0:03 - Introduction to Relationships and Philosophy
7:25 - Real-Time Relationships Explained
15:27 - The Importance of Vulnerability
25:44 - Embracing Pain as Healthy
35:33 - Navigating Offense in Relationships
46:53 - Equal Contributions in Partnerships
49:28 - The Role of a Homemaker
51:01 - The Pressure of Age and Family Planning
54:30 - Dreaming Big vs. Reality
58:35 - Understanding Reciprocity in Relationships
59:37 - Probing for Narcissism
1:02:18 - Testing Virtue in Relationships
1:10:36 - Early Signs of Consideration
1:18:51 - The Impact of Attractiveness on Relationships
1:23:17 - The Importance of External Standards of Virtue
1:27:19 - Love as the Ultimate Preference
In this in-depth interview, Keith Knight engages with Stefan Molyneux, a well-known commentator and author of "Real-Time Relationships, The Logic of Love." The conversation delves into Molyneux's insights on relationships, the importance of reciprocal dynamics, the significance of honesty, and the underlying philosophy that drives human interactions, both romantically and socially.
Molyneux begins by explaining the concept of "real-time relationships," emphasizing the necessity of expressing feelings and thoughts in the moment. Drawing on personal experiences from his childhood and adult life, he describes witnessing conflict in relationships and grappling with the question of why people often choose to argue rather than communicate effectively. He reflects on his own marriage of over 23 years, where conflicts are infrequent and approached with resolution in mind. Molyneux argues that successful conflict resolution fosters deeper trust and intimacy, positioning honesty as the key virtue in any relationship.
Knight raises the potential downsides of real-time honesty in emotional conversations, citing the complexity that can come from expressing feelings right after a conflict arises. Molyneux acknowledges this concern, encouraging practice and patience when transitioning into more candid communication styles. He suggests that while it may be difficult to articulate feelings in the moment, the long-term benefits of vulnerability and openness in relationships outweigh the challenges.
The dialogue shifts to the notion of reciprocity in relationships, with Molyneux asserting that mutual benefit underpins all healthy interactions. He draws parallels between personal relationships and others, such as business or friendship, to highlight the inherent necessity of balanced give-and-take. Molyneux argues against the idea of self-sacrifice without a reciprocal return, asserting that relationships should not be based on power dynamics but rather on shared value and moral admiration. Love is framed as a preference based on virtue, suggesting that self-improvement and mutual growth should characterize romantic bonds.
As the conversation progresses, Knight shares personal anecdotes about navigating complex feelings following perceived offenses in dating scenarios, which leads Molyneux to emphasize the importance of assessing virtue early in relationships. He describes the need to gauge if a potential partner contributes positively to one’s life and is willing to consider the other's needs, underscoring that love should flourish alongside personal growth.
Molyneux also discusses the role of pain and suffering, arguing against the left’s utopian vision of a pain-free existence. He posits that embracing pain as a part of life can lead to personal development and better relationships, pushing back against societal tendencies to avoid discomfort. Throughout the conversation, he highlights the necessity of confronting personal and relational challenges rather than projecting past traumas onto current experiences.
The interview wraps up with a compelling discussion on the necessity of virtue in relationships. Molyneux insists that virtue must be recognized through external, universal measures, and partners should encourage each other's moral growth. Love, according to Molyneux, is about preferring to face life's challenges together while fostering an environment for ongoing personal development.
Overall, the discussion provides listeners with practical insights into building healthier relationships marked by open communication, courage in vulnerability, and a shared commitment to mutual moral values. Molyneux’s philosophical approach to love and relationships invites deeper contemplation on the foundational elements necessary for long-lasting connections.
[0:00] Welcome to Keith Knight, Don't Tread on Anyone and the Libertarian Institute.
[0:03] Today, I'm joined by Stefan Molyneux, host of freedomain.com and the author of Real-Time Relationships, The Logic of Love. Mr. Molyneux, where is the best place for people to get a copy of this book?
[0:16] Well, it's available on my website, and thanks for having me back on. Nice to chat again. It's available on my website at freedomain.com slash books.
[0:25] Sounds good. Links to that will be in the description below. On page 270, you say, the reason I call it the RTR, real-time relationship, is because it is all about telling other people in the moment how you feel. Why is this a productive approach to relationships?
[0:44] Yeah, it's interesting. When I grew up in England, I lived in this apartment building, sort of a low-rise apartment building, with sort of paper-thin walls. And I suppose it was not the most elevated circles in society as a whole. And I just remember hearing, you know, couples fighting and yelling and not getting along and escalating and all that. And I just remember thinking very clearly at the time, like, what's so tough about just being nice and getting along? Like, what's the big barrier? Why would people fight? Why would they yell at each other when they claim to love each other? Why would they have all of these problems? And of course, my mother was a single mother. She went through these relationships and there were conflicts and problems. And I just saw a lot of fighting and it was kind of hard to comprehend like why people would get involved in these negative relationships, why they would claim to love each other, but yell at each other and call each other names. And, and then of course, uh, I, um, uh, had my share of relationships in my teens and twenties. And then I got married in my early thirties and I've been, you know, very happily married for now over 23 years. And I.
[2:00] Never raised our voices at each other. We've never called each other names.
[2:04] And we maybe have a conflict that's not particularly major once a year. And we actually end up closer because of that, because every successfully resolved conflict gets you closer. Like if you're in a business relationship and every time you successfully negotiate, you end up closer and there's more trust. Like trust is not the avoidance of conflict, but the resolution of conflict. So in the general approach that I've had in life, it's not particularly mine, this comes out of Socrates or it comes out of Freud, which is sort of the two things that you need in life to be happy is happy or positive or good or moral relationships and a productive, meaningful occupation of some kind. Now, those are the two things, I won't guarantee you, but it's pretty close to the best shot that you have. Now, of course, libertarianism focuses on political freedom and economics and some philosophical foundations to the non-aggression principle, but it's not common for there to be a lot of libertarian focus on relationships. In other words, libertarianism focuses on, sorry, this is a long sideways answer, but libertarianism focuses on political freedom, economic freedom, economic productivity, which is great. But that's the work side or the labor side aspect, meaningful occupation side aspect to life. And that's important and it's good and it's important to focus on.
[3:31] However, we spend a lot of our time not working. We spend a lot of our time trying to love and be loved. And of course, when we retire, like I never used to think about this, I'm kind of in my late fifties now. So not that I'm on the verge of retiring, but you think about those, you know, 65 to 80 or 85, there's 15 or 20 years that it's really going to be about your relationships, not so much your heavy productive labor side of things. And so there's a lot of time that we spend loving or trying to love or trying to be loved. And how can we make that as happy and productive as possible as well? What's the other half of life as a whole. And, of course, the other thing is that I wanted to write this book because we have... Well, we have very little control over our political freedoms. You know, we can go out and march, we can sign petitions, we can make cases, we can vote, we can do all of these things.
