting of everything you do is wonderful and everything you do is glorious, it is sabotaging because you're not preparing your children for the fabulous, glorious, beautiful, wonderful indifference of the world as a whole to what you want.
	Your dreams are very precious to you.
	Your desires are very precious to you.
	Nobody else cares outside of your, again, I'm saying like outside of your immediate circle.
	Nobody else cares.
	And even the people in your circle are going to stop caring after a while, right?
	I want to be a poet.
	Don't tell me what the poets are doing.
	So maybe not antisocial enough.
	But if you don't write poetry or the poetry you write never goes anywhere, eventually people stop.
	They just don't care.
	They don't care.
	I want to be a dancer.
	You taking any dance lessons?
	Well, no.
	People will stop caring.
	And strangers don't care at all.
	Right?
	They don't care at all.
	And they shouldn't care at all.
	They shouldn't care at all.
	Because to want people to care about things that you don't care about is to want to be a hypocrite.
	Right?
	Oh, I don't care about people's dreams in the mall.
	I'm just going to go and pick up some mouthwash from the pharmacy.
	I don't care about all the people who like, you know, there's people who stand, hey, beautiful hair.
	You want to try this fragrance?
	You want to like.
	So, of course the kids are anxious.
	The other kid became too easy, people-pleasing, suppressed real feelings, absorbed everyone's emotions, withdrawn.
	I thought it was just being a teenager.
	It wasn't.
	I cried a lot.
	I tried so hard to do everything right, to do things different from what I had growing up, right?
	She says, here's what I realized.
	I wasn't actually doing gentle parenting.
	I had slipped into permissive parenting without realizing it.
	A lot of parents do this.
	There's no shame or guilt allowed here.
	Parenting is hard.
	No, it's really not.
	It's not if you have principles.
	Getting a bridge to stand up is hard if you don't understand engineering, but if you have principles, you're okay.
	You're fine.
	You're fine.
	So she said, here's what I realized.
	Oh, yeah.
	The things I thought were gentle.
	Validating feelings for 20 minutes equals over processing.
	You don't have to get to the root of every single feeling and validate and justify every single feeling.
	Feelings are great, but you got to get stuff done.
	Feelings are great, but you got to get, but it's a male perspective.
	Could be a male perspective.
	Feelings are great, but you got to get things done.
	Got to get things done.
	And if you're not getting things done, you're wasting a lot of time.
	You know, feelings are great, but you've got to milk the cows.
	You've got to plow the back 40.
	You've got to plant the turnips.
	Whatever you're going to do, right?
	So feelings are great, but you've got to get things done.
	And feelings should be accepted and not processed unless they're somehow sabotaging or actively interfering into what it is that you're doing.
	Okay.
	Validating feelings for 20 minutes.
	Imagine that with a toddler.
	Over-processing.
	Explaining too many boundaries, making everything negotiable.
	Yeah.
	Well, some things shouldn't be negotiable because things in life aren't negotiable.
	Or you shouldn't allow everything to be endlessly renegotiable, right?
	So you can negotiate when you're signing up for a cell phone plan, right?
	Say, ah, I'd like a little bit more or can you give me a slight discount or something like that, right?
	I try to negotiate everything because I'm, wait, what was that bird sound?
	You guys hear that?
	Because I'm cheap, is what I'm saying.
	I'm cheap.
	I'm a frugal.
	A frugal.
	A frugelhorn is the instrument that I play in the band called Don't Spend Money.
	All right.
	Frugelhorn.
	So you make a deal and then you start making the deal, right?
	So it's like if you're negotiating to buy a house, right?
	You say, I'm going to pay X and they want Y and you sort of meet somewhere in the middle.
	X plus Y divided by the difference between X plus Y divided by 2 plus X.
	So you do all that.
	And then you pay.
	You don't start negotiating afterwards.
	Once you sign that dotted line for the lease on the car or the cell phone, or whatever you're doing, then that's it.
	You don't negotiate after that, right?
	Compromising too much equals no real limits, right?
	So if you're a parent, you need to teach your children win-win negotiations, which means you need to express your needs and preferences.
	You need to listen to their needs and preferences and try to find something that works for both.
	Because that's teaching people how to have relationships, right?
	It's like sex with sex.
	I mean, if it's if sex is all about you, I guess you have a little bit of fun for a while, but then, you know, no sane person wants to have sex with you.
	Like, that was great, honey.
	It happens, but it shouldn't happen often.
	That's what I'm saying.
	So you want to enjoy yourself and make sure the other person enjoys themselves.
	And it's win-win, right?
	It's win-win.
	If you only focus on yourself, right?
	So it's like this show.
	That's why I take questions and comments.
	If I just want to talk about myself, I can do that with my solo shows, but in live streams, I'm help other people, right?
	Got to be win-win.
	So you can't erase your own needs and you can't erase the child's needs.
	You have to figure out how to creatively both get what you want so that it's win-win.
	But if all you do is compromise too much, just okay, okay, okay, right.
	Then you're not teaching them about the other.
	So she said, I had high warmth plus little structure.
	I didn't realize it at the time.
	I think that's got to be a parenting phrase, high warmth plus little structure.
	And it created anxious, entitled, people-pleasing kids.
	I don't, oh, I guess these are two different things, right?
	Because to be entitled and to be a people-pleaser, those are two different kits.
	Because entitled is I have to win.
	Being a people-pleaser means you have to win.
	So yeah, yourself and other and negotiating the two, that is a relationship.
	I exist, you exist.
	We both got to negotiate for something that is beneficial to us both and be happy about that.
	You can't have a relationship if people aren't working for win-win, right?
	So she says, so I shifted to authoritative parenting.
	High warmth, connection, validation, empathy, high structure, clear boundaries, consistent limits, natural consequences.
	But that's authoritative parenting.
	Okay.
	This is research-backed and the shift faster than I expected.
	Not overnight, but soon I saw, she says, less anxiety over decisions, more confidence trying new things, less negotiating and entitlement, better regulation.
	All right.
	She says, I put everything I know, learned, and implemented into the breaking cycles method.
	It includes healing yourself, understanding your child's brain development and emotional capacity, age-appropriate scripts and boundaries, and more.
	Okay, so she's a bit of a bit of a sales thing.
	Oh, whatever.
	It's fine.
	It's fine.
	In the caption, Williams said she once believed she was the poster child.
	Sorry, the poster parent for calm, conscious child rearing.
	I validated every emotion, processed feelings extensively, explained every boundary, compromised on things, avoided harsh punishments.
	I thought it was doing it right, blah, blah, blah.
	So this is sort of a repeat.
	What is it?
	More than half of the stuff online now is AI written.
	Yeah, so there's a picture of her with, gosh, what?
	Is that her?
	No, it's just, I think it's a stock photo.
	So yeah.
	The video struck a nerve with parents across social media, many of whom wondered if gentle parenting had quietly morphed into a free-for-all in their own home.
	One commentator broke it down bluntly, saying, gentle parenting isn't the same as permissive parenting.
	Gentle parents still hold hard boundaries.
	Another added, gentle parenting is simply not beating or yelling at your kids when you can't handle them.
	And I will stand by that.
	It doesn't mean you're letting them do whatever they want.
	Williams jumped into the thread to clear the air, defending her intentions.
	There's a reason gentle parenting is in quotation marks.
	The point is to show how easily it is to slip into permissive parenting, especially when life happens.
	I guess life does generally tend to happen, but a peaceful parenting is there to prepare your children for adulthood.
	In adulthood, you want your kids to have win-win negotiations with the self and other both present.
	It's the universalization of I want.
	I want and you want.
	That's the reality.
	I want and you want.
	If I only get what I want at your expense, it's an exploit of relationship and it won't work out.
	Because the only people who will be around to be exploited are people who are very insecure and you just build resentment and the relationship can't last.
	Or if it does last, it just gets even worse and worse on your conscience.
	It's number one.
	So it's the universalization of I want and you want.
	And we both deserve to get what we want.
	And we have to figure out some compromise.
	So, you know, if you work to try and get both parties or multiple parties in a relationship to get what they want, you open up real creativity, right?
	I mean, to take a sort of horrible historical example, you know, the old thing that if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
	So when slavery was around, and remember the Muslim slave trade went on for more than a thousand years and was still going on decades after the American slaves were freed.
	But when all you had were slaves, every problem, you just threw more bodies at it.
	But when you didn't have slaves, labor-saving devices became valuable, essential.
	So you became very creative and you came up with the loom and the steam engine and the, you know, better plows and internal combustion engine eventually and things like that, right?
	Automation of every kind.
	You get very creative when you're not allowed to use force.
