Stefan Molyneux addresses parenting, societal progress, and ethical dilemmas, arguing that prioritizing time with children prevents peer pressure while "di-fu" enables escaping abusive family origins. He critiques mass immigration for lowering Western standards, advocates homeschooling over government schooling, and rejects tipping casino dealers as mere tradition. Molyneux challenges media narratives on domestic violence, warns that unchecked power corrupts central banking and education, and asserts resentment drives the incompetent toward socialism. Defining revenge as secondary to creation, he notes high IQs tempt political rule, permits harmless lying, and emphasizes maintaining an "observing ego" to uphold the non-aggression principle against hedonistic determinism. Ultimately, he suggests virtue requires surrounding oneself with competent people to counteract societal decay. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Importing Broken Parenting Styles00:14:40
Already, ready.
Good morning, my friends.
I hope you're doing well.
It's the fan Molyneux from Free Domain.
Freedomain.com.
If you donate over the next couple of days, I will send you the history of philosophy and the history and the truth about the French Revolution.
Like 30 hours of great podcast material, some of my best work.
So, FreeDomain.com slash donate.
Questions from my good friends on X. What do you think about side hustles after having kids?
I tried, but can unfathom how one combines it with.
Kids.
Well, parenting is the ultimate example of pay me now or pay me later.
Pay me now or pay me later.
Just as much as humanly possible, just spend a bunch of time with your kids when they're young.
The memories are fantastic.
They are a warm heart in your fire as the world grows cold as you age.
And I love going past places that my daughter and I had great memories when she was little, right?
She's going to be 18 this year.
So.
She's almost an adult, of course.
And forget about the side hustles.
Just cut back on your expenses to spend time with your kids.
Your kids want you.
They don't want stuff and materials and toys.
They just want you.
Just go play with your kids.
Spend time with your kids as much as humanly possible.
I mean, A, it's fun.
B, it's great for them.
C, they build wonderful memories.
And D, if you don't spend time with your kids when they're young, And I know you're not talking about not spending time with your kids, just talking about it being a bit different.
If you don't spend time with your kids when you're young, then of course what happens is you end up having to spend a lot of time managing them and their problems and their peer pressures and so on when they get older.
You want that pair bond to be with you, the parents.
You don't want it to be with the other kids, their peers as a whole.
I mean, they're going to have their peer bonds, but you don't want those peer bonds to be overwhelming.
So you either spend time with your kids when they're younger.
Or you spend time trying to repair and fix up the damage that not spending time with them when they're younger has in their teen years.
All the parenting is preparation for the teen years when they get enough independence that they can be led astray.
And you want to have those solid bonds so that they don't get led astray.
And that's what you need.
So, all right.
Somebody asks With your years of fighting the good fight for non aggression and peaceful parenting, do you see societal progress on these fronts?
Is it moving the other direction or is it about the same?
Well,.
You know, one of the great tragedies of mass immigration is that the West, after struggling for thousands of years to improve parenting, Christianity being one of the big ones, after struggling for thousands of years to improve parenting, the West is now importing millions of people whose parenting practices have not reached Western standards as a whole.
And if you spent time around immigrant communities, particularly from the third world, their parenting practices are very aggressive and dismissive and Top down and so on.
So, yeah, it's really sad and it's really counterproductive, of course, in the long run.
So, there's some negatives.
In terms of what I see, though, it's absolutely staggering how much things have progressed.
So, it was not like almost 20 years ago, I was attacked viciously by multiple press outlets for being an evil cult leader trademark.
Because I was wantonly apparently smashing up families for fun and profit, though I never told anyone to leave their families, just reminded them that they could when they were adults.
And so it was, you know, evil cult leader practice to talk about going no contact or the voluntary family.
You know, and again, I've always said the same steps, just in case you haven't heard them, the same steps I've been consistent in for 20 years.
If you have problems with your abusive parents when you're an adult, then sit down and talk with them and try and work things out.
And try and get to some kind of positive resolution and go to therapy.
If you're even thinking about going no contact with your parents, please engage with a good therapist because it's certainly in the past, although still now, certainly in the past, it was a tough process because socially it was completely unacceptable because, well, for a variety of reasons, not least of which you honor their mother and their father, but it's your mother.
You only get one mother, you only get one father, and so on.
Now, this was shocking.
And appalling, and it was a dangerous idea.
It was one of the more dangerous ideas that I, or arguments that I put forward into the public square, was reminding people that you don't have any foundational responsibility to remain in any abusive relationships, but particularly unchosen abusive relationships.