[4:29] And on the voluntarist or an anarcho-capitalist side, those are not always considered the most productive uses of our time. We have more control over our occupation, but then again, our occupation, we may have government licenses or requirements which could change. And we saw over the course of the pandemic, how licensing boards could be used to suppress dissent. So even in our productive arenas, the laws can change, the licensing can change, the taxes can change. I mean, think of all the people who poured all their energies into creating productive businesses or environments, and then the pandemic came along, it kind of nuked that, or maybe the tariff thing comes along, maybe nukes that. And so we have less control over our productive labor, and we have very little control over our political freedoms. But what we do and say in our relationships is 100% under our control. And I've always been kind of drawn to working on philosophical problems where you have more control rather than less control. Because otherwise, your will is just kind of like, it's like this sea that's going up against this pier that you just can't take down. You just keep slamming yourself into things that you really can't affect. And so philosophically speaking, I've always been drawn to.
[5:52] Where you can bring the most free will and choice into your moral decisions, into your philosophical decisions. And in love, in relationships, that is key. You control what comes out of your mouth. You control who you date. You control who you make your boyfriend or girlfriend or who you get engaged to, who you marry. You control who you have children with. These are all things under your control, and they have, I mean, arguably the most impact on your happiness. You know, jobs come and go, careers come and go, friendships come and go, your parents age out and die when you're in middle age usually, but your romantic relationship should last your whole life. And so why not bring philosophy to bear on that? so the question of when you feel something right this is the why i call it real-time relationships so this comes out of sort of a instrumentation or computer software where real-time is when you get feedback on what's happening in the moment right you you hit the gas on your car your speedometer goes up you hit the brakes it goes down that's real-time feedback as opposed to you know at the end of every month, you may, if you, I don't know, have some sort of internet income, you can see it all in real time, but you're usually at the end of the month or the end of the year, you sort of tote it up and tally it up and all of that kind of stuff.
[7:19] So real-time relationships is we all have stuff that's going on in our heart, minds, and souls in the moment.
[7:25] And the more honest we can be about what we're actually feeling and thinking, the better our relationships tend to be. Honesty is the most foundational virtue in life as a whole. If you can't be honest, you really can't be much of anything because the only alternative to honesty is manipulation. So if you're in a conflict with someone, let's just say husband and wife, and you're the husband and your wife says something cutting, you have a choice. You can say.
[7:57] It actually upsets me, that hurts me. I'm not saying you're right or wrong. I'm just saying my direct experience of that is kind of negative. It hurts me, it upsets me, it makes me a little angry. Without jumping to conclusions, like just a statement, an honest statement of what you feel in the moment. That's key. Because most times people avoid the vulnerability of saying what they feel in the moment, because what they do is they become morally judgmental. They counter attack. Uh, you know, that was incredibly rude and disrespectful and how dare you. And, and they kind of escalate that way. And where do you really take those kinds of relationships? The real honest thing, if somebody says something that cuts you is to say, Ooh, that, uh, that did kind of hurt without jumping to a conclusion that there's a moral dimension to it. Uh, and that level, it's funny because me as a moral philosopher saying, don't bring the moral judgment into your personal relationships.
[8:57] Um, you have to be honest going back and forth first and give people real-time feedback on how their actions are affecting you without going to the sort of hard shelled, granite hearted defense of moral judgment. You know, you're, you're, you're bad, you're selfish, you're wrong, you're mean, you're disrespectful. I mean, all of these things are like hurling thunderbolts from a high tower, it doesn't actually get you to connect with the other person and their effects on you.
[9:28] Is there a potential downside in telling people how you feel in the moment? For example, if I'm upset with someone and I tell them how I feel in the moment, I might not have the perspective that I would have after 24 hours, but then again, bringing it up a day later is kind of difficult. It's like, oh, you've been thinking about this. That was a small deal for me. And then that could also be difficult to deal with. Could you list the costs and benefits of dealing with things in the moment as opposed to postponing them and coming up with, hey, here are the 10 things that pissed me off in the last week. Let's sit down and go over these.
[10:07] Right. So we are generally not raised or trained to talk about our feelings in the moment. I mean, there's lots of exceptions to this. I'm not trying to paint with too broad a brush, but we are generally not raised to talk about our genuine honest feelings in the moment. And so when we try to move to that approach where we're trying to talk about our genuine in.
[10:36] Experiences or feelings in the moment, it's going to take some practice. It's like learning a new language. In general, it is better to try and solve conflicts with honest vulnerability in the moment rather than pile things up later because it's, you know, what we feel is quite complicated, right? So if you had a very aggressive mother, say you're a guy, you had a very aggressive mother growing up, then when a woman, like say a girlfriend or a female friend, if a woman gets angry at you, that's going to have echoes from the past, right? You're going to feel like you're sort of back with your mom, sort of finger wagging and getting mad at you and so on, which is unfair, right? So the people who maybe harmed us in the past should not dominate our interactions in the present. Because if you had a mean mom or a mom with a mean streak, bringing that to your girlfriend is unfair because then you're saying to your girlfriend you're kind of like my mom and that is taking the past and projecting it onto the present or taking someone who did you wrong where you had an involuntary relationship but we don't choose who we get born to we don't choose our parents and you're taking an involuntary relationship and moving it into a voluntary relationship and you're taking someone who did you harm perhaps for years.
[11:58] And taking it to someone who is just angry at you in the moment for some reason. And then what people do is they get triggered, right? So if you had a mean mom and then you've got a girlfriend who's angry at you, then you often are quite desperate to shut your girlfriend's anger down because it's kind of triggering you, right? But the honest statement is not, well, you're being irrationally angry at me and that's wrong and unfair and bad and you're mean, right? just because you want to shut her down because she's kind of reminding you of maybe your mean mom. The honest statement is to say, I'm upset at you being angry with me, right? That's the honest statement. I'm upset with you being angry with me. It's very hard to sit in that statement. It's very hard. It's easy once you get the hang of it, but it's very hard to sit in that and say, I'm upset because you're angry at me.
[12:55] Without coming to some kind of conclusion, right? Most people can't sip at the honesty of their genuine experience. They have to come, or they desperately want to come to some kind of conclusion, which is, I'm upset because you're mad at me. Therefore, what? Therefore, you should stop being angry at me. Therefore, you're being unjust. Therefore, you're just like my mother. We want to come to a conclusion which gives us control over the other person, And rather than just giving the statement, which is the most honest statement, which is I'm upset because you're mad at me. That doesn't mean you have to change. That doesn't mean you have to alter anything. That doesn't mean that you're being unfair or unjust or wrong or disrespectful or rude. I'm just, I'm upset. I feel this. I feel, I feel unease. I feel nervous. I feel tense because you're angry at me without coming to a conclusion. Because a conclusion is the end of exploration and tends to shut down the conversation. And so saying the minimum that is valid, right? The minimum that is true and valid. The conclusions are very rarely valid, especially when we're triggered, right? And so saying the bare minimum of what you know to be true, right? You got angry at me, you're angry at me. I'm upset about that.
[14:17] Staying with what is the most true gives you a chance to explore. And it's usually worth saying, and I don't know whether it's fair or right or good or bad. I'm just telling you my experience. Then you have a place where you can explore things like what's the causality and so on, right? But the moment you come to a conclusion, and the conclusion is usually a morally judgmental conclusion. How dare you raise your voice at me? How dare you be angry at me? How dare you be upset with me? Well, that's a counterattack, so to speak. And that tends to escalate. And I think in relationships, especially with someone you really care about, what you want to do is explore and say, I wonder what the causality is, right? So I'm upset that you're mad at me. I don't know why. I don't know if it's fair or not. I'm just telling you my experience. That's a place that tends to de-escalate. And that's a place that tends to have people be able to explore what's going on, which is usually quite complicated at the roots and get to the heart of the matter. But the moment we kind of slam this portcullis down of moral judgment, it's almost like a guillotine. It just, it ends the interaction and generally tends to escalate.