	You know, Genghis Khan did not write poetry or bring flowers or figure out complicated mating dances.
	He just drew his sword and said, submit or die.
	So peaceful parenting is there to prepare your children for rational, healthy adulthood.
	And overindulging your children and, oh, you're so precious and everything's so wonderful and so on is not preparing your children for adulthood.
	Giving your children the impression that they're special and wonderful just for existing is not preparing them for adulthood.
	Self-erasing your own needs, wants, and preferences in order to appease your children is not preparing them for adulthood.
	Having an excessive amount of care and solicitation of your own children's being over-solicitous with your own children's thoughts and feelings is not preparing them for adulthood.
	Nobody cares in general about your thoughts, hopes, dreams, and feelings.
	Nobody cares.
	And if you've been an employer, well, you can kind of understand how this stuff gets a little old, a little tiring, a little precious.
	All right.
	So again, happy to take any questions or calls.
	If you want to chat, I am thrilled to do the chatting, huh?
	The chatting.
	Um, I won't do that one.
	So contrary, this is from Steve Stewart Williams, Steve Stew Will.
	Quote: Contrary to widespread belief, when you consider both paid and unpaid labor, fathers and mothers do similar amounts of work.
	In fact, on average, fathers do slightly more.
	Fathers do slightly more.
	If you only count, this is, you know, it's a narcissist.
	If a woman is like, well, I do all of this around the home, let's say she's working part-time or not working outside the home at all, and she says, like, I spent all day doing this stuff, and you're not doing it, right?
	Any woman or man, which is in this case, we're talking about women, but any woman who believes she's hard done by because the man is just mysteriously gone all day and she spends a lot of time cooking and cleaning and childcare and blah, blah, blah, and thinks that he's what off at some sandals resort getting his feet rubbed by well-oiled Filipino ladyboys.
	I don't know, just making things happen.
	But if she thinks he's, you know, he's gone and he's just not working here, therefore he's not working, therefore I'm doing more.
	I mean, that's a narcissist test, right?
	And I mean, the test of the narcissist thing is really, really important.
	Right?
	The narcissist test is so important to do.
	Or the selfish test.
	We say the selfish test because, like, well, I can't diagnose anyone.
	But let's say the selfish test, right?
	Woman makes you a meal.
	She says, What do you think?
	You said, Honestly, I really, really appreciate the effort.
	I didn't like it.
	I found it too salty.
	And she's like, Oh, I'm so sorry.
	And no reason to apologize, right?
	And then she puts less salt into the next meal.
	Boom, keep her.
	Bring her up.
	Put a ring on it.
	Make her yours.
	Take her into the pit of philosophy and never let her go.
	Right?
	That's the test, right?
	That's the test.
	She's massaging you and it's too hard.
	Oh, I'm so sorry, right?
	But if you tell her her food's too salty, and she gets sort of pissy and you don't appreciate, right?
	She's just kind of silent and pissy and negative and is punishing you with emotional withdrawal.
	Run, away.
	She, chameleon, lying there in the sun.
	All things to everyone.
	Run, run away.
	So have a preference then that's different from hers.
	If she gives you a present and you don't like it, you say, look, I'm really, again, I really, really appreciate the effort.
	It's not my color.
	It's not my style.
	I already have one.
	I don't need it.
	But if we could return it, we can make an outing out of it.
	And again, I really appreciate it.
	And if she's like, oh, I'm so sorry.
	I mean, blah, blah, blah.
	And, you know, you, but if she's like, you don't appreciate it.
	She gets all quiet and pissy and slams and walks or stones or whatever, right?
	Run.
	Right.
	So you got to do that.
	Oh, smash the like, team.
	Yes, that's right.
	Smash the like.
	Just do.
	And it's not like some big conscious test thing.
	Just have a preference that's different.
	Appreciate the effort, but be honest.
	It's all be honest.
	What does somebody think you're dating them and you maybe want to move it to the next level?
	What do they think?
	How do they experience you having a different perspective or opinion?
	Right?
	She makes you a meal.
	Oh, I got to tell you, I hate it.
	It's not your fault.
	You wouldn't know.
	I can't stand eggplant.
	I just, if you could, you know, I'm really sorry, right?
	Oh, I didn't know, blah, blah, blah.
	And the next time she doesn't make it with eggplant.
	Nothing complicated.
	We all have preferences, right?
	Are you allowed to have a different preference?
	Are you allowed to disagree with her?
	If you can't, get out.
	All right.
	David asks, Hey, Steph, Would a universal reputation system be healthy for childhood?
	Um, maybe into teens, but not earlier, because you really would be judging the parents.
	Did you know your grandparents?
	What do you think about the importance of grandparents being involved in the upbringing of their grandchildren?
	I mean, it's great.
	Hey, I mean, the more the merrier, right?
	The better, right?
	The more the better, the more the merrier.
	And but not at the expense of you not being honest or direct or open or assertive with your own parents.
	See, when my daughter gets older, gets married, has kids, it's her household and it's her husband's household.
	They run the show, they are the authorities.
	I'm their fun grandparent.
	Hopefully, the kids will enjoy it.
	I'm great with kids, so I'm sure they will.
	But it is their household and they are the authorities, and that's how it literally has to be.
	It has to be that way.
	I will never flex or assert anything that goes against the parents' wishes.
	I will never ever put the parents down in front of their children.
	That's a cheat code.
	Like, it's part of the, if you've had really bad parents, part of the ways that they screw up your life going forward with your own kids is they bypass your authority, or they're super nice to the kids and super indulgent to the kids without any boundaries or anything like that.
	And that messes up your authority in the kids' eyes.
	It's just another form of, you know, I think somewhat sadistic sabotage.
	So, yeah, if the grandparents are great and healthy and good and the kids love them and they defer to you as parents, and right?
	Because kids will glom on to whoever is perceived to have the most authority in the family.
	So, if you have a rule, right?
	Let's say you have a rule, like no tablets at the table, and the kids have agreed to that rule, and the grandparents let them have tablets at the table, and you don't say anything about it, then clearly the kids say, Oh, well, the real power is the grandparents, so I'm going to cleave to them in my mind because kids are drawn to that which is the most powerful, of course, right?
	Because they are powerless and they want to get to a state of power, so they fetishize, so to speak, or will glom onto or follow, like ducklings follow whoever they bond with.
	They will follow whoever's the most powerful.
	And it's a way of subverting your authority and in placing themselves in authority to do that.
	So, all right.
	Good evening, Max.
	Kairos, nice to see you.
	Says original sin comes from an ex post facto rationalization historical quirk.
	It's not scriptural.
	All right.
	Good to know.
	Looks and sounds good.
	Thank you.
	Good evening, sir.
	Love to see this live stream.
	Thank you, Nathan.
	Appreciate that.
	Frida.
	Nothing is better than the freedom.
	Let the law take a man from his family.
	Okay, he says, this is a subject that I actually have struggled with for many years.
	Sometimes, when I am firm about my own needs with my children, I feel very guilty, and I'm not sure when I'm crossing the boundary into narcissism.
	Is there a principle to guide parents into distinguishing when it's time to validate your child's emotions versus when it's time to get things done?
	Hmm.
	It's a fine question.
	It's a fine question.
	Like Mozart.
	Or very small sand grains.
	It's fine.
	F'd up, insecure, neurotic, and emotional, isn't that?
	F-I-N-E fine.
	All right, so validating your child's emotions.
	So your child is, let me see what validating.
	I know I talked about it earlier, but I'm trying to think of a sort of specific example.
	You're validating your child's emotions.
	Your child's upset about something.
	Your child's upset about something.
	Yeah, so I'm sort of thinking about my daughter, I think like a lot of kids, when she was very young, did not like the car wash.
	Now, in Canada, you kind of need to get car washes.
	It's not that optional, especially in winter, because there's all this salt on the roads that gets up into your undercarriage and is pretty bad for your car.
	I mean, as far as I understand it, right?
	So I would, of course, try to work it so that I could get a car wash without my daughter being in the car because she didn't like the car wash and so on, right?
	And so, but as she got older, it's like, hey, you know, I get that you really don't like it.
	I mean, I have to get the car washed up.
	You know, we're pretty far away from home and there's not a place near home or whatever.
	I can't remember the exact reason.
	But, you know, let's talk about it.
	Like, I actually do need to wash the car and I sort of explained the why and this, that, and the other.
	It's perfectly safe.
	And you can come sit up here in the front with me and all of that.
	So at some point, you know, when the kids are very young and they're too sort of young to understand, look, it's just, it's just some spray.
	It's just some water.
	Because, you know, when you're a kid, everything's huge, right?
	It'd be like, it feels like a space battle, you know, all this foam and spray and all of this, right?