You don't choose your parents, you know, and again, I was always raised that it's fine to divorce if you're not happy.
And these are people that you dated and chose.
So the idea that you could never leave parents that you never chose was incomprehensible, logically, of course.
And the purpose was to privatize the family because only in the private sphere do you get quality.
Quality is choice, right?
The government has a monopoly on certain services.
You can't really choose anything differently, so they don't have much of an incentive to produce services of the highest quality.
You just kind of have to deal with it, right?
As best you can.
So, privatizing the family is really important, and making sure that parents know that if they horribly mistreat their children, their children are under no foundational obligation to stay with them and continue to have a relationship with them as they get older is the best way to improve parenting.
I mean, the best way to improve a service provided by the government is to privatize it and to allow for competition.
And so, privatizing the family is taking the principles of the free market and applying them.
To parenting.
And it was extremely dangerous in terms of releasing this idea into the wild and so on.
And no matter how reasonable I was, no matter how reasonable I was, no matter how, I think this is kind of accepted within the psychological community, but it's kind of like ethnicity and IQ.
You just can't talk about it within the public square, public sphere.
So I talked about it and it was all.
Perfectly reasonable, perfectly friendly, and so on.
But it was a very dangerous idea to put out.
Now, that idea has gone mainstream.
And it's remarkably quick.
In only 20 years, this idea has gone mainstream.
And now there are regular articles that I see.
And I will say it's not without a tiny degree of bitterness from time to time, but there are mainstream articles that I see.
About going no contact, or what I referred to as Di Fu, which is like divorce, but for your parents.
Fu stands for family of origin, F O O, family of origin.
So, if you're married and you're talking about your family, you say family of origin, so difu.
And it's gone mainstream.
It's talked about in a wide variety of mainstream publications.
It's discussed without hysteria as a potentially healthy option for unrepentantly abusive parents.
And of course, I get no credit and my reputation remains as harmed as ever.
But nonetheless, I am more than willing.
A very noble and honorable trade to have my reputation endlessly trashed in order to reduce abuse against children.
Right.
So the idea of going no contact is a way of improving parenting.
Right.
If your kids can never leave you, you don't have to provide better services for them, you don't have to be nicer or kinder and so on.
In other words, you don't have to treat them as most abusive parents treat.
Random strangers, which is way better.
And so, back of the napkin calculations is that I sold or burned my reputation in order to prevent about one and a half billion assaults against children.
And I mean, obviously, obviously, that is a deal that any moral or reasonable person would make.
And I'm very proud and happy to have made that deal.
Of course, you know, you wish you lived in a world where that deal didn't have to be made.
But any moralist who improves the human condition is going to have to sacrifice his reputation, at least in the short run.
You know, in the long run, things were different.
And afterwards, people look back and say, I don't understand the hysteria.
Why were people so upset that astronomers argued that the Earth went around the Sun?
Now we just take it for granted.
It's incorporated, but at the time, of course, it could get you burnt at the stake.
That's just a reality.
The other thing that was really important to me with regards to the voluntary family, the free market family, Is, oh, of course, there's a moral aspect that you are not responsible for contracts you never signed.
That seems quite important.
And the other thing that's quite important is that if you are in contact with abusive parents as an adult, that conditions who you can marry and who you can date.
Now, the most important decision you're ever going to make in your life is who you marry.
Everything else is like a distant second.
The quality of the person you marry.
Now, if you are around parents who insult you, ignore you, put you down, Roll their eyes, treat you with contempt, or even are physically dangerous, then quality people will not want to marry into your family, right?
Because men judge a woman as an individual, women judge men as part of a family structure because men are going to go out and work, whereas women are evolved or have evolved to judge a man's family because she's going to need those family resources to help raise the children, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and so on.
And so, if you have a bad family, then you cannot get a good spouse.
And that means that only insecure cry bullies will date and marry you.
And that's going to mean that your children are going to be treated badly.
And I'll tell you this I mean, I lived this entire experience.
I was embedded in a toxic family structure, and I could not get the kind of woman that I married.
My wife's a professional.
Mental health specialist for a quarter century and practice psychology, all that kind of good stuff.
I mean, I just couldn't get her.
I couldn't get that kind of woman until I ended up going no contact with my family of origin.
And that makes perfect sense.
So, it's really just about happiness, virtue, consistency, quality, and founding my philosophy, as no philosopher in history has done before, founding my philosophy or founding philosophy from a moral standpoint on anything and everything that is best for the children of society.