[15:27] I love that this is very productive advice because I have known, you know, not only have I done it myself, I've spoken with a lot of people who've said, oh, this person does these things that upset me. Oh, how long has this been going on? Well, I've known them for probably six years and that's just who they are. So a lot of times in relationships, we don't tell people how we feel in the moment. And so I have not exactly embraced this just because I came across the book recently, but I think that'll be very interesting to see how people respond to how I feel in the moment. On page 144, you said relationships are fundamentally defined by reciprocity. Now, this is different from what I have heard previously, which is always be a good person, always be nice, and even when people are bad to you, it's only because they don't have the information, they don't have the opportunities you've had, so just be some version of just be yourself, always be the person that you'd like to brag about being. You say relationships are fundamentally defined by reciprocity. Why is that?
[16:37] Because we don't like exploitation. And why would personal relationships be carved out of every other relationship that we have? So I went for lunch with my wife yesterday. We had a lovely lunch out. And at the restaurant, it was a reciprocal relationship between us and the restaurant, right? The restaurant brought us food and we paid for the food. So that's to, you know, we, we enjoyed the lunch more than the money we spent on the lunch and the restaurant preferred our money to the food, right? Because they were willing to do that sort of voluntary trade. So that's, that's, um.
[17:15] Voluntary trade to mutual benefit. This is the conversation that you and I are having. We are voluntarily interacting in this kind of way, and we both expect to gain something out of the conversation. It's win-win, and of course, hopefully the conversation helps other people, and we do all of that kind of goodness. When you go to your work, you know, trading your hours for a handful of dimes, as Jim Morrison famously snarled, but when you go to your work, you say, I prefer, you know, so you make 50 bucks an hour, 20 bucks an hour. I prefer the money to the time and the employer prefers the time to the money because it's a voluntary exchange to mutual benefit.
[17:58] So we have all of this in our, we have this with our friendships. So you go to see a movie and they want your money, uh, more than they, um, uh, they want your money and you want the movie so it's a voluntary trade for mutual benefit so relationships um why would you i'm a big one for universality which is don't carve out opposite exceptions to general principles as much as we humanly can and this is i love science i love physics and so on and physics doesn't have opposite land right or at least when it did it wasn't really physics it was more like mysticism So physics didn't say, yeah, yeah, yeah, everything falls. Well, clouds, dust, birds, bees, helium balloons. It didn't just carve out these magical exceptions. It sought to understand the general principles that explained both the things that fall to the ground, which is the majority of things, and the things that float or go upwards, which is a minority of things. So air displacement lighter than air and so on. So all of the work that birds use to keep themselves up in the air despite the presence of gravity. So I like general principles. And if we're going to say...
[19:14] All of our adult relationships are based upon trade to mutual advantage, except carve out, right, carve out this little hole in the space-time fabric of trade for love. And I don't see that. I mean, can you imagine, can you imagine if you were dating some girl and she said, yeah, I don't, I don't like being here. I don't like you. You smell funny. Your nose hairs are constantly poking my eyeballs when you kiss my nose. Um, I find you boring, but I've decided that, that without me, you'd just be an incel. You'd be lonely. So I'm just sacrificing my happiness and, and pleasure. And I'm just babysitting you so that you don't get lonely. I mean, would anybody want that? Uh, who wasn't, you know, I don't know, just some bizarre psycho. Would anyone want a woman or a man to be with you against their own happiness and self-interest? No, I want my wife, I want my daughter, I want my friends to be better off because I'm in their life. I want them to be happier. I want them to be looking forward to seeing me, to having productive conversations. And they want the same from me. So, yes, relationships are transactional. Yeah.
[20:35] They are, I'm a better person because my wife is in my life. I think she's a better person because I'm in her life. And why would that not be under the general umbrella of adult relationships that are trade for mutual advantage? Now, what you're trading in those relationships is really important. Like that's, that's the key. So yes, there's trade to mutual advantage and so on. But you know, you could argue that, uh, I mean, though it would be immoral and illegal, you know, hiring a hitman would be traded for mutual advantage, but it's not particularly, I mean, that would be evil, right? To hire someone, to kill someone.
[21:08] So what you're trading in relationships is really important. Obviously, with a restaurant, it's food for money and we get all of that. But in a romantic relationship, what we're trading is moral admiration. I think that's the real key to it, because I've got this definition of love, which is in the book and in my shows as a whole, which is love is our involuntary response to virtue if we're virtuous like if we are virtuous and we have virtue as an ideal and we're striving to achieve it then the people who are manifesting the virtues that we aim for we will admire them and the values that we manifest that they're aiming for they will admire us for that and then the um the trade is moral admiration sort of mutual moral admiration. And that is a beautiful thing to be a part of. And that's, I like it. So love is an involuntary response to virtue, if we're virtuous, right? If we're evil, then we have a negative response to virtue because I hate it, loathe it, want it to tear it down. If we are neutral, we might have an ambivalent relationship. But if we are moral, and I mean, I know that's a pretty expensive word that's not really being defined at the moment, but you know, courage, integrity, a virtue as a whole. So if we are moral and striving for greater morality.
[22:34] Then being in a relationship with someone who mirrors those virtues and encourages those virtues, and we are further encouraged by their achievement of those virtues, they're further encouraged by our achievement of those virtues, we have an involuntary response. I don't like the idea that love can just be wills. You know, you just will, just grit your teeth, and I'm going to make myself love this person. I think that's really easy to exploit. And real-time relationships really is about trying to i mean be honest in relationships but it's one of the best protectors against being exploited so if you're vulnerable and you say to someone that hurts me or that upsets me then that doesn't mean that they can't do it or mustn't do it or anything you have a conversation about that but if they if they can find a way to correct you or have a way that is going to guide you in a better direction without triggering or aggression or being like your meanie mom, then they'll work around that, and they'll generally try to find a way to correct you that is not going to be difficult, unpleasant, painful, or harmful. However, if you say to someone, when you yell at me, I really do get quite nervous and upset, and they say, hmm, so I can get that person to do what I want if I just yell.
[23:51] That's a different matter. So vulnerability feels, you know, scary and dangerous sometimes in the moment. But if you are vulnerable and you say, this is really upsetting to me when you do it, and then the person says, well, listen, I still need to be able to correct you from time to time, just as you need to be able to correct me. But I don't want to do it in a way that is really difficult and harmful and painful for you.
[24:13] So let me find a way that we can either get to the root so you're less triggered or I can find a way to be less aggressive in my sort of corrections and so on. So we can have a gentle conversation and encouraging conversation. So somebody who's willing to work with your emotional makeup so that they are not silenced, but also they still can have a way to correct you without triggering you, that's a positive thing. However, if you are vulnerable and you say to someone, hey man, when you yell, it really does, I feel this real strong urge to conform or comply based upon my own history and so on. And they basically say, well, that's great. So now I know how to get you to do what I want. Well, that's important information to have. When you're vulnerable, do people try and work with your vulnerabilities or do they double down and use your vulnerabilities in order to try and, control you or bully you in a way. Vulnerability is short-term pain, but long-term gain in that the other person can work around it and you can deal with the source of your discomfort. And if the person doubles down and tries to use your discomfort in order to control you.