	So when they're very young and too young to understand it, when they get older, and I can't remember exactly how old she was, but when they get older, it's like, hey, you know, I get that you're nervous.
	I really do.
	But first of all, I mean, hopefully you trust me to the point.
	I'm not going to put us in any danger.
	I'm not going to put us in any threat.
	And in fact, it's pretty bad if the car breaks down, then it's very expensive and so on.
	And that's less, you know, money for like, I don't know, arcades or Chuck E. Cheese or whatever, right?
	So it is actually kind of important.
	I'm not putting this in any danger, obviously, right?
	And I, you know, sit up here.
	I'll tell you what's going on and so on.
	And she did and she was fine with it.
	So, you know, when they're young and things, and you can't sort of explain what you're doing and why, I think it's good to defer as much as possible to what they need.
	Or, you know, if you have little kids and you're going through the airport or whatever and they, you know, got to go through security, they've got to hand over their bag and this, that, and the other.
	You sort of explain what's going on, right?
	And also you can remind them of other things, right?
	You can say, hey, remember when you were really scared of thunder?
	And then now thunder is fun, right?
	Like things light up.
	It's kind of fun, right?
	Unless, I mean, every now and then there's some horrible thunderstorm.
	And at least around here, I'm sure there is where you are.
	Some horrible thunderstorm that just completely thunderclaps you awake in the middle of the night, like you're in some World War I trench and all of that, right?
	Shop.freedomain.com slash pages slash books.
	Wait.
	Zynv, are we live?
	Are we live?
	Let me just get this.
	Shop.freedomain.com slash pages.
	Sorry to interrupt.
	This is quite important.
	Shop.com.
	It is books.
	Oh, oh, yeah, I probably shouldn't put a comma in there.
	Otherwise, I just get the old searchy search.
	All right, let's try that again.
	So close to being good typing.
	Oh, to 404.
	Sorry, I'm not sure why you would put that in here.
	Oh, less than one day.
	Okay, so shop.freedomand.com/slash pages slash books.
	You will get these four parenting tomorrow over the weekend, the book, the physical book.
	I hope that you will give to people.
	Grandparents need it too, right?
	Everybody needs it.
	That's good.
	Thank you.
	Bass says, I love this topic.
	My three-year-old son is lovely.
	The boundaries testing is in full throttle, and my wife and I are trying to be as effective as possible in our negotiations.
	Right.
	Right.
	So you do have the right to say to your children, look, I'm not going to put you in danger.
	I'm not going to put myself in danger.
	I get it's loud, you know, and here, you know, you can do this.
	You can do this and close your eyes, right?
	do this and close your eyes so but there's a self and there's another like Like, hey, I don't want to put you through a car wash if you're nervous about it, but I need to get the car washed.
	Like, otherwise, I'm not going to get to it for another week or two and it's not great for the bottom and so on, right?
	It's not just, oh, there's a little bit of dirt on the blah, blah, blah.
	Like, I need to clean it.
	It's like, it's like brushing your teeth, right?
	Yeah, nobody likes to brush your teeth, but you've got to brush your teeth, right?
	So when they're too young to understand, then there's really nothing to negotiate because there's no way to appeal to their self and other thing.
	But, you know, validating your feelings are when they're old enough to understand, right?
	It's like, you know, I'd like to avoid this topic forever, and I'd like you to never be nervous about anything because it would be easier in the long run.
	But you understand, we all have to do things that we don't like.
	We all have to do things that are a little scary from time to time.
	And, you know, trust me, you're going to be fine.
	And you can come sit up here with me.
	I'm going to explain exactly what's happening.
	I know it's loud, but it's like thunder.
	You used to hate it.
	Now you find it kind of exciting.
	And we, you know, we'll make up a fort when there's going to be a, we used to do this in my household when there was going to be a big thunderstorm.
	We would make up, we'd turn over the couches and, you know, bring the blankets and sheets down and we'd make a fort in the living room.
	And then we'd have a little opening to where the window was.
	And then the lightning would flash and one, two, three, speed of sound, you know.
	And so now we like it.
	So, and of course, you know, children want to overcome their fears.
	Children want to overcome their fears.
	They're proud of it, right?
	And, you know, hey, there's things that I'm nervous about.
	the things that I'm scared of that I do have to kind of try and do the right thing right all right so So let me get, I think we did that.
	Oh, let me get over here.
	Over here.
	Our kiddie ass Solitaria says rational secular ethics don't exist.
	Yeah, so I posted this.
	Somebody who said, what opinion about religion would get you in this position?
	And it's the Flynn Ryder.
	Flynn Ryder, you broke my smolder from Tangled with all the blades of him.
	And I said, God was an essential placeholder until rational secular ethics could be developed.
	And he said, rational secular ethics don't exist.
	Hmm.
	Yeah.
	So there's a standard for not existing that God passes, but reason doesn't.
	But he's using reason to prove that rational secular ethics don't exist.
	But he thinks that God does exist.
	It's like the person who said, take your Reddit tier 90s atheist talking points, blah, blah, blah, and shove them, whatever, right?
	And it's like, oh, so you're saying that my argument is invalid because it's old?
	For a religious person, that seems like a bit of an odd odd perspective.
	I mean, religion's a lot older than my arguments.
	So there's that.
	there's that too.
	All right.
	All right.
	Oh.
	Let us get back to our ookie-dookie bookmarks and scroll.
	Kings and queens of the past would envy the lives of ordinary people today.
	So there's a quote.
	Go click your way through the English royal line and check the numbers.
	King James I and his wife had seven children and buried five.
	His son Charles and his wife had nine children and buried five.
	His son James had eight children by his first wife and buried six.
	And seven children by his second wife and buried five, not including several miscarriages and stillbirths.
	Can you call them rich, the royals of the past?
	Every last one of them would envy me.
	According to the World Bank, the deadliest place in the world to be born is Niger.
	More than one child in 10 there dies before age five.
	Those are way better odds than the children of 17th century English kings had.
	Phew.
	That amazing.
	You say these are worsted times, best half times, bad times, and so on, right?
	Cremio was writing per graphite.
	52% of the articles written online are now written by AI.
	The slop slopoca.
	The slopocalypse.
	Slopocalypse.
	The slopocalypse is here.
	I got it.
	I got it.
	Slopocalypse.
	Now I can say it.
	Now I can say it.
	So, male students, according to data from October 20th, 2025, male students show more tolerance for political enemies than their females show, than females show for their own allies.
	I mean, cancer culture is just female nature, plus the power of the state, with the stakes of income transfers and political power.
	Male students show more tolerance for political enemies than females show for their own allies.
	Data reveals the gender tolerance gap is real.
	That wild I thought this was good.
	This was good.
	It's a little bit of a lengthy post, but it's well worthwhile.
	I just want to make sure.
	Okay, so we don't have any callers yet.
	I choose to believe that that's because it is so grippy what I'm saying.
	Oh, Friedemane.
	Steph, do you collect anything?
	Souls?
	Do I collect anything?
	I uh I gotta tell you collecting things is retarded.
	I don't collect anything.
	My wife would say I collect microphones, but every single one of them has its use.
	Honey.
	I don't collect things.
	I think it's something you should get over about the age of 15 or 16.
	All right, we have a caller.
	God, how loud is my input volume at the moment?
	Go ahead.
	If you want to unmute, I'm happy to hear what's on your mind.
	Hi, this is Rand.
	Yeah, I listened to you a lot and you've got a lot going on.
	I just wanted to talk about something pretty mundane, which is because you were talking about the ethics, secular ethics or something like that.
	And, you know, there's a big question about, you know, what's the difference between ethics and morality.
	And it's an important distinction because I think morality is oddly enough, based on religion only, but ethics is really for everybody.
	What do you think?
	Well, I don't know what you're based on.
	It's for everybody is not a definition.
	So what is your definition or what are your definitions of morality?
	It's a great topic, and I appreciate you bringing it up.
	What are your definitions of morality versus ethics?
	Yeah.
	So my understanding about morality, it's book.
	You know, it's what's in the book.
	In other words, what you're told, what you've been given by your parents, that's your morality.
	And ethics is something that you think of yourself.
	You know, you reason it out.
	You read things, you learn things, and then you decide, okay, this is what's right and wrong.
	And that's ethics.
	You know, and that's the way I'm taking it.
	But I'm feeling that others.
	Sorry, sorry, sorry.
	Is this your definition, or would you say this is more of a standard definition?
	I think a lot of people don't know the difference and they don't use ethics at all as a word, but they use morality as being right or wrong.
	That's what I think others do.
	But for myself, I see ethics as being more of a code of conduct with others, how to deal with other people that's a way you would like them to deal with you as well.