The non aggression principle must apply to children first, otherwise, it will never apply socially.
So, yes, massive, massive progress.
All right.
Now, Steph, do you think it's possible to raise strong moral children in a large urban area today?
With the constant distractions, negative influences, and government schooling, I believe it's extremely difficult, if not impossible.
What are your thoughts?
Yeah, I mean, I think if you have the choice, if you have the choice, I would say that living in the country, in a good community, and homeschooling is probably the best approach as a whole.
Is retirement devastating for most people?
I think we need to provide value to the world in order to be happy.
Happiness, which is fundamentally the approval of your conscience, is only achieved by doing good in the world.
Doing good in the world means promoting virtue and thwarting or opposing the interests and preferences of evildoers, and then they get their hits back, as all of us who've done tangible empirical good in the world have seen and known that the bad guys get their hits in on you, and then you get to see everyone.
Agree with the bad guys for the most part.
I mean, it's a little dispiriting, but again, it's a natural part.
And I, as a philosopher, have tried to move the actionable moral virtues of mankind further forward than any other philosopher in history.
I will stand by that.
I mean, I have my strengths, I have my weaknesses.
That is an absolutely valid assessment because by focusing on personable, actionable virtues, particularly regarding children, I have provided the world with the most actionable progress in morals.
In the shortest amount of time of any philosopher in history.
And that has a lot to do, of course, with the amazing technology we have to discuss reason with the world.
And so it's not my particular brilliance, although maybe that's a part of it, but it is really the communications technology and the participation of the audience with great questions like this that has really helped.
So if you retire from work, that's fine.
I don't think I'll ever retire.
I'll probably be podcasting on my deathbed.
But if you Retire from work, that's fine, but you still need to be able to provide value to the world.
I think if you don't provide value for the world, I think your body just says, well, kind of what are we here for?
And then I think illness is a potential.
Somebody asks, are we obligated to tip dealers at casinos when you win?
I don't gamble, but to me, this makes no sense.
They don't tip you when you lose, and you still have to pay taxes on that money.
No, you're not obligated.
It's not a contract, it's a tradition.
It is a nice to have, not a have to have.
It's like tipping at a restaurant.
Now, personally, personally, this is just a personal opinion.
It's not a philosophical proof.
Generosity Begets Generosity00:03:24
Sort of what I've seen and experienced in the course of my nearly six decades on the planet is that generosity tends to beget generosity.
I mean, I noticed this when I was a waiter.
I spent years being a waiter as a teenager and in my early 20s.
And generosity tends to beget generosity.
If you are generous and kind, as long as you're assertive, In expecting reciprocity, right?
So don't just be a pushover.
Don't just be somebody who provides resources to others with no expectation of return.
I don't think that's reasonable or healthy.
But if you are generous, then most people will be generous in return.
I mean, when I meet people, I'm positive and friendly, funny, hopefully a little, and happy, and all of that.
And, you know, every now and then you'll meet a sour puss who doesn't reciprocate, but most people will respond to the energy you provide.
If you're generous as a whole in the world, generosity tends to come back.
Now, it's not any kind of magic karmic force, but if you're generous in the world, you know, generous with your time, generous with your resources, and a giver, then as long as you're not being exploited, as long as you look for reciprocity and shave off the people who don't reciprocate so that you end up with.
Mutual support in your life as a whole.
I mean, that's a great thing.
That's a great thing.
So you don't have to, but I think generosity helps as a whole in life.
I want to know why you think, sorry, I want to know what you think about the prevalence of young female domestic abusers.
I have no data, but in my opinion, it seems to be dramatically rising.
Well, one of the things that's happened over the last sort of 50, 60 years is that women have gained.
Unfair access to the legal system, right?
So, what you do is you portray violence, domestic violence, as always being abusive men against helpless, loving, dependent, virtuous women.
That's not how domestic violence works.
I mean, among boyfriend, girlfriend, married partners, and so on.
The way that domestic violence works is you get two sick people who both enjoy and get sadistic satisfaction from provoking each other and playing the victim, and so on.
It's a It's a horrible psychodrama that comes out of early childhood.
But what happens with domestic violence is you get two sick people who are mired in manipulation and brutality and a repetition compulsion of early childhood violence.
And they both are drawn to each other.
They both provoke each other.
They both end in this horrible, ghastly, demonic dance of provocation and victimhood and so on.
And the woman will provoke the man, and then the man hits her, and then the man provokes the woman, and the woman hits him or calls the cops or something like that.