[25:24] Then you gain really important information about their capacity for empathy or their desire to bully. And that may not be the most productive situation to stay in in the long run. Obviously, you try and work with it and so on, but if they just keep doubling down. Vulnerability is really powerful that way because it really does reveal who has your good interests at heart.
[25:44] On page 85, you said, it could be said that the entire point of this book is to convince you that you need to feel pain. Pain is healthy. Pain is good. Pain is essential to the healthy functioning of mind and body. Why is pain something healthy that we should acknowledge as opposed to something that hurts and we should avoid.
[26:07] I mean, that sounds close to masochism. I'm pretty sure I didn't quite mean it that way. So if you look at this as a little bit more on the left, right?
[26:21] The left has this utopianism of a pain-free existence. And I don't want to get all political here, although that is a little bit of my gravity. Well, I hit that way sometimes.
[26:32] But the left has this utopian view that life should be without suffering. And the problem of course with that is that there is always going to be suffering involved in life and if you aim for no suffering as your ideal you're just going to be constantly upset and frustrated by the suffering that does occur in life so there are some people who don't save for their retirement and they're broke when they get old and that's suffering and the left is like well we got to give them old age pensions they can't be broke when they're old it's like okay but then we all we've done is change the suffering to unfunded liabilities and national debts and things which can't be sustained and so on and we've discouraged people from saving anyway because they hand their what the money is taken by the government and then spend there's really nothing for their retirement anyway or we can say um well uh single mothers are are broken and and sad and upset and so on and we can say well well then they need all this government money and and and food stamps and and subsidized housing and free daycare and all of that it's like so reduce the suffering reduce the suffering and it just changes the suffering to well now it becomes somewhat profitable to have kids outside of wedlock and and so you end up with more more suffering and particularly for uh for the children.
[27:53] So we could do endless examples of this. And the left in general gets very frustrated and angry if people ask them for sacrifices. It comes out of the boomer thing, like the boomer thing is, well, you guys voted for all these massive national debts and you guys voted for all these unfunded liabilities. And it's unfair for you who were the richest generation in human history to then demand that the next generation or two pay for your retirement because there's no money in the retirement plan. You can't ask the boomers for sacrifice because the boomers grew up in a, there should be no suffering in the world. And if there are poor people, let's just print money and hurl money at them. And if there are single mothers, let's just throw resources at them. And if there are people who are sick, we'll just give them free healthcare because no one should suffer. And this is one of the reasons why they tend to be quite censorious because we all have to learn how to manage and deal with suffering in this life. Everything, you know, everyone we love is going to die on us or we're going to die on them unless there's some mutual fiery flame out in some 18-wheeler.
[28:57] Our parents who we love and care about are going to age and die. Our children may get ill. We will certainly get ill as we age in one way or another. And there's just a certain amount of suffering in life.
[29:10] If you have a utopianism that life should be without suffering, then you tend to throw all of your morals away in the pursuit of the hedonism of no suffering. So there shouldn't be poor people, right? And poor people throughout human history was pretty much everyone. But of course, in particular, in the 1950s and the 1960s, when the poverty rates were being reduced by 1% every year, then the relatively few poor people who remained were like this giant thumb in the eye eyesore for society and it's like wow we gotta get rid of that that room those remaining poor people so we'll just because we can't handle the discomfort of seeing the poor people or the personal work of going in and actually trying to help uh the poor people i mean one of the great cures for the welfare state is to spend time among actually poor people trying to help them and if some you can't help but a lot of them you can't sort of like like drug addicts so because there was an avoidance of suffering and a suffering was like fundamentally offensive and this utopianism of no suffering it means that well there are poor people so we just have to redistribute well redistribution is the wrong phrase because it's not like money wasn't distributed like a poker hand in cards or anything like that. It generally is earned and created in a free market.
[30:34] But they threw away property rights because they couldn't stand to see suffering. And they threw away.
[30:41] The value of currency, right? Because they wanted to be able to print money and hand it out to the poor so they could feel better. So they could, so this, this, and this is the focus on pathological altruism or the appearance of good rather than actually being good, which is, well, I want to give money to the poor because that makes me feel good. Does it actually help the poor? Does it actually improve things for them? And is it a sustainable economic model? And is it moral? Well, all of that was thrown aside because of this hedonism of, and it has a lot to do with drugs and the sort of sexual promiscuity and so on that was occurring in a lot of places in the 60s. Now, on the right, though, because it comes out of Christianity to a large degree.
[31:28] Well, there's a lot of suffering in life. It's a veil of tears, right? We are separated from God. We are separated from Jesus. We are separated in virtue. We may have original sin. And so suffering is the natural part of human life. And so on the left, if someone is upset, right, you've seen that sort of the triggered feminist face, you know, if somebody's upset, well, that's really bad because you shouldn't upset people.
[31:59] And the sort of the hate speech argument, which is generally just speech the left hates, they call hate speech, because people shouldn't be upset. And if you upset someone, then you're wrong because people shouldn't be upset. And therefore, you need to be prevented from upsetting people, which, you know, hello, welcome to Mighty Platforming, right? So you need to not upset people because the ideal is to not be upset. However, all progress, all progress, and it's funny because they call themselves progressive, which means they want progress. But all progress is upsetting. I mean, it wasn't like the people who ran the horse in buggy companies were real thrilled about the arrival of the car, right? Or, you know, the people who made rotary dial telephones, I guess you can ask your parents about that. They weren't happy when the cordless or the cell phone or whatever came along. And so all progress is upsetting to some people. You know, if there was a cure for cancer tomorrow, there'd be a bunch of cancer treatment centers that would have to find a whole new business model and would be used to a whole bunch of money that wasn't coming their way anymore. That would be.
[33:11] Upsetting for them. So all progress is going to upset people. And so the fact that there's this sort of don't upset people. And if you do upset people, you're a bad person. Well, the person who's upset should be honest and say, well, what you're saying is upsetting to me. That doesn't mean you shouldn't say it. Right. But that moral conclusion, I'm upset. Therefore, you should not be allowed to say what you're saying, that's a moral judgment that comes out of a genuine emotional experience. So we do have to embrace the fact that we're going to get upset in life. Life can, you know, it has smooth sailing times. It has rough storm times. It has times where things, everything's going your way. And then it has times when nothing's going your way. There are times when you're well, there are times when you're sick, there are times when you're happy, there are times when you're down. And that's, that's a whole spectrum. That's a 360 of human experience, but demanding that other people make sure that you're not upset and you have no power to control your own emotions is the perspective of a baby. I mean, that's how babies are. If you spend time around babies, they get upset, they cry, and they can't fix their own emotions.
[34:26] Because they need food, they need cuddles, they need shelter, they need a temperature change, they need their diaper changed, something, right? And they can't do it themselves. So the idea that my suffering is an absolute demand upon other people to fix it is a very, I wouldn't say it's immature because babies aren't immature, they're just babies, but it's a very early perspective. The mature perspective is I'm responsible for my own emotions. If other people upset me, maybe they're mean and maybe I shouldn't spend much time with them or any, or maybe I'm triggered and me being triggered is not the fault of the other person. That's my issue to deal with. That's my suffering to work through so that I am less triggered because I've integrated those parts of myself and I'm not just mad and upset because someone said something that was upsetting to me. So accepting that there's suffering means that you can actually have moral principles rather than just, well, if I'm upset, somebody's wrong and needs to be stopped. And that's not good for society as a whole.