	Okay, what was my question?
	So my question.
	No, no, what was my question?
	I asked you a question.
	I'm not trying to be confrontational.
	I just want to know what our listening status is here.
	Yeah.
	Probably I maybe missed it, but I think you were asking what's the difference.
	What was my definition of?
	So here's what I really do like.
	If we're going to have a conversation, which I'd love to have, we really got to listen to each other, right?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	So you said morality is what's in the book, what's told to you by parents and so on.
	And ethics is stuff that you reason and puzzle out for yourself.
	And I asked you, is that a general definition of the difference?
	Or is that your, and it's not, if it's your definition or is it a general definition?
	Because if it's yours.
	Yeah, it's my guess at what, you know, when people, you know, ask you what's the difference between ethics and morality, that's my guess at what it is.
	And I just wanted to know what your thoughts were on the matter.
	Yeah.
	So in general, the way that I break it down is that morality is the theory and ethics is the practice.
	So if you say, what is a moral theory?
	What is a theory of morality?
	Right.
	That would be the Ten Commandments or UPB or Kantian categorical imperative or whatever you sort of have a theory of virtue that would be morality.
	Virtue, yes.
	Yeah, ethics would be, well, he's a really ethical person to me means that he practices moral theory.
	He puts it into practice and you can rely upon him to follow or at least try to follow or at least be held accountable to his moral theory.
	So for me, now, one of the ways I just asked Grock about this, and they said the terms morality and ethics are often used interchangeably in everyday language, but philosophers and scholars make useful distinction between them.
	So that's what I would like to do.
	So what they say is morality equals what you believe is right or wrong, your moral compass often inherited or felt.
	Ethics is the study, justification, or codification of those beliefs, thinking critically about morality.
	So an analogy would be morality is like the local customs and feelings about proper behavior in a village.
	And I think that's what you were saying.
	And ethics is like anthropologists or philosophers coming in and asking, why did they do that?
	Is it justifiable?
	How does it compare to other villages?
	So real-world illustrations, many people in society have the moral intuition that lying is wrong, morality.
	An ethicist might develop Kant's theory that lying is always impermissible because it violates the categorical imperative, blah, So all ethics is about morality, but not all morality is ethics.
	Morality is the raw material.
	Ethics is the disciplined reflection on that material.
	So I think this is what you're saying, that morality is what you inherit or told or you have an intuition about.
	Ethics is when you reason your way through it and try to apply Socratic reasoning or Kantian categorical imperatives or UPB to validate what you feel or have inherited about virtue.
	So I think yours is closer.
	I think yours is closer to what I was than to the general definition than what I was talking about.
	Yeah, it's something that just came up for me there when you're trying to summarize that is that morality then is what you're given or that you must do whether or not you've reasoned it out properly.
	In other words, you don't even know why it's moral or why it's the right thing to do.
	But ethics is when you know why it is.
	In other words, you have reasons for it.
	And morals are, well, you're told to do it by God or some other higher power.
	And that's interesting, yeah, because maybe I got that or intuited it or heard it somewhere because my book is Universally Preferable Behavior, a rational proof of secular ethics, which means because it's around proof and reasoning, it is in the realm of ethics rather than inherited morality.
	So, yeah, I mean, there's a place for both.
	I mean, because when you're young, you certainly haven't reasoned everything out yet.
	It takes a while, you know, and some people never get through it all.
	But, you know, I think there's a place for morals, being told what to do.
	This is right.
	This is wrong.
	And you don't need to know why.
	And then to figure it out sooner or later gives you some ethical boundaries, I guess, that allow the, you know, and you might, I don't know if you'll ever reject your morals.
	If all you'll do is justify it and turn it into ethics, because it's easy to argue any side of any point.
	And you can make something right or wrong and rationalize it and go ahead and say, yes, now I believe it for rational reasons rather than because I was told so.
	Okay, so hang on a sec.
	So it's a very interesting point.
	So when you say people don't surmount their ethics or change their ethics, are they valid or invalid morals?
	So for instance, I was raised both a Christian and I was a socialist for a while, and I am now neither.
	And so I have certainly changed my approach to ethics, but I would never be convinced that rape, theft, assault, and murder could be good.
	Right.
	So as far as sort of the basic ethics, and this is an old Aristotelian argument that says, look, if you come up with a moral system that can be used to justify rape, theft, assault, and murder in some way, you've made a mistake.
	Right.
	Like if you try and drive to Las Vegas and you end up in the desert, you can't say, I've driven the right path or route.
	Like you've ended up in the desert, not a Vegas.
	So empirically, you must have taken a wrong turn somewhere.
	Right.
	So when you say people don't surmount their ethics, do you mean the ethics they were raised with or the morals that they were raised with or some ethical system that says murder is good, but people wouldn't accept that?
	I guess that's the trick.
	And I think good parents will try and teach their kids the why of things.
	Hang on.
	Sorry.
	I feel like you're not answering my question.
	Oh, maybe not.
	What was my question?
	Okay.
	Let's see.
	You ended up in the wrong place.
	But you're heading for Vegas.
	I'm trying to get there.
	I try to read it back.
	But it means you're not listening.
	Possibly.
	No, no, not possibly.
	I'm not saying you have to give me some perfect answer.
	Lord knows these are complicated questions.
	But if I finish asking a question and you go off on a monologue and can't even remember my question, it means you're not listening.
	That's kind of rude, isn't it?
	A little bit.
	Well, because if you're going to talk about ethics and virtue and so on, then engaging in someone in a conversation and I made a request.
	And it's an interesting thing.
	It's an interesting thing because I made a challenge.
	It's also kind of rude to talk when I'm talking.
	Okay.
	So when I talk and you're talking in my ear, that's really annoying and very rude.
	So we've got an interesting ethical dilemma here, which is I made a request that you listen to me, right?
	You made a point and I asked for clarification.
	Right.
	So you said people don't surmount the morals they were born with.
	And I said, do you mean what they inherited or do you mean ethics that most sane people would recognize as valid, like murder is wrong?
	Right.
	That was my question.
	Right.
	And then you just went off on a, and you had already agreed to listen and try to provide responses to what I was asking.
	And see, now you're talking in my ear again.
	This is wild, man.
	Why are you, why are you studying ethics in the theory if you can't practice this shit in the moment?
	Like, this is wild to me.
	Like, why would you have all of this interesting thoughts or questions about ethics and be this rude?
	And you agreed, like, this is a matter of honor, of integrity, of virtue.
	That I said, listen, we really need to listen to each other.
	And you said, yes, that's very true.
	And then you don't listen and just go off on tangents and make your own little speeches, which is very rude.
	And then I ask you, please stop talking in my ear.
	And you almost immediately start talking in my ear again.
	What do you think the disconnect is with you in ethics?
	I'm just trying to forward the action.
	That's all.
	But sorry, you're trying to what?
	Trying to forward the action.
	I guess I can try to follow along.
	Hang on, what do you mean by I'm just trying to forward the action?
	Do you think that makes sense to me?
	Well, typically, you know, all the good ideas come from intuitional jumps.
	And so, yeah, I tend to kind of take what you're saying, accept it, and then move on.
	And, you know, that's no, no, but if I'm asking you a question, you owe a response.
	Now, you can say, I don't want to answer your question, or your question doesn't make any sense to me, or, but, but you can't just ignore the question.
	That's rude, right?
	No, I agree.
	Can I give it a try?
	No, no, I'm just, I'm more interested now in why you have these, you have a lot of thoughts about virtue, but can't manage some basic politeness.
	And I'm not saying this in a hostile manner.
	Like I'm, I'm genuinely curious.
	Like you're like telling me, you know, how important it is to quit smoking and how good you are at quitting smoking and you keep lighting up a cigarette.
	Okay.
	And again, I'm not, I'm not trying to be critical or mean or negative.
	Like I'm genuinely curious why when you agree to listen to someone, you immediately abandon that commitment and don't even notice it.
	It's true.
	I didn't notice it.
	Right.
	And what decade are you in of life?
	I'm 60-something, 62, I think.
	Wow.
	So you don't have the sort of hot fire of selfish youth or anything like that.
	Well, you know, we could say I do, but.
	No, not in your 60s.
	You don't.
	You're not, you're not 16.
	I am hardly started.
	No, you're mostly finished.
	You're close to the end.
	As they say, yes.
	But they being statisticians and human mortality.
	It's not they.
	It's not an opinion, right?
	If you're in your 60s, you say you're how old?
	It must be 62.
	I was born in 63 in December, so it's going to be shortly 60.
	What is that?
	It's 25.
	So yeah, 60.