So, domestic violence is a sick cycle between two adults, usually both as bad as the other.
But that's not what the media portrays.
Of course, what the media portrays endlessly is the loving, virtuous, kind, wonderful woman whose husband just turns on her for no reason and becomes a terrible guy and she's trapped because she loves him and loves the kids.
And so you just portray this endlessly.
And what this does, of course, is it gives women excessive.
Power Corrupts and Checks Balance00:07:13
Credibility in the legal system.
And it gives them excessive power within the legal system.
And then what they do is they switch from abusing the men directly to calling the cops and threatening the cops on the man.
And of course, there are times when this is justified.
The man is a violent guy and the woman should be protected and so on.
I'm just talking about the general social knowledge of it.
So the woman then, of course, will.
Threaten or enact, you know, she'll smack herself in the head and then say, I'm calling the cops and you're going to jail.
And I mean, this is all terrible stuff.
Now, of course, people should have access to the police or its equivalent in a free society.
People should have access to these things if they're under physical threat.
Absolutely, for sure.
But unfortunately, a lot of police in the West are just trained that.
You always believe the woman.
You take the man right out of the household.
He goes straight to jail.
And this is excessive power for abusers.
Access to the power of the police is something that can be easily abused by bad people.
And we don't have enough checks and balances in this as a whole.
So, for instance, women who falsely accuse men of assault are very rarely prosecuted or very rarely jailed, even if the man has video evidence and so on.
So, it is power corrupts people as a whole.
And we always need voluntary checks and balances on power.
Any system that does not have checks and balances on power is totalitarian.
So, for instance, money printing, right?
I mean, should new money be created?
Yes, for sure, because the economy grows and you need money to grow with the economy as a whole.
Should new money be created?
Yes.
Should any particular individual be in charge of the creation of new currency?
Absolutely not.
This is what's so terrible about central banking, right?
So, I'm just giving you an example.
So, Bitcoin fixes this and solves this and so on.
So, all unchecked power corrupts.
And if you try to design some sort of system where there's no particular downside to the unjust exercise of power, your system will fail.
It's like trying to design a fish tank without water, trying to figure out a system without automatic.
Decentralized checks on humanity's desire to use excess power.
I mean, we're designed for that.
I mean, and there's nothing wrong with that in a way.
I mean, designed to exploit excess power is what gives us windmills and water wheels and internal combustion engines and all sorts of good stuff, right?
So we have an instinct to exploit power.
And from a material energy standpoint, that's given us a lot of the delights.
And the comforts of the modern world, right?
And when it comes to a coercive power, centralized power, the political power, power of the police, power of the courts, and so on, then unfortunately, what's happened is that these systems have been designed without checks and balances, right?
So, what happens, for instance, if a judge releases a prisoner back into society and that prisoner goes on to commit more crimes?
Well, in a Society where you design things intelligently, a voluntary society, a free market society.
You can check out my books on this at freedomain.comslash books.
But you would have checks and balances there, right?
So if you'd say, well, you know, rape is a terrible crime, and it is, right?
One of the worst crimes around.
Rape is a terrible, horrible evil.
And some women and some men, but mostly women, will falsely claim to have been raped in order to punish a man for some perceived misdeed.
Or non compliance.
So you have to have that, right?
You have to have that built into the system.
And anytime I look at a system and I don't see any counterweight to the abuses of power, the system I know is going to fail, right?
If you look at democracy, well, what happens if a politician does not fulfill his promises?
Well, nothing.
I mean, that's like having a store where you say, or an online store where you say, you send us.
You know, $1,000, and maybe we'll send you the computer, or maybe we won't.
And there's no negatives to that, right?
And of course, with a democracy where the government controls hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars, then of course the natural result is that the government bribes people with counterfeit currency, bribes people with the debts of their children in order to buy votes in the here and now.
Okay, so what's the counterweight to that?
Every time you look at a system, understand that power corrupts and say, okay, what is the counterweight to the natural corruption of humans when exposed to power?
What is the counterweight to that?
How does the system deal with the fact that human beings are corrupted by power?
I mean, everybody knows this.
Everybody understands this.
A sort of famous Lord Acton quote all power corrupts, absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely.
Everybody knows this.
Okay, so if the government is in charge of educating the children, then those who want to propagandize their society will immediately start writing the textbooks.
Okay, so what's the counterweight to that?
What is the counterbalance to that?
That children are going to be increasingly indoctrinated.
Because it is a centralized power to quote educate children.
So, what's the counterweight?
Well, there's no counterweight to that.