[35:30] This totally gets into the reciprocity aspect of things.
[35:34] I can't tell you how many people have said to me that it's really important that I walk on eggshells around other people to make sure that I don't evoke a feeling of pain or inferiority or insult other people. Meanwhile, the very person saying these words to me offends me all the time. I want to give you three examples of things that have offended me recently.
[35:58] Wait, not just in this show, but as a whole. I'll work harder.
[36:06] And I want you to help me analyze either what I could say to this person. You could just pick one of these three. I've seen a number of people constantly having double standards for people based on race. Almost every race can embrace pride, but whites should be ashamed. And the only time they're generalized is in a negative light. Other races can be positively generalized. And a lot of people are celebrating the fact that whites are becoming a minority by 20-something, 2060 or something. That one pisses me off. The other one, whenever someone justifies a war that involved military conscription, what I see is them celebrating the potential for me to be conscripted, to start taking orders from politicians and potentially get my limbs blown off for what is most likely either a lie or a war that they provoked. The third example was I was on a date with a woman and I have worked so hard to save up money to buy this house. It's just been ridiculous. And as I was telling her about it, I thought it was surprising. Someone my age owned their own house and I told her about it. She goes, how big is it? I walked her through the square footage and everything and she goes, that's small. And I literally froze and I said, It sounded like she said, that's small. What? And she said, that's small.
[37:29] And I just completely avoided the pain that I felt in that moment. So bashing whites, conscripting me and laughing about it and telling me the house that I've worked so hard for is small. Which of those could we analyze so you could help me more productively walk through that pain I experienced?
[37:48] Much though I embrace and enjoy the volatility. The other two topics, let's go with the date one because it's more personal.
[37:53] Okay.
[37:54] And that is sort of a relationship issue. Okay. Okay, so you say with great pride about the house that you've got, and she says, what is the square footage? I just want to know if it's like 5,000 square foot, and she says that's small as opposed to 250 square foot.
[38:13] 1,600.
[38:14] That's good. Yeah, 1,600. That's good. That's good. That's twice the size of the condo my wife and I first lived in, so that's a good sized house. All right. How many bedrooms? How many bedrooms?
[38:26] Three.
[38:27] Three. Okay. Okay. And how old was the woman on the date?
[38:33] She was 32. I'm 29.
[38:36] Okay. Okay. Well, congratulations on the house. That's very impressive. And certainly you got home. You got house ownership before I did in life. So good for you. Congratulations. Okay. So she says that's a small house. And your emotional experience of that was what?
[39:02] Literally, all I pictured was me getting up at 3.50 a.m., walking to the Walmart because I didn't have a car, and working in zero-degree weather. The freezer is between zero and negative 10 degrees. I just literally got that image in my mind, and I go, wow, this cannot last. And literally, it was one of those instances where I just completely lost interest. It wasn't like, oh, I really like her, but now I have to fight this urge. I literally just had no attraction to her just after that. So this was a classic example of that hurts. Forget about it. This is over. It really didn't even occur to me to bring it up to her in the moment. And this was like three months ago. I should have been old enough to say how I felt in the moment or at least give a little pushback, but I'm trying to gain emotional maturity. That's why I read your books.
[39:59] Right, right. Okay, so let me ask you this. What attracted you to her to the point where you were on a date?
[40:14] She was extremely good looking. I called her and we got along. She seemed pretty impressed that I had gotten two books published. And she had seen that I have a channel with a great number of videos on pretty complex topics. So that was a little flattering. But the first time I met her, this was our second date where she mentions the house thing. Immediately when I saw her, she seemed so open, so personable, so optimistic, so energetic that she was just very inspiring to be around. So that's why this was a bit of a curveball.
[40:52] And what was her level? We don't have to get into details because, of course, she's not part of the convo. But in general, Keith, what was her level of success or achievement compared to yours?
[41:07] Not anything out of the ordinary. I'd been to her place, nothing to write home about, significantly smaller than mine, of course. And it looked like Hurricane Katrina just went through the place. But that should have been a bigger red flag for me.
[41:23] That's what she liked to be messy.
[41:24] Yeah.
[41:25] Hmm. And again, without getting into a lot of details, do you know anything about her childhood and her upbringing?
[41:35] Yeah. From what she said, it was a very controlling environment. Stopped talking to her parents for a while and a lot of spanking, which in retrospect, the parents have apologized for. So it didn't seem like it was exactly the Brady Bunch.
[42:01] Okay so you were signaling your competence and fitness as a partner i mean i'm not saying that this is all you've been doing i mean you're genuinely proud of of the house and of course you should be but um you are or you were to some degree signaling your your fitness as a partner you're showing off your desk that maybe if she becomes your wife the mother of your children and so on, that she would be, here's my cave, so to speak, look, it's warm and dry, and I've ridded of orcs, or something like that, right? So, her response of it's small...
[42:44] Probably came from, just the theorizing here, right? But it probably came from her feeling that she could not measure up to what you were offering. And therefore, she needed to diminish what you were offering in order to feel that there was some kind of equality or compatibility, if that makes sense. In other words, if you're saying, look, I got this channel, I've got this job, I've, uh, I've, I've got this house, you know, I'm not even 30 yet. And, and, uh, I'm very successful and so on. Then if she is, that's why I asked if she was successful or not, if she's not successful, then she has the choice. She can either just say, well, you know, you're, you know, I'm here and you're here. Like I'm, you're further up than I am. And we're not really compatible that way. Or she has to bring you down. It's called leveling, right? She may have to bring you down to her level because she feels less secure relative to your success. I mean, let me ask you this. Have you, I'm sure you have, I mean, we all have, but have you been, say, have you been on dates with women where their success is significantly greater than yours or not? I mean, that's a little less common at your age, but have you, have you been on those dates?
[44:08] Yes.
[44:09] Okay. And, and how did they go?
[44:12] I thought they went pretty well. I did have a feeling of inferiority during it, though, that it was definitely something hard to get over, wonder, hey, am I really bringing enough to the table? And this woman was very successful because her dad started a business. She was an administrative assistant. I had seen where their family lives, and it's just this mansion in Arizona. So that was a little difficult. she seemed very nice and down to earth it wasn't like the she got tons of money and was looking for someone with even higher income it was like money's not an issue for me i want a nice guy that's what she was saying that's what she was signaling and i think i have every reason to believe her her and i got along very well but.
[44:59] It didn't emerge into a relationship is that right.
[45:02] Yeah, no.
[45:03] And why do you think that didn't happen?
[45:06] She was not confident on whether or not she wanted to have kids. She was like, maybe, probably, eventually. That's not two. That's just not something I'm interested in now.
[45:20] Yeah, because then you get involved, you get enmeshed, and you don't even know if you want the kids' stuff. That's very essential. So it wasn't so much that she herself had earned her success, but she got a little bit silver platter to her from daddy, right?
[45:32] Yeah.