	So yeah, I'm definitely 63.
	Okay, so 63.
	So, you know, you might have another 20 years to go, right?
	But you're three quarters of the way along.
	And it's not like the last 20 years are as full of pep and vinegar as the first 20 years, right?
	Well, think about Trump.
	I mean, where he was at 60 and where he is now, I mean, he's done quite a bit in a short time.
	So Trump is very much an anomaly in that he seems to be able to eat whatever he wants and have good health.
	He also only needs a couple of hours of sleep a night.
	And so looking at Trump is like saying, well, some people win the lottery.
	It's like, but that's not an average that you or I or people should guide our decisions by, right?
	I mean, some people smoke like chimneys and live to be 90, but that's not a good plan for people, right?
	But, you know, I am somewhat that way.
	So, okay.
	I definitely have extraordinary characteristics.
	Well, but okay, so why do you think that you got to almost your mid-60s without learning how to listen?
	Well, let's say that this is a special conversation and most conversations will rattle off into, you know, bad avenues.
	And then I try to bring it back to the subject at hand.
	In this case, it was probably cogent.
	And so I should have followed along.
	Yes, it was probably I needed to follow up with that since I was calling in for the in the first place.
	So why not follow along?
	So, you know, I'm not a follower generally.
	It's harder for me.
	So I guess that would be my first answer.
	My second answer is I'm willing to follow along now.
	No, but it's not, I'm not asking you to follow me.
	I said we need to listen.
	We're having a conversation.
	I ask, I've asked two clarifying questions about the difference between ethics and morals.
	And also, when you say people don't abandon their morality, whether you're talking about can you abandon the morality of your youth, which I certainly have, or are you asking people to overturn basic moral presuppositions that most people share, like rape, theft, assault, and murder, are wrong?
	I just asked for clarity on that.
	So there's sort of been two instances where I've asked for clarity and you haven't listened.
	And I don't think you've even noticed that you haven't listened.
	And you've gone on tangents, and that's rude, right?
	It's probably because I didn't understand.
	So I kind of missed your point.
	I guess what's the polite thing to do is to say, you know, I don't quite understand that.
	Can you clarify?
	Right.
	And ask the question again so I can try to grasp it.
	So that would, and that's fair.
	Listen, I mean, these are complicated topics, and I've certainly required clarification of your points.
	So I appreciate that.
	So why wouldn't you tell the truth?
	Well, I definitely would if I.
	No, no, but you did because you didn't understand.
	But rather than say, I don't, because it's interesting, because this is like ethics in real time, right?
	Yeah.
	So if you don't, I didn't understand what you meant by people don't abandon their core beliefs.
	So I asked some for some clarity, right?
	Which is being honest, right?
	And if you didn't understand what I was asking for, which could be entirely because I explained it badly, right?
	I mean, it's not on you.
	It could equally be on me or, you know, just because we're dealing with complex subjects.
	But why not just say, I'm sorry, I don't follow.
	Why go off in a tangent?
	Okay.
	So, yeah, I'm getting what your question was that I didn't answer about core beliefs.
	And so, so, yeah, I mean, that's a really important point because what you're told, what your father told you,
	what maybe you believed in church or from the Bible, you know, that thing, whether or not you've reasoned it out, is a core belief and it'll outlast all the rest.
	And that's what I believe.
	Okay, so you're saying that people as a whole don't abandon the morals that they were exposed to as children.
	It's possible that it's as children or that it because it was grasped in a special way that was permanent.
	Well, sorry, that's circular.
	So if you're saying people don't change their permanent beliefs, then by definition, permanent means they're not changing them.
	So what do you mean?
	And again, I just want to know what is when you say they've learned it in a special way, what does that mean?
	In a way that it's something that they can't come up with a rationalization to disprove it because it's absolute.
	It's an absolute would be another word for it.
	Well, it's absolute for them, right?
	Yeah, it's absolute for them.
	Okay.
	So do you think that social values have changed a lot over the last hundred years?
	I can see they have in the published, the when we call, when we talk about social values, we're talking about the things that are pushed on us generally.
	Yeah, those have definitely changed.
	Okay.
	So if people don't give up their core beliefs or the beliefs that they learned as children, why would values have changed so much?
	Is it purely intergenerational?
	But of course, parents who were raised in, say, traditional nationalist Christian values would try to give those values to their children.
	And so why if your theory is that people don't change their core beliefs, why have beliefs changed so much?
	I mean, that would be a, I'm not saying that you're wrong.
	I just don't understand how that would explain that.
	Yeah.
	I, you know, I think what happens, what might happen is they.
	They reject their parents because they see that they did something crappy or did something that was contratempts of what they were being told.
	And so then they could reject the whole thing, including the parent.
	And people can change their core beliefs from when they're young.
	Well, yeah, if they had them, and we could say they had them lightly and then their parent ruined it, let's say, and turned it into something they could reject then.
	Okay, so you said that people don't change their core beliefs from when they're little, but they do.
	Yeah, well, before we were talking about to some extent, people do have absolute beliefs that they don't change.
	And we've seen that in practice.
	And in reality, I certainly have them.
	And those things are not likely to change.
	I suppose there are, you know, if you could, you know, dive deep or get a new world experience, then you could change those core beliefs.
	Yes.
	Okay.
	So if your theory is that people don't really change their core beliefs, how would you test that, if that's your hypothesis?
	And again, I don't mean this in any oppositional way because it's a really good example of some of that.
	No, no, I'm still talking.
	So it's a really good example of how to deal with questions that you have.
	So you have a theory that says that people don't really change their core beliefs, their core moral beliefs.
	So how would you test that?
	How would you find out if you're right or wrong?
	Hmm.
	Well, I mean, you could torture them until they change, declare we don't want to test a moral theory by being evil, right?
	So how would you do that?
	How would you do that without being evil?
	Yeah.
	Well, you present other data that maybe they didn't see.
	You present a panoply of data.
	No, but you could only do that.
	And then, sorry to interrupt.
	You could only do that at an individual level.
	You're talking about humanity in general.
	Ah, okay.
	Well, I mean, how do you, so these core beliefs are held individually.
	So you can't really do it.
	I don't think as a general thing.
	You have to do it one at a time.
	Okay.
	So in general, when people come up with theories, I like to know how they validated or not validated them.
	Otherwise, they're just opinions, right?
	So what I did while you were talking was I decided to ask two questions.
	One is, the first question is, what percentage of people become atheists over the course of their lifetimes?
	Right?
	Because that's a big change in moral theories, right?
	Globally, 10 to 15% of people raised religious become unaffiliated over their lifetimes.
	In the U.S., it's 18 to 19% become unaffiliated.
	These rates are increasing, especially among youth, but very widely by culture.
	So we can, I don't mind taking the lower side of that, you know, 12%, let's just say 10%, right?
	So 10% of people who are religious become unaffiliated, and some percentage of people who are raised unreligious become religious.
	I've certainly talked to lots of them as well.
	So, you know, 10, 15, 20% probably or something like that.
	And another question would be: how many people switch political affiliations over their lifetimes?
	And without getting to a huge amount of detail, in the US, it's 20 to 30%, UK, 15 to 25%, Germany, 10 to 20%.
	So 15 to 25% of people switch political parties.
	And in summary, sorry, young adults, 25% switch in the first decade.
	It tends to stabilize after 40.
	And so in summary, about 20 to 30% of Americans switch affiliations at least once over their lifetimes, with 10 to 15% crossing to the opposite major party.
	And so let me just ask: combine these two numbers, which is people who change from religious to unaffiliated.
	And let's see, can we put this?
	Political affiliation is somewhat more fluid than religious affiliation.
	So one in five adults will leave the religion they were raised in and become non-religious or atheists at some point in their life.
	Roughly one in four adults, 20 to 30%, will switch their political party or become independent at least once in their life.
	Of course, there's some overlap between the two of them.
	I would assume that if you are a leftist atheist and you become religious, you probably become more conservative, maybe even vice versa.
	So we're talking, if we sort of put these two together, 40 to up to 60%, 40 to 50%, 40 to 50% of people change their core values over the course of their life.
	So I'm not sure that supports your hypothesis too well.
	That's a bunch.
	It is a bunch.
	But this is what I'm saying.
	So if you have a theory, then, and it's great that you have theories.
	I love the fact that you think deeply about these things, but you really do have to ask questions.
	And this is the great thing.
	I mean, you could look this data up without AI, but AI certainly makes it easier.
	And certainly when you're asking AI about raw data, it tends to be pretty good about these things.
	You know, politics and so on tends to be a bit more subjective.
	So if you have these ideas, which is great, you've got to validate them.
	You got to put them through the true, false.