Everywhere you look at systems as a whole, okay, so there are bad teachers, and the bad teachers don't want to lose their jobs, and the bad teachers will often keep their jobs by agreeing to propagandize the children.
What's best for the children is to have the best teachers.
The children aren't paying directly, the children have no say.
And so, what is to stop bad teachers?
From propagandizing your children.
Well, there's nothing.
There's nothing to stop that.
So, anytime you look at a system as a whole, you want to look at how it deals with the reality that power corrupts.
And there is no political system that can deal with that problem.
Who will watch the watchers, right?
Well, we've got the police.
Well, what if the police turn bad, right?
Well, who's going to deal with or control that?
Well, there is no answer in a political system.
The only answer is a free market system, right?
Where if judges become corrupt, Or unjust, or give ridiculously short sentences.
Resentment Versus High Achievers00:10:16
There was a guy who was sentenced to six months for sexually assaulting an unconscious person, I think, woman, by a dumpster.
Okay, so what do you do?
I mean, everybody's really frustrated with these judges, these activist judges.
What do you do?
Well, there's no solution.
Well, you could work for this and work to impeach them and blah, blah, blah.
It's like, well, what can you answer?
You can't answer that in a political system.
All right.
If women are unfriendly towards other women who are more attractive and intelligent than themselves, more attractive women experience more aggression and sabotage from other women per research, how does the female status hierarchy work?
Is it self defeating or rewards mediocrity?
Well, I mean, if you've ever been a very productive person in a union shop, a male, then your productivity is viewed resentfully by the others.
Hey, slow down, man.
You're making us all look bad.
You know, that kind of stuff, right?
So, less competent people will generally have resentment towards more competent people.
And that resentment manifests in socialism, communism.
It's just resentment of the less competent towards the more competent as a whole, which is why nobody came to my rescue when I was being deplatformed because I'm very good at this.
And so people enjoyed not having me as a competitor.
So it's not just a male, female thing.
So if you're competent, you just need to get away from incompetent people, like just in general.
It's just, it's one of the biggest life advices that I can give.
If you are a competent person, if you're hardworking, intelligent, creative, you love what you do, then you just need to be around other people who are that way inclined.
You cannot sustain relationships in the long run with different levels of commitment and competence, and certainly different levels of virtue, because part of competence is just virtue, right?
If you say you're going to do something, you do it, or you say you're not.
If you are taking on a task and you're being paid for it, then you do as good a task as you possibly can.
I mean, a little example would be this podcast, right?
I'm trying to give hopefully brilliant answers.
Honestly, that's my goal, right?
And my goal is to give fantastic answers.
To questions, and nobody's paying me for this, right?
I mean, obviously, freedomain.com slash donate.
You know, I always expect a donation from people who's when I put huge amounts of intellectual effort and energy and 40 years of experience into answering a question in a practical, digestible format.
Generally, I would expect people to toss me a donation.
Very few people do, but that's just part of the sort of selfishness of the modern world and so on.
So, as far as the hierarchy goes, this is why more attractive women tend to hang out with more attractive women because.
Who wants to spend your life surrounded by resentment?
This is why I could never work in a union shop.
Who wants to spend their life surrounded by resentment, undermining, and so on?
So people only undermine you if they're less competent than you.
This is why rich people tend to spend time around other rich people rather than poor people.
I mean, obviously, they have some more stuff in common, but what they mostly have in common is intelligence, self restraint, and competence, and usually higher IQ.
You know, you can't be in a choir that allows bad singers.
And expect to be successful.
So, you need to relentlessly, like relentlessly and fiercely sort out incompetent or underperforming people, depressed people, resentful people, the losers and the bottom feeders and the hell dwellers and so on.
Like, you can try and help them if you want, and, you know, maybe you'll help one or two, but, you know, this is a pretty sad life to try and drag people from the water who keep running back into the water.
So, what you want to do is relentlessly sort out.
Everyone in your life, so that you end up with a matching level of confidence and competence and achievements as a whole.
I mean, if you can be around more high achieving people, so much the better, but you have to view them as a virtue and a value, not as, you know, whatever group that you're going to resent.
So the only way you can succeed in life is to ditch the sad sacks, the brokies, the losers.
I mean, sorry, like I hate to be blunt, but you have to.
If you want to succeed, if you just want to.
Get caught in this riptide, you want to get caught in this quicksand, you can sink down with them and wallow in the sadness, the loneliness, the depression, the anxiety, the hostility, the, I mean, just the trash, right?