[45:33] Okay. So it's kind of like if there's a business partnership, so let's say you and I decided to go into business and you had a million dollars to invest and I had $10,000 to invest. I mean, that would not be an equal partnership, right? You'd obviously have to have like 99% of the company, right? So if I wanted half the company, I'd have to find some way in which I could contribute as much as you're contributing.
[46:06] And there's two ways to equalize contributions, right? You can either up your contribution or you can downgrade the other person's contribution. Right. So if I were able to convince you that we didn't need a million dollars, right, that did you keep your million dollars? You know, we'll just each put in five grand and it'll be fine. Then so in a sense, I'm diminishing the value of your million dollars relative to the investment. Right. So I'm taking your value down so that we can be more equal. Right. Because I don't have a million dollars. I have my five grand. You have your million dollars. And so in order for me to end up in an equal share of the company, I either have to come up with a million dollars, which I'm not going to be able to do, or maybe I can put in massive amounts of sweat equity or something like that.
[46:53] Or, you know, you only have to work 10 hours a week. I'll work 80 hours a week. You know, whatever. We could come up with something where I'm making up for my lack of capital. Or I can just say, we don't need your million dollars. All we need is five grand a piece and we're good to go. And then we can get 50. I can get 50% of the company. Does that sort of make sense?
[47:12] Yes. I get that disparity in the compensation attempt.
[47:17] So with this woman, my guess is, did she want to have kids? The woman who said your house was small?
[47:25] Yes.
[47:26] Okay. But she was a slob.
[47:30] Gosh, it was unreal. And as I'm walking around her house, I'm waiting for the explanation. Oh, sorry, I didn't clean up. Or, hey, I'm moving. This is really terrible. I didn't even get an explanation, an attempt to, you know, explain it away. It was just like, yeah, this is how I live.
[47:47] Right. So if she were to become your wife and the mother of your children, that's a household you'd live in.
[47:56] Unfortunately.
[47:57] Well, I mean, so she's not a good homemaker, right? So you know how it works in generally in male-female relationships, or at least how it traditionally used to work, which is the man goes out and provides the income and what does the woman provide in return?
[48:15] Keeps the house clean.
[48:16] Raises the kids, does the charity, keeps the community going, keeps the relationships going, remembers who has a baptism, remember who has a birthday, you know, all of that kind of stuff, which men are like, I don't know, is it right in front of me? Does it flash lights? Does it make beeping sounds? Then I'm interested, right? So the man provides the income, the woman provides the home, the child raising, and the community to a large degree. Now, she could not provide the running of the household.
[48:50] She had not a great childhood herself, and it doesn't sound like she'd done a lot of work to therapy or whatever it is to deal with that kind of stuff. So she may not be the ideal mother for your children if she's got a lot of unresolved issues. She also, if she has fractious relationships with her own parents, then she can't provide the grandparents. And the grandparents, of course, if they're reasonably healthy and productive and affectionate and so on, then grandparents are a very big benefit for your family as a whole, right? They come in with a lot of experience.
[49:28] They may have some monetary resources. I hate to say babysit because it's like it's family, but they can take the pressure off your wife. If you have a bunch of kids under the age of five or six and you have grandparents next door, that's a huge benefit because otherwise she's kind of isolated with the kids and then kind of, you know, comes onto your full needy adult tentacles. And I'm not complaining about that. I mean, I was, I've been a stay at home dad for almost 17 years. And, you know, when my daughter was little and my wife is away or working or something, you know, like you, you need a little bit of adult time after that. So there's sort of a variety of reasons.
[50:04] And she's older, right? So she was 32, right? So she's older, which means that she's got a much shorter runway. Let's say you want to have three kids while 35 is geriatric pregnancy already. And the risk factors go up from there. You know, I'm sure you remember my famous Taylor Swift tweet, you know, honorably voted the worst tweet in history, pointing out the basic biological facts that by the time a woman is 30, 90% of her eggs are gone. So, you know, facts, see, facts are offensive. I need to be, you stop, stop at the facts.
[50:39] So, now of course people make bad decisions because they avoid facts and then the facts make them feel bad about their bad decisions. So the facts have to be further avoided and that's how the cycle of depopulation continues, at least birth rates. So my guess is that in looking at your level of success and your youth, I mean, not only, are you younger, but you're a male, so you have a longer runway for having kids anyway.
[51:02] If she's 32, let's say you start dating, let's say you date for a year, maybe you get engaged for a year, you get married, she's already 34, when you start having kids, if you want three or more kids, she's going to be in her late 30s, which is starting to get real dicey, so she probably was feeling that she did not have much to bring to the table relative to you. And so how does she, how does she level up? How does she not feel that? How does she not say to you, listen, I mean, you're a young guy, you got it really going on. Um, you've seen my place. I live like I'm, I have 12 poltergeists in my, in my living room.
[51:44] And, you know, I just, I don't, I don't feel that I can match your level of drive and success. And I just, I don't think it's, I don't think it's right. I mean, that would be a pretty mature person and a pretty mature person would probably already be married if because the other question is you know early 30s and you say very very good looking um why why single i mean don't get me my wife and i married in our early 30s so i'm not saying it's a hard and fast rule but you know it's kind of uh it's kind of a hard it's it's a it's a reasonable rule of thumb though not an absolute statement of course in any way so if you said okay so let's try this you play the date you play the date and i'll i'll play you in the real-time relationships thing right so.
[52:36] You said you don't have a roommate you and you own the house how big is the house.
[52:41] Uh it's a 1600 square feet three bedrooms.
[52:47] That's small.
[52:48] Huh. Small. That's interesting. It's interesting that we have such a different experience of my house. I'm proud of what I've gotten a hold of. And it's not a mansion, but I don't really want a mansion. I'm just a guy. And, you know, so I, when you say it's small, it kind of like oh i mean obviously i want to impress you i want to be cool for you i want to you know razzle dazzle and wow you because i think you're very very cool and obviously very attractive and all of that so when you say it's small i have this i'm not saying there's anything wrong with what you said but i have this like oh this kind of lurch down in my heart like suddenly, is it small but no it's not quite that it's not quite that no because i can't really believe that it's just small. But if you think that it's small, that's like a negative experience for me. And I'm not criticizing you. I'm not saying you did anything wrong. I just, that's like, oof. Do you know what I mean?
[53:53] I'm sorry. I just, I dream really big.
[53:59] Well, you have nothing to apologize for, honestly. I mean, I want you to be honest. You have nothing to apologize for. I mean, the fact that I'm a little hurt and upset by the small comment. I mean, couldn't you just talk about my penis instead? That'd be different because then I could just say it's cold out or something like that. I mean, so no, you have nothing to apologize for. Okay. So, so tell me, tell me what you mean when you say you dream big. Well, what does that mean relative to the house that I have? I'm trying to understand where you're coming from.
[54:30] And I appreciate the conversation. I'm really curious about that.
[54:34] I dream big. Big house, big family, lots of travel, lots of properties, ownership in different companies. And when you have a house that represents who you are, that's where you live, that's the primary asset which I can associate with you in my mind. When I see that that's, I mean, that's small, that you and I aren't compatible, you're kind of a small dreamer, and I'm a big dreamer.
[55:01] I appreciate what you're saying there, and I'll tell you my sort of response. Maybe this is defensive, I don't know. But... It's kind of like, it's the dream versus the reality distinction.
[55:19] Oh, totally.