	You've got to put them through the data metric as a whole.
	And I think then you can say, here's my theory, and here's the data, right?
	I like the scientific approach.
	Like I have a hypothesis, I have a conjecture, but I also need to measure it with regards to the data so that I know if there's data that supports, you know, so I say, oh, well, the free market is more productive than socialism.
	Peace and freedom and property rights is more economically valuable than coercion and so on.
	And I would, you know, I've got a whole bunch of, this is back in 2006.
	I did a whole 17-part series, 18-part series, an introduction to philosophy, where I pulled up all the data to support all of this stuff.
	So I think that's really important to do to make sure that you're not just having opinions, but actually having some data behind them, if that makes sense.
	It does.
	And yeah, I appreciate it.
	I appreciate your look at it because, you know, when I was looking, you know, my original theory was really more along the lines of that morals are what you're given and ethics are what you assume yourself over time.
	And what you were saying is that people take their original morals, let's say, that they were given, and then they switch based on reason or something, but sometimes they switch to a bad thing.
	So, you know, it's hard to tell.
	People make the bad decision or, you know, screwed up logic and end up with something worse than the morals they started with, I guess.
	So now, this is why do you think that I, and I'll tell you my bias, of course, right?
	But why do you think I would be non-plussed?
	Not that you have to plus me or anything like that, but in terms of understanding how people's minds works, why do you think I would be not receptive to an argument that said people don't change their core values?
	I actually think you would.
	But I think you were taking my theory as being that people don't change those core values or their absolutes and they don't change.
	When I was saying that, what I meant is it was true for the person who received the moral education for a large part of their life.
	And, you know, like you said, 20% on the average switch, you know, whether it's political, religious, or whatever, they'll change what they were given to something else.
	But it's a very few, isn't it?
	I mean, look how many stay stuck where they were with what they were given.
	And in your argument about, well, why, you know, what about modern times?
	And they changed so much.
	How did they change?
	You know, it is perplexing how quickly things change because I guess people are lemmings.
	And I know the lemming model is not right, but I'm just saying that sometimes people are baffled by fads.
	And so they'll tend to do the faddish thing.
	I guess that would be the end of my piece on remarks on what your added value that you just gave me.
	All right.
	Let me ask the audience: why do you think I might be hostile to the argument that people don't change their core values?
	And this doesn't mean I'm right.
	And this is actually just an admission of bias, if that makes any sense.
	But why do you think I would be non-plussed with regards to this argument?
	This is like a sort of an empathy test or some things like that.
	That's right.
	You're a moral philosopher.
	Yeah.
	My entire purpose is to change people's core virtues.
	I'm sorry.
	I'm sorry I didn't answer that question.
	Yeah, you know, I was aware, but I'd given up at that point.
	So yeah, I'm going to appreciate the call.
	I really do.
	And thank you for a very interesting chat.
	But yeah, I mean, because if people couldn't change their core moral values, I would be a con man.
	I would be promising something that couldn't happen.
	I'd be like saying, you too can get abs just by donating.
	You don't have to do any sit-ups, no crunches.
	I remember there was the Bakery section of the gym when I used to go to the gym because there's this glute section.
	And you know, there are these girls, it's mostly girls, right?
	So there are some guys at the gym, they go all in on biceps and shoulders.
	That's it.
	They got these spindly little legs, they got narrow waists, and right?
	They go and they go all in.
	Some guys do that.
	Some guys go all in on legs, and it's less, you know, pyramid, like more of a pyramid.
	It's less common.
	But some people just go all in on a particular thing.
	Chest, right?
	So they don't mix it up.
	They don't spread it out.
	It's just, it's like, basically, it's like somebody says you're saying, hey, can I get a piece of toast and peanut butter?
	And like, there's half a jar of peanut butter on one square inch, and the rest of it's completely just butter.
	So, and there are these girls, right?
	The girls who are like, it's buts.
	That's all I'm doing is the butt.
	And they've got this stepladder behind them.
	You can sort of put an energy drink on there.
	And it's like, nothing else in particular, but they are the exception.
	The butt.
	See, anyway.
	So, so if you were a personal trainer and I said to you, people can't change their muscles, they can't change whether they get muscles or not, they can't change their body shape.
	Or if you were a dietitian and I said people can never ever lose weight, I'm calling you a con man.
	So when somebody said, I mean, my entire purpose as a moral philosopher is to get people to change and understand their morals.
	And then somebody says, people don't change their morals.
	And this is, it's interesting, right?
	And this is not to diss the listener.
	I mean, I'm really glad he called in.
	It was very interesting.
	But it always is amazing to me how blind people are to the effects of their words.
	Now, Lord knows I've had that too from time to time, blah, blah, blah, right?
	But it is always wild to me.
	You have little kids.
	Little kids are like this.
	And I'm not calling this guy a little kid, but little kids are kind of like this.
	You're like, why are you so fat?
	You know, hey, that's a legitimate question, right?
	But little kids don't think about what they're saying and how it lands for people, which is where you have to learn, and maybe one day I will, a little discretion, a little diplomacy, a little niceness, and so on, right?
	But it always is amazing to me that people can just say stuff that's, I mean, they don't mean to be, but it's kind of offensive, right?
	I mean, I can, this doesn't mean that he has to change what he's saying, but it always is amazing to me that this guy wouldn't say something like, hey, I know that your gig is changing people's morals, but here's why I don't think that's possible.
	You know, I know that you have good intentions, but as opposed to, yeah, people can't change their morals, he says to the guy who spent his whole life getting people to change their morals.
	People can't do it.
	It's a total con.
	It's a total, you're just a con man.
	Right?
	Because that's the implications.
	But people don't even notice that kind of stuff.
	It's wild.
	It's wild.
	So, yeah, if I said philosophy will give you abs, like just reasoning, read UPB and you'll wake up with abs.
	Well, that's not possible.
	That would be a con, right?
	That would be a lie.
	Vince says, my daughters, thank you for the tip.
	My daughter's first birthday party last Sunday was excellent.
	And please do use the comment that you mentioned as a testimonial.
	P.S. All right.
	I appreciate that.
	Thank you.
	Could you please put the staff treatment on collecting?
	Yeah.
	Collecting is sad.
	Collecting is sad and gay.
	I don't know what to say.
	Collecting stuff, like, who cares?
	Who cares?
	You end up with a bunch of stuff and you spend a lot of time collecting it.
	It doesn't add to virtue, doesn't add to value.
	Does it make you happy?
	No, it's just a bunch of OCD.
	I've completed the set.
	Who cares?
	I've never known a person with a healthy sex life who's also a collector.
	I'm just telling you my own personal experience.
	I don't have the data.
	But yeah, collecting is make work.
	It's just, oh, I need this.
	Like, no, you don't.
	Don't need to complete the set.
	Don't need everything.
	Don't need it all.
	Don't need any of it.
	I had a friend of mine when I was younger who would collect.
	I got to get all of the videos from the European tour in 1978 of Queen.
	It's like, why?
	Why?
	What do you care?
	I got to get the live album of every concert I've ever been to.
	Why?
	Why do you care?
	What does it matter?
	It doesn't matter at all.
	And actually, later on in his life, when his life was far from going well, I remember him sitting me down and he was looking at all these things that he'd collected.
	He went to all these records, like back in the day, before you could just boot up YouTube and get live concerts of everything.
	He would go to these record conventions and thumb through things and you wouldn't be able to listen to it ahead of time.
	You'd buy it.
	You would have no idea what the sound quality was at the live.
	Sometimes it's really good.
	Sometimes it's just somebody holding up a tape deck, right?
	And recording from the crowd.
	And all you hear is some vague singing, a little bit of bass, and people going, woo, and screaming their lungs off, right?
	Start singing.
	Like at the beginning of the da-da-da-da-da-da.
	Well, I heard about the midnight rambler.
	Everybody got to go.
	You just see it.
	Ah, start singing.
	So he collected all of this stuff.
	It added up to nothing.
	His life fell apart.
	He had all this stuff.
	What for?
	It ended up getting replaced anyway because YouTube came in and other things came in and Amazon Music and everybody's record collection.
	The devil take your stereo and your record collection.
	Can't tell you how long it took me to realize that Adam Ant was adamant.
	So, yeah.
	I mean, what do you care about collecting stuff?
	You're just collecting avoidance, dust, things to clean.
	And the ultimate collection is regret.
	How many people at their end of their life?
	How many people at the end of their lives sit up with their last breath?
	Look at their fucking laboo-boo dolls and say, that was worth it.
	All the time and money I spent on collecting bottle caps and matchbooks and beer bottles and little furry collectibles.