I mean, so I've obviously done my best to try and help people as a whole, but not have them in my life.
I'm surrounded by competent people for the most part, right?
So, yeah.
All right.
When does patience stop being a virtue?
Patience stops being a virtue when you get irritated.
And then you need to deal with your irritation.
Your irritation is probably telling you that you're being exploited.
Irritation and anger are there to tell you that people are lying to you.
And so if somebody says, hey, man, I'll pay you back that thousand bucks I borrowed.
I'm sorry I'm late, but I'll get it to you next week, right?
Okay, well, whatever.
You're probably not too bothered by it unless you desperately need the money.
But if it's been a month or two or three, Then, of course, you're going to get impatient.
Why?
Because the person's lying to you.
Impatience, anger, irritation are there to tell you that you're being lied to, most fundamentally.
If somebody says, oh, hey, man, I'm sorry I embarrassed you at the party you threw.
I'm sorry I got so drunk, it'll never happen again.
Okay, well, I mean, I think second chances are fine.
But if the person keeps getting drunk and they say, hey, man, I'm never going to do it again, oh, I've got to stop drinking, they're just lying to you.
And so patience turns to anger when you get that you're being lied to and you should confront people about that and so on.
All right.
You seem to say the poor lack empathy towards the rich with their wealth tax in New York, California, but the rich are funded.
This communism for 100 years, the Ford Foundation, Hewlett Foundation, Soros, Hearst Foundation, Bill Gates Foundation, and many more.
The rich are evil.
Oh, I mean, I don't know that they're a good rich, they're a bad rich, and so on.
I think Elon Musk is a pretty good guy as a whole.
I would not put Bill Gates or Sam Altman into that category.
The rich have to be involved in the political process because they're outvoted by the poor, and the poor will vote to take away the property of the rich, right?
The poor vote to take the property of the rich because it's easier than earning it themselves.
And then everybody ends up poor.
So the idea that wealthy people should not get involved in politics and should not try to sort things out.
I mean, one of the things the rich do is they will support the welfare state because it's less chaotic than having armed robbers come into their mansions, right?
So you can have a structured redistribution of wealth or a structured forced transfer of wealth.
So the rich pay their taxes, the taxes go to the poor, and then the poor don't invade the private estates of the rich.
So, you just, it's protection money.
You're paying the rich to pay protection money to the poor so the poor don't kill them.
And that's just a sad thing.
And that's because the education hasn't taught the poor that the rich create jobs, a smart intelligence, why they have so many cool technologies and cool things and so on, right?
So, when is it okay to seek revenge?
Asks Paul.
If you are rude to a waiter, is he justified in spitting on your food?
No.
I'm not a big revenge guy, although I generally will not resist the urge to put a poke in where I can.
Right.
So there are people who've done me great wrongs in the past.
And if they come up, I will put a ding in, but I don't seek out revenge.
I mean, I'm not as far as the, you know, if you're going to go seek revenge, make sure to dig two graves.
No, revenge is fine.
I just would rather create new things and take vengeance on past wrongs, if that makes sense.
You know, like a songwriter, right?
If you're a songwriter, you're going to get ripped off.
I mean, you're just going to get stolen from, you're going to get exploited.
And this just seems to be the music industry is one of the.
I occasionally think it's good that God didn't give me a better singing voice because I love to sing.
I love music and so on.
I wrote some songs and tried to learn a bunch of instruments and all of that.
And I am very happy that there was no success for me in that area.
And that's very, very good because the, I mean, my God, I mean, who wouldn't like to sing as well as, say, Justin Bieber?
But look what happened to Justin Bieber when he got handed over to the functional equivalent of endless B Diddy parties and they seemed to take his soul and.
Wreck his spine.
It's just horrendous.
So, if you're a songwriter, you're going to get ripped off.
And maybe what you do is you go and spend five years in lawsuits, right?
There was a terrible one for the band Men at Work.
I think the song was down under, and it was some someone said, Hey, it sounds just like the Kookaburra song.
And someone had bought the rights of the Kookaburra song and sued them.
It went on for years.
And I think one of the band members ended up killing himself.
Not entirely over this, but it was sort of related.
So, for me, if If I was a songwriter and someone kind of ripped off one of my songs or whatever it is, it's like, okay, well, I can spend five years and a quarter million dollars in lawsuit land, or I can just go write a bunch of new songs.
And, you know, I'm not saying this right or wrong.
You know, you need the vengeful people maybe for some blowback or payback in society to keep people in line.
I don't know.