[55:20] Right? So you dream big, but I have a house. So in your dream, who provides, like, tell me what is your, like, what size of penis, sorry, what size of house would I have had to say for you to say, that's big or that's a good size?
[55:44] Uh three-story house 3,400.
[55:47] Square feet okay three-story house 3,400 square feet okay have you ever dated a guy with a house like that who's in his 20s.
[55:56] 20s no i usually go for older guys but you're an exception.
[55:59] Okay so in your scenario of the dream and listen, I have no problem with dreaming big, I have no problem with daydreams, but in your scenario of the dream, who provides the house?
[56:19] The man.
[56:20] The man. So, you want to date a man who has a big house, and I assume not that he's like paying some giant mortgage and has to hitchhike everywhere because he can't afford a car. So what's the sort of rough income of the man that you want to date who has a 3,400 square foot house? Like have you, I'm sure most people think about this from time to time. So what income would you be looking for?
[56:58] We had this discussion on, trying to remember. She said, well, because of the gender pay gap, men get paid more than women. The average male income is like $150,000 a year. So I'd like a guy who earns like $300,000. I'm barely exaggerating when I say that. That was almost verbatim.
[57:21] So your perception is that the average salary for a man is $150,000 a year?
[57:30] Well, yeah, because I've met so many guys and that's what they tell me. So that's the average, more or less.
[57:37] I mean, it's not. Just, you know, statistically, the average male income is like 40, 50K a year. So you're off by a factor of three. Now, again, I'm just telling you the sort facts. You know, I personally wouldn't ascribe it to a gender pay gap. For a variety of reasons, we can talk about that perhaps another time. It's not just a men are mean and just want to underpay women. Okay, so you want a man who's going to bring $300,000 a year to the table, right?
[58:09] Yes.
[58:10] Okay, and what does he get for that? Like, he has to bring himself, let's say me, right? So he has to bring himself and $300,000 a year, which is like the top 3% or 4% of male earners, right? So he has to bring that. And what does he get for that? What do you bring for that?
[58:36] All right, so we could pause the role play here. Basically, what you're trying to get at is ask her specifics about how she came to the concept of how does she differentiate big house from small house? What is the guy getting in exchange? Is she involved in a reciprocity of relationships? How much thought has she put into this? Or is this just a knee-jerk reaction? She saw the great Gatsby and wanted it herself. Those are good bullet points for me to have. Asking specifics, how did you come to that conclusion? Checking reciprocity and seeing how much thought they put into it. Any other bullet the points you could add if someone mentioned something that evokes a feeling of insecurity in you?
[59:20] Well, I mean, you need to find out if she's evoking insecurity in you because she herself is feeling insecure and is trying to, to level, right?
[59:30] Yeah.
[59:30] So, and the reason why the question of what does the man get for his $300,000 is you're probing for narcissism.
[59:37] You're probing for vanity, right? So if the man has to be the man plus $300,000 and she can just be herself, then she's saying that a man relative to her is minus $300,000 a year. I mean, because he has, like, so they're both bringing themselves, their identity, and so on, their personalities, their habits. They're both bringing those to the table. But the man also has to bring $300,000 a year.
[1:00:14] Now, this is not to talk about this woman, right? Because I don't know her from Adam. This is just to talk about the general principles of this. You are scanning for exploitation. You're scanning for predation, right? So, if the woman says, the man needs to bring $300,000 a year, I just need to bring myself, then she's saying, the man has to pay to be with me.
[1:00:45] Now, if she says, look, I mean, he brings this amount of money to the table, I mean.
[1:00:52] I'll cook, I'll clean, I'll raise his children, I'll run his whole household, I'll make his life perfect, I'll, you know, work morning, noon, and night to make his life a joyride of infinite blah, blah, blah. Okay, well then, she's working for that, and she's, you know, that's a mutually beneficial arrangement, right? But if she's just like, well, he brings 300,000, I just bring me, then that's a different matter. That is more vanity and potential narcissism. I've just used this, of course, in an amateur fashion, but you are looking for realism. You are looking for negotiation, right? Because she's negotiating saying, you got to bring 300 grand a year. And then somebody who's bringing 300 grand a year has every right to say, I mean, I didn't get the 300 grand a year, the guy would say, by being bad at negotiating, right? And so it's funny because women want men who are very successful and good at negotiating and then they don't want the man to negotiate with them and it's like, it's not the type of man that you're going to get. So you're looking for reciprocity right and through saying that's upsetting to me tell me what you mean then you get to the thoughts behind the statement.
[1:02:19] And what you definitely want to avoid is a woman who believes she has value just by existing. And again, I'm not talking about this woman in particular, but what it fundamentally comes down to is if you were to say, can you imagine having a male friend who would pay all your bills? And she would say, well, no, I mean, a male friend wouldn't pay all of my bills. That would be kind of weird, right? It's like, okay, so it has to be a romantic relationship for the man to pay the bills. Well, what differentiates a romantic relationship from a friendship? Sex. That's all it is. I'm not saying that the only thing that's in a romantic relationship is sex, but it's founded on sex because that's the one thing you can't do with other people. That's the one foundational differentiator, right? I mean, if you're in a relationship, you're a man, you can have female acquaintances, you can have female friends, you can go for lunch with a colleague who's a female, you can do, I'm not sure many people are doing that these days, but you can do all of those things. But the one thing you can't do is have sex with someone else. So if the woman says, basically what she's saying is, you bring X amount of money to the table, and I'll have sex with you. That's not good that's like no woman with any i think foundational self-esteem.
[1:03:48] Would contemplate engaging in that kind of transaction and so.
[1:03:56] That's when you cut cut out right so sorry i'm not be very clear when you keith shut down in that date and you're just like i lost all interest it all completely evaporated right It's worth keeping going.
[1:04:12] Exactly.
[1:04:12] It's worth because you need to find out. What her nature is you need to find out what her compassion is you need to find like you know when she was saying and again i know it's a role play so we can't ascribe it to her in particular but when she's saying like uh well i guess i just dream big and it's like you know that's like somebody saying well i i have a really great girlfriend although she's inflatable and it's like you you know if she's inflatable she's not not a great girlfriend so uh it's dreaming yeah fine, dream away, right? But if it doesn't manifest in reality, that's what they call a fantasy, right? That's like me saying, you know, I'm going to be a ballet dancer, Keith. That's my next step in life is to be a ballet dancer. I mean, I've never been able to touch my toes. I have the flexibility of your average slab of sidewalk and I'm 58 years old. But man, let me tell you, right coming down the pipe is me being a ballet dancer. That's not a dream. That's a fantasy. That's not going to happen. That's not going to come real. And especially when you have daydreams or fantasies that other people have to work like hell to provide. That's predatory.
[1:05:21] And it is the dangling of sexual access in return for money. And that's different from running the household, raising the kids, because then both people are working very, very hard. And so but but by shutting it down and just closing off your heart you are not getting to the root of what she's saying and you know of course if you get to the root of what she's saying and that's unappealing which i'm i'm sure it would be then the the reason why it's valuable to do that is then you need to go back in time and say okay if this is who she is how is it evident from the beginning right what were the red flags what was going on and i think i could be wrong of course but i would guess if i had to guess that it's the old sin called lust.