	All the time I spent collecting that, which is now worthless to everyone except maybe for a little bit of money, was time, money, effort, and energy well spent.
	I scoured and I traveled and I gathered and I grouped and I died and who cared.
	I told you the story of a friend of mine whose uncle died and left him this giant collection of butterflies.
	He'd spend his whole life, travel all over the world.
	I got to get this butterfly.
	I got to get butterfly.
	It's train spotting.
	It's bullshit.
	He didn't have a family.
	He didn't have kids.
	But he had a bunch of dead butterflies.
	Vampires staked to a corkboard and a glass.
	And my friend was like, God, I got to spend all this money to keep the temperature.
	I keep offering it to museums.
	They're like, I got to ship it.
	It's too expensive.
	My God, I don't know what to do with it.
	It's all rotting away.
	It's just rotting and falling apart.
	Most depressing shit ever.
	Everything you collect gets sold or thrown out.
	It's a waste of time, waste of money, talk to people, do good in the world.
	Collecting is just gay OCD garbage.
	Alex says, that was harsh earlier.
	LOL, I think there are healthy and constructive ways to collect things, but of course there are also unhealthy and wastefully extravagant ways to collect things.
	Oh, come see, come saw.
	A little bit of this, a little bit of that.
	It's the Aristotelian mean.
	See, I use false address.
	That's an argument.
	Somebody says, I believe that the large debt Western countries have created are making governments act irrationally and stupidly.
	For example, believing they can control another country on the other side of the world and just allowing for creation of irrational policies locally.
	Yeah.
	That is psychosis, right?
	I also believe, says someone, oh, same person.
	I also believe that there tend to be mental disabilities or forms of psychosis around the habit of collecting things, a way of compensating or dealing with deficiencies.
	A healthy way to collect things, however, might be a historian collecting historical artifacts for preservation, for examination or for sharing with students, or to enhance the experience of studying history.
	That's not being a collector.
	that's an archivist or a historian uh staff has to constantly verify that people know what question they're being asked because everyone has internet brain rot Oh, trust me, this is not an internet thing.
	I'm sure the internet isn't making it better.
	But, but.
	It is long pre-internet.
	I can't tell you the number of times, even long before I was famous or whatever, the number of times I'd be having a debate with someone.
	And you know, you know, when they're just waiting their turn to talk and they have no interest in answering your questions and all you are is Charlie Brown's trombone teacher.
	Oh, my turn to talk.
	Great.
	I can talk about all of the stuff that I've mulled over and never verified.
	Never verified.
	Let's see here.
	With all due respect, we can move on to the next caller.
	Well, I think it's interesting, though.
	Sorry.
	Of course, I think it's interesting I kept going with the call.
	Oh, redundant.
	All right.
	There are some goofy people who've appeared on the show over the last few weeks.
	Anyone remember?
	Anyone remember that guy who asked Stefan whether he would be justified in using a chainsaw to penetrate a trespasser?
	Ah, that's funny.
	Do-do-do.
	All right.
	Yeah, I've certainly changed my values during my life.
	Yeah, for sure.
	So I hope, Alec, that helped.
	for sure it's just it's collecting is make work It's just make work bullshit.
	I need to finish.
	I need to get the rest.
	I need to get the set.
	I need to.
	Get the Magic the Gathering thing.
	I need to get the last one.
	What are they?
	A beanie babies.
	Beanie babies.
	Cabbage patch kids.
	What have I seen people collect?
	Duck ornaments.
	Gotta get more.
	Why? Why? Why?
	Steph, I think you're underestimating the fact that many museums have what they have because of collectors.
	That's Cope, man.
	All due respect.
	That's Cope.
	So, what do you think?
	How many people are collectors?
	And how many people's collections end up in museums?
	Not a lot.
	It's got to be less than one one-thousandth of one percent of people.
	If you're collecting good orgasms, you don't need to collect butterflies.
	Somebody says, I've had the collective problem.
	I've stopped accumulating.
	I still have a load of instruments.
	I've been playing since I was 13 and spent a lot of time playing in bands.
	I haven't gotten anything new since getting married, aside from a few very thoughtful gifts from my now wife.
	I've been planning on selling nearly all of it.
	Not the gifts, of course.
	I still play, but I only needed a decent few.
	Well, I don't know if that's a collector if your job is to be a musician and you have a bunch of instruments.
	Are there not healthy forms of collecting?
	Of course, there are extremes that detract from life, but a modest collection of historical artifacts seems healthy.
	Okay, well, I mean, you're not making an argument.
	You're just saying that is there a deficiency of collection?
	Can you collect too little?
	Is it the Aristotelian mean?
	All right.
	Someone told me they fancy themselves an art collector by collecting magic cards like Magic the Gathering.
	That museum's guy is his plan to become a future archaeologist dig site.
	I suppose so, yeah.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I just think all collection is a waste of time.
	All of it.
	Because there are museum curators, there are archaeologists, there are historians.
	They all go out and they collect stuff.
	They're paid for it.
	So amateur collectors don't do it.
	Look at what could be missing in your life that you don't have anything better to do than obsess about completing things that are immaterial and unimportant.
	My point was to indicate that there are collectors who do society as a service by collecting to whatever extent.
	Okay, let me ask you this, Alec.
	I'm happy.
	What percentage?
	Yeah, stamp collecting, birdwatching, right?
	So what percentage of people who collect and their collections, what percentage of them end up historically relevant or in museums?
	And I don't mean in the ass back of museums.
	I mean where people can see them.
	So what percentage of people who collect and what percentage of their collections end up being historically important, studied, and or in a museum?
	What percentage would you say?
	Because again, then we're like, well, some people do win the lottery, so what's the point of saving for your retirement?
	It's like, but it's a bad plan, right?
	So I'm happy.
	Everyone can guess this.
	Everyone can guess this.
	What percentage of people who are collectors end up with their collections in museum displays?
	I don't know if AI will be able to answer this well or badly, but let us hang out.
	Boom.
	All right.
	Museums often decline 90 to 95% of offered donations due to space, relevance, or condition constraints.
	Museums often decline 90 to 95% of offered donations.
	So you have to collected a bunch of stuff.
	You have to offer it up to museum.
	90 to 95 percent of offer donations due to space relevance or condition constraints.
	Even accepted gifts often end up in storage because museums only display 5 to 10 percent of their holdings at any given time.
	Well, museums rely on collectors for about 90 percent of their core holdings, only a small fraction.
	5 to 15 percent of collectors achieve the museum display outcome often after rigorous vetting for hobbyists.
	It's nearer 1%.
	If planning a collection's future, consult estate experts, blah, Okay, so what about what percentage of overall collectors because 1% is pretty good.
	That was 1% is way higher.
	So this is 1% of people.
	Sorry, 1% of people end up with museum display quality collections, but that's people who submit it to the museum, I assume.
	Submit their collections to museums, because that's the question, right?
	Nobody's going to take, you know, teenagers like collecting monster energy drinks or other kinds of energy drink collections, right?
	Do do.
	Let's just.
	Sorry, I'm just going to get to the bottom.
	Yeah.
	So this is people who collect stuff that people would be interested in.
	Museums would be interested in.
	I'm not able to get it right now.
	But if you think of all the people who collect everything, only 1% of those who collect stuff that's relevant to museums end up with their museum stuff on display.
	That's a pretty bad number.
	with regards to overall collectors.
	It's tiny, right?
	Do-doom.
	Less than 1%, 1%, 0.5%, 0.
	My goodness, a collector is so broad, especially if you're collecting broads.
	John Fowles.
	A collector?
	I think.
	Essentially, no consumer product collectibles are worth museum display.
	That's true.
	I don't know, says Alec, but there are war veterans, for example, the men of the famed Easy Company, whose artifacts are on display.
	For the most part, collections are a waste and they turn to trash.
	Okay, so, but the people who were the easy company didn't collect them.
	They just got them as part of the, they weren't collectors in that way.
	I guess maybe other people collected them, but reason, logic, and evidence indicates you're being a killjoy.
	Pokemon card collectors, yeah.
	A man who holds a small collection of museum quality artifacts is exposing his children to things of symbolic and historical significance.
	Yes, but he can do that by going to the museum, right?
	So, I mean, I'd used to take my daughter to the ROM, Royal Ontario Museum, all the time.
	What about passive collections that get periodically used, suits, tools, etc.?
	Tradesmen may take pride in that which they collect that brings them value.
	Yeah, but that's not a collection.
	That's like I have a collection of computers and cameras.
	It's not collect things.
	I'm just that it's my work tools, right?
	My point was to show that collecting can be healthy, and playing the lottery can be profitable, right?
	Okay, let me ask you this.
	Let me ask you this.