I'm just not one of those kinds of people.
I would much rather people take my ideas and spread them without attribution if that helps the idea spread.
So if people say, oh, this is peaceful parenting is a really cool idea, and they say all of this, that, and the other about peaceful parenting, great, that spreads the ideas.
If people say, well, peaceful parenting, it's by this guy, Stefan Molyneux, don't ever look at what people write about him because I would much rather the idea spread without attribution.
Then, if it's difficult to spread my ideas with attribution, as it is, then strip my name from the spread of the ideas and just spread the ideas themselves.
What matters is the ideas get spread, not any personal attribution towards me.
All right.
Ditch Bad People For Good00:09:58
Why do high IQ folks tend to be the most gullible and authoritarian, as Eric Hoffer described?
The tyranny of the intellectuals.
So, power exists in the world, and high IQ people are drawn to it.
Because, as Plato said, the price of not being involved in politics is being ruled by your inferiors.
And so, high IQ folks, of course, there's a bit of this sort of demonic temptation that, hey, man, we're going to create this system and you're going to be in charge of it and you're going to get your way and you're going to impose your will on others.
I mean, that's it.
I'll give you the whole world if you worship me, says Satan to Jesus in the wilderness.
And so, a lot of intellectuals, of course, are like, wow, okay, so if we have this polyp bureau that runs the entire economy, either they'll listen to me or I'll be on the polyp bureau and have all this power.
And then, of course, you create all this power, and evil sociopaths end up in control of it, and then they kill people.
So there is that temptation for sure.
But when you see the quality of the average intellectuals these days, of the average politicians these days, trying to get involved in politics is a big temptation.
When is it okay to lie?
Well, I think in inconsequential matters, whatever, you know, if somebody says to me, How are you doing? and I have a bad headache or I'm tired or whatever, I just say, I'm fine.
I'm good.
You know, that kind of stuff, right?
So, when it doesn't matter, or when there are no long term consequences, right?
So, the example of I've given of a, you know, you're an EMT, you arrive at a horrible car crash, the driver is dying, and his wife and kids are dead in the back, and he says, My wife and kids okay, and he's dying.
You say, Yeah, they're fine, they're being taken care of, they're totally fine, right?
You don't say, Oh, yeah, you killed them, right?
I mean, you caused the crash, or you're in a crash, they're dead in the back.
Like, you just give him some comfort in this last minute or two of life, so.
Because there's no long term negative consequences to that.
It's not like he's going to then go out and drive badly again, right?
So, where does free will end and determinism begin?
So, I've got a three part series on free will.
You can get it at fdrpodcast.com.
Free will is our capacity to compare proposed actions to ideal standards, but you have to keep that habit.
Like when I was a kid, I spoke German and I did not keep it up.
And now, I don't speak really much German at all.
And I didn't keep it up.
Right.
So, free will is a muscle.
You need to have, you need to develop and retain the observing ego.
The observing ego is like the third eye.
You could say it's an inner dialogue where you say, here are my ideals, right?
What would Jesus do, or UPB, or non aggression principle, or, you know, the virtues of honesty and moral courage?
Here's where my ideals are.
Here's the right thing to do.
How am I doing relative to the right thing?
Right.
So, you're constantly comparing.
Not to others, but to moral standards.
And free will is our capacity to compare proposed actions to ideal standards, ourselves or others, but it's a muscle that needs to be retained and maintained.
You know, when you were a little kid, like most little kids, you were probably enthusiastic and ran everywhere.
And I like to walk, right?
So it's one of the reasons I don't do much camera anymore, I like to walk.
It helps me think.
It helps me, I think, get better answers and so on.
So, like all muscles, the observing ego, the ability to compare proposed actions to ideal standards, it is a muscle that needs to be developed, maintained, and hopefully strengthened.
And you just get into the habit of it, right?
So, you can, if you let that muscle, Atrophy, then everything just becomes reaction and determinism.
And then what happens is you don't compare proposed actions to ideal standards.
What you do is act in a hedonistic way and then make justifications up for it afterwards, right?
You act to conform and comply and then you say, oh, but I'm conforming and complying because it's the right thing to do.
And blah, blah, blah.
People did this under COVID, right?
So you either have ideal standards, compare your actions to them and try to close that gap where reasonable, or you just do whatever the heck you want and then justify it afterwards, right?
What would you tell a successful 38 year old man who can't find a good wife?
Man makes 400K a year, lives in a nice townhouse in a nice town in the USA, works out four days a week.
Well, he is not sorting by virtue, right?
So I said earlier that you have to ditch the incompetent and spend your life with competent people.
And I mean, I say this my wife is staggeringly competent.
She can keep like 25 balls all in the air and spin plates and Does it with grace, and I mean, she's incredibly competent.
And it's the same thing with virtue.
So, if he can't find a good wife, it's because he's surrounded by non virtuous people.
Hopefully, not you, right?
But 38 years old, never kissed a girl.
So, if he can't find a good wife, it means he's not surrounded by good people because good people know good people and bad people know bad people.
And bad people don't know good people and good people don't know bad people.
And so, if he can't find a good wife, it's because his friends, his family, and so on, he is not embedded in a society of good people.
And he needs to go and find good people, and that means ditching the bad people.
You can't have moral friends if you have immoral friends, right?
Like bad money drives out good, immoral people drive out good people.
You have to ditch.
This is the leaving the zombie city to the village of competence across the desert.
You've got to cross the desert.
You've got to be alone for a time.
You've got to ditch the bad people in order to get the good people.
So, all right, what should I read to know more about theater?
Are there non acting theater degrees?
I'm sure there's history of theater and so on.
But you can crack books, of course.
You want to read.
Respect for Acting by Uta, someone or other.
You want to read the Stanislavski method, and you can read, of course, biographies of famous actors.
I've read biographies of a bunch of actors and all of that, so that would be helpful.
Do you think AI slop on social media will ruin the addictive hooks integrated into social media in a way that makes people minimize their social media use?
Yeah, it's possible.
X has been pretty brutal for me over the past sort of four to six months.
My reach has diminished considerably.
But I like to think it's because they're fighting bots, and maybe a lot of my reach formerly was just a bunch of bots and so on.
So I don't know.
Yeah, it's going to be interesting.
I think that social media is going to have to have a bot rating, like a likelihood of AI rating.
It's going to be tricky, but I think that if you're truly original, I think you'll AI slop will get rid of the unoriginal people more obviously.
So, how can one who finds himself drowning in apathy learn to feel joy again?
So, apathy fundamentally is the belief.
That virtue has no traction, that virtue cannot win, and the world is completely run by evildoers, and to be good is to be doomed.
And so that's what bad people want you to feel that you're doomed, that virtue will never work, that you can't ever be a consistently good person without being destroyed, and so on, right?
And look, I get it.
I mean, it can be risky to be good.
That's why nature has given us such happiness at being good, because it's tough to be good, for sure.
So the opposite of apathy is anger.
You know, fuck evil.
Fuck evildoers.
Fuck evildoers.
Get out there and do some good.
What are your thoughts on the Tesla humanoid robots?
It's totally fine.
I think they're great.
It's like the power loom of the modern world.
Question Was there ever a time in the history of the universe where nothing existed?
I mean, without wanting to nag you or neg you on nothing existing.
Contradiction, man.
No, I mean, I don't think so.
I don't think so.
Matter cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be transformed into energy and back.
So you cannot unatom an atom.
You can transform it.
You can blow it up and move it around or whatever.
So I accept the continuity of matter and energy.
So I don't think there was a time in the history of the universe where nothing existed.
Why do you only have one kid?
Perfectly fine, fair, and valid question because that's all nature allowed us.
We tried for more.
How can men best help in the emotional regulation of their women?
Listen, but don't take it too seriously.
Right.
So absolutely listen, let her discharge, but don't take it as if your girlfriend or wife is panicking.
Absolutely listen and don't take it too seriously for the most part.
How do we culturally stop social media or gaming addiction?
We have to make the world a little bit safer for honesty.
Right now, I mean, I can be honest and, you know, kind of survive in a way, but that's not the case for a lot of people because if you're honest, the left will just work to get you fired and so on.
And maybe the right too, a little bit now as well, sort of blowback.
So men have looked at society and said, oh, men and women.
Have looked at society and said that telling the truth is too dangerous.
And therefore, they look for fantasy honor rather than real honor.
What are some dating tips you have for unattractive people?
You need to develop some other talent, some other ability.
I mean, do this either way, but you need to develop some other talent or ability because you have a deficiency.
So, learn how to tell good stories, do your personal grooming as best you can, get great haircuts, learn how to tell.
Funny jokes, learn how to be funny, just work to develop those kinds of things.
Be well read, be up on current affairs, have interesting things to say, and that's the best you can do.
All right.
I think that's it for these questions.
I really do appreciate people giving me these questions.
I hope that they're of value to you, freedomain.com/slash/donate.