	And this is to Alec, and I'm open this to everyone, right?
	What percentage of collectors do you think are providing objective value to the world after they're gone?
	What percentage of collectors do you think are providing objective value to the world after they're dead and gone?
	I asked if museums ever accepted a Pokemon card collection, and some have.
	There are potentially millions of Pokemon card collectors.
	It's unlikely that a collection would be the one to be accepted, much less featured.
	But you admit you have a collection.
	Keepsig items can be a window into the past.
	No, I don't have a collection.
	A collection is something that you gather for its own sake, right?
	I ordered a new microphone so that when I'm doing walkabout call-in shows, I don't have to rely on wireless because I'll get better audio quality from a wired microphone.
	So I ordered that because I needed a microphone that had a splitter because I've got a little thing to adapt on my cell phone here that requires a separate input for microphone and earpiece, right?
	So I ordered a microphone.
	I probably have half a dozen microphones, but each one of them has a specific purpose.
	And I have a one-sided microphone that I ordered when I had an ear infection once because it was uncomfortable to listen on the other ear.
	So that had its sort of purpose and so on.
	And this one I've ordered, I have a quote, collection of microphones, but they're all used for my work.
	they're all used for my job.
	So no, it's not a, it, I have a number of microphones, but I use them for work.
	That's like saying that a cab company is collecting cab cars.
	It's like, no, it has cab cars because there's a cab company.
	It's not a collection, right?
	If it is higher than zero, says Alec, I intend on being one of them.
	So far as I collect.
	Somebody says, sometimes I think Stefan is a bit slow to understand or deliberately misconstruing.
	It's kind of rude.
	Actually, it's really rude.
	I'm not insulting anyone.
	But yeah, so if you ask me a question and I'm providing my case for an answer saying that I'm a bit slow to understand or deliberately misconstruing, so I'm either dumb or manipulative.
	Yeah, I don't really feel like answering any more of your questions.
	That's kind of rude.
	It's better than smoking dope, I guess.
	Maybe, yeah.
	Then Ben says, I have a set of lathe tools that I made my own handles for out of different exotic hardwoods.
	And I wouldn't say I collect lathe tools even though I spent time making my tools beautiful.
	But you use them, right?
	But you use them.
	So, yeah, I don't know why were you rude?
	That's an odd, odd thing.
	I mean, I was making a joke about the orgasm thing, right?
	I mean, but that's, and I said that's not any kind of truth.
	That's just a personal observation.
	But, yeah, it's interesting.
	It's interesting.
	Because, you know, if you ask someone a question and you get an answer you don't like, it doesn't mean that the person is dumb or manipulative, right?
	That's not a particularly positive way to reward someone.
	No?
	Oh, that's a bad call.
	So he says, I'm sorry for being rude.
	I didn't mean it that way.
	Bullshit.
	Of course you did.
	Of course you did.
	Let me go back and read it to you.
	That's a great thing about having text, right?
	You said, you said, you should.
	Let me find it.
	I will find it.
	Bum.
	Wait, is it gone?
	Is it gone?
	It should not be gone.
	You said that Stefan is slow to understand or is, oh yes.
	Sometimes I think Stefan is a bit slow to understand or deliberately misconstruing.
	So I didn't mean it that way.
	I didn't mean for it to sound harsh.
	See, if you're rude and you apologize, and then you say, if you say, well, Steph misconstrues things, and then I say that's kind of harsh.
	And you say, well, I didn't mean that.
	You're misconstruing.
	You're not solving the problem.
	Steph, you misunderstand things, perhaps deliberately.
	Oh, that's kind of harsh.
	Well, I didn't mean it that way.
	You're misunderstanding it.
	No, listen, you were stung because I stomped on a sacred cow of yours.
	And I understand that.
	I'd be happy to hop on a call to flesh it out.
	Oh, that could be a while, man.
	You want to do it now?
	So are you on X?
	No, you're not.
	You're on YouTube.
	Okay.
	Yeah.
	So, but you can go to freedom.com slash call and you get a free call and show and we'll do it.
	But I was, listen, I mean, whatever you do for relaxation is fine.
	So people say, you shouldn't play video games, right?
	Steph, you just slammed people who collect things.
	That was also rude.
	No, it wasn't rude.
	Wasn't rude at all.
	I didn't slam people.
	I gave my strong opinion about the fact that it's kind of useless and kind of pointless and there's better things to do with your time.
	That's my argument.
	That's my opinion.
	I'm slamming people.
	You're taking everything personally.
	Right?
	So let me give you an example, right?
	So the guy who said to me, people don't change their moral perspectives, which is basically calling me a con man.
	Was I rude to him?
	I was not.
	I was not.
	I don't use social media.
	I don't know what that has to do with anything, right?
	So no, no, it wasn't rude.
	If you ask me for my perspective and my argument and my opinion on something, and I give you my perspective, argument, and opinion, which is that I do not think it is a productive, valuable, and healthy use of time for most people, just about everyone, to get into collecting.
	And I gave examples and I gave my reasoning.
	I gave my theory.
	I did call collecting gay and retarded.
	Of course, that's kind of a joke, right?
	I didn't call everyone who's a collector, right?
	And there are some people who collect who are valuable, but they tend to be professionals.
	So, I mean, I was called a con man by this last guy.
	I was still polite to him.
	Doesn't use social media.
	It would be impossible for him to create an account.
	I don't know what that means.
	So, and yeah, so I do think that it is a way of avoiding sort of necessary moral challenges in the world.
	If you are doing great good in the world and you have a great family and then you enjoy collecting World War II pistols for fun, it's fine.
	I mean, I'm not going to, oh, don't, right?
	Or anything like that.
	But people who focus a lot on collecting, and I've known people, like I was talking about the guy, I think this is in reference to the guy who spent his whole life collecting butterflies, missed out on having a family and kids, and ended up with a rotting butterfly collection in a relative's basement that was just a big mess and he didn't know what to do with.
	But you know what?
	You're right.
	You're right.
	I was rude.
	Yeah, you know what?
	You're absolutely right.
	Gay and retarded is kind of rude.
	So you're right.
	Fair play.
	All right.
	Back to the lathe tools.
	Yes, I use them, but they come with usable handles from the store.
	Is it worth my time to make nicer ones?
	Is it the utility or the beauty that justifies the use of my time?
	Well, that's an interesting question, right?
	That's an interesting question.
	So, when I look at people who collect, what I do is I look at the opportunity costs, right?
	I look at the opportunity costs.
	So, Ben, let's say that you spent 50 hours making handles for your lathe, right?
	There's nothing wrong with that, whatever, right?
	If that's 50 hours that you didn't spend time with your children, I think that's a negative.
	Like if somebody said to me, you can do a sort of useless task or you can spend time with loved ones, spend time with your kids and so on.
	I've known a lot of people who are collectors who are collectors at the expense of personal relationships, right?
	Which is why I was talking about the guy who collected butterflies and didn't have a family, didn't have a wife.
	And I've known a lot of people, you know, honestly, the guy who went to all of these, the guy I knew many years ago who went to all of these record shows, he went there because he wasn't getting along with his wife.
	He just needed someplace to go that she didn't want to go.
	I think a lot of collection is around, a lot of collecting is around avoidance.
	And it is the creation of a completely artificial and almost completely useless metric of success or progress or a good thing or something like that, right?
	So that's why if you are focusing on the pointless, materialistic aggregation of fairly useless objects at the expense of your personal relationships, that's a big cost.
	That's a big negative.
	Rather than working to improve your relationships rather than working to connect with people and so on, I mean, I'm trying to think: do I have hobbies that separate or alienate me from people?
	I mean, I exercise, but my wife exercises too.
	I don't think I do.
	You know, like I can't imagine going to my wife and saying, sorry, and my wife and my daughter and going and saying, sorry, I have to go to Northern Ontario because there was a sighting of a peregrine falcon.
	And no, you can't come and I'll be gone all weekend because I need to complete my collection of photos of birds of Ontario or whatever it is, right?
	I would be like, like, no, I'd rather spend time with my family.
	Thank you very much.
	So, all right.
	All right.
	Any other questions, comments?
	I think we're done for tonight.
	I really do appreciate your time.
	Happy Thanksgiving, everybody.
	And shop.freedomain.com to get stuff.
	And don't forget your, it was posted earlier.
	Let me just get it in case you have forgotten.
	Let me just do that.
	Yeah, shop.freedomain.com slash promo slash FDR promo 10.
	All caps, FDR promo 10.
	Have yourselves a wonderful evening, freedom.com slash annotate to help out the show.
	Thanks, everyone, so much.
	Have a beautiful evening.
	We'll talk soon.

▲