[1:06:14] She was pretty and she was sexy and you wanted to sleep with her and, it's nothing wrong with that it's why we're all here in the first place but but but uh you need to test for virtue before going down this road. And the reason for that is, I mean, it's better for you, better for your heart, better for your trust. And also, you know, when you're pushing 30, you don't have as much time as you think, right? Because... The good women tend to be be snapped up and stay snapped up right so like you sort of good moral loyal women willing to work hard and and support you and you be you support them in their endeavors and so on those women it's sort of like the used car market like everything that's on the used car market is kind of a lemon because if the car is is kind of if it's been used a lot but it's still a great car and and and it's bulletproof and doesn't break down it doesn't get sold right so sorry this is true for men as women so this is comparing both sexes to a used car but in general, you have to be efficient as efficient as possible in trying to find the love of your life because you're pushing 30 and the good women are being beamed up into marriages you know real quick real quick so how long did you know this woman before this deadly date.
[1:07:40] Um 10 days second date i bet i knew her for 10 days.
[1:07:47] Okay okay um but yes.
[1:07:51] Uh lust was uh the most likely explanation that i also ended up with.
[1:07:57] Well it's the same lust that gets you the house right so i'm not i'm not i'm not criticizing it i'm not saying this but in terms of efficiency right in terms of efficiency uh you need to start really testing for a virtue before you go down this road where you end up with this woman who's kind of putting you down for uh for having a house when she has a mere apartment that she rents it looks like a homeless encampment right so that's also a little tough to uh you know it's it's one thing if i don't know if peter teal says you're not particularly wealthy, that's one thing. But if the homeless guy says you're broke, that's a whole other thing. So yeah, looking for the lust. Lust is fine and it's great. There's nothing wrong with lust. It's a beautiful part of a healthy marriage, but testing for virtue is really important. And again, 10 days is not the end of the world, but it's really, really important to learn those lessons and go back. And if, you know, the real question is, why was the place such a mess? What's she saying there?
[1:09:12] I don't know. I'm not exactly sure. Doesn't have standards for herself, has standards for others. Didn't expect someone coming over or wanted to show the worst aspect of her to see if someone would stay.
[1:09:32] No, she's saying that she skates on looks. She doesn't have to have a tidy place because she's too pretty. So guys will just date her for her looks they don't care about the state of her place, and that's um that's the dream big kind of stuff uh and that's the i assume that's a certain amount of vanity so another.
[1:09:56] Likely explanation um you can i'm wondering what would be a good litmus test that you think would be to test someone's virtue early on. I'm thinking of this quote from page 147. Intimacy is driven by a delight in gaining knowledge. Intimacy is the natural process and result of pleasurable curiosity. I'm wondering if curiosity invoking intimacy leading to virtue, it would be your answer. What is a good way to test virtue early on?
[1:10:37] Hmm. So I think a good way to test for virtue early on is, does the woman, want to make your life better and easier from the beginning? I mean, I mentioned this story on my show. I'll just touch on it briefly here. When I was first getting to know the woman who became my wife, I said, oh, I have to, I was writing books at the time. And I said, oh, I have to interrupt my writing. I've got to head downtown to pick up some sandals. I got repaired, right? Because when you grow up poor, you just get everything repaired. You never buy anything new. It's just a fact. It's just a fact. So, and she said, oh, I'm going to be downtown this afternoon. I'll pick them up for you. I gotta tell you, man, I mean, modern women as a whole, how do I put this honestly? Not overly dedicated necessarily to making a man's life easier and better. And so, I mean, and just the fact that she was like, oh, go write, you know, your writing is great, go do your writing, it's like 10 minutes out of my way, I'm happy to pick them up for you, right? Now, I guess I was in my early thirties at that point. I'm not sure that I'd met a woman, before.
[1:12:01] Who would have said that? Because, you know, women have been so toxicified with this wage gap, exploitive, toxic masculinity, patriarchy stuff that they have become profoundly unhelpful and ungenerous because they've been sort of trained in viewing men as the enemies, or the exploiters and all of that. And, and therefore, you know, you get your own, you get your own sandals, right? I'm not going to be exploited by you patriarchs.
[1:12:28] And so the fact that she you know oh hey listen man i mean because this is the kind of thing that i would do if she had to pick up some sandals and i was going downtown anyway i'd be like yeah pick up your sandals for you so just this idea that she's um helpful or and it doesn't have to be obviously doesn't have to be picking up sandals can be any number of things say where do you want to go for dinner and say oh what what works best for you i mean um uh you know what do you like to eat and and sort of is it relatively close to you and all of that like is there a consideration for you early on and particularly if you're the guy who pays for the date right if you're the guy who pays for the date does she choose a really expensive restaurant and does she order an expensive thing it's like oh that's not great that's not great because it's not having consideration for your finances, right? Like I remember many years ago, I dated this woman, she was quite wealthy and we went to the, she wanted to eat at the top of the CN Tower in Toronto, which is this rotating restaurant. And I was like, okay.
[1:13:36] And I think I had a salad and a glass of water because she ordered lobster with a side of golden calf meat or something like that. It was just mental. I didn't even have enough money to pay for it. So I had to leave my wallet and come back later to pay for it. And, you know, I mean, she just was very wealthy and didn't really think about costs and all of that. But that's, you know, not necessarily, um... The kindest and most, uh, thoughtful, uh, thing. So yeah, is the woman, is the woman thoughtful? Uh, does she consider your side of things? Uh, does she want things to be easier for you?
[1:14:10] Um, in, in the dating scenario as a whole, is there anything that, that she could do that makes your life easier or better? So one of the typical things is you take the woman out for dinner and let's say she doesn't have a lot of money or whatever, it's fine. So you take the woman out for dinner and then she may offer to make you dinner right she may offer to you know here's a home-cooked meal and come on over and that kind of stuff right and that is sort of reciprocity well you paid for this meal and i will uh cook cook a meal or maybe the next meal she insists, on on paying and then you know you don't order anything too expensive just those little marks of sort of empathy and consideration is really important to look for. Or is she kind of like the queen on her throne, where you just have to sort of show obsequence and pay for things and arrange things and all of that? In other words, if you have to be in endless wooing mode, but she doesn't have to do anything in particular in return, that's probably not going to go too well. So those little things where she's thinking about what's best for you, she's thinking about what works for you. She's thinking about how she can make your life a little bit easier. Um, especially in the early dating, when you're probably the one asking and paying, uh, those little things, um, they, they mean a lot, right? Uh, and, um, it's the kind of thing where, you know, maybe you're on your second or third date and you mentioned something that you like and she just picks it up and brings it.
[1:15:38] You know, oh, I really like this Ethiopian coffee or whatever. And maybe there's a coffee place near her and she drops by and she gets you half a pound of the Ethiopian coffee, right? Just those little thoughtful things where she's like, okay, how can I make this person's life a little bit better? How can I make them a little bit happier? Do I note little things that they want and have those sort of thoughtful considerations and so on?
[1:15:57] Those kinds of things are really the foundation of somebody who's willing to think about what's best for you, as well as you thinking about what's best for them. That is really an unbeatable combo, but you have to be looking for that pretty early. The other thing, of course, is curiosity about your life, right? So you ask the woman a lot of questions. Does she ask you a lot of questions? Is she genuinely curious and open-minded and thoughtful about what you say? Does she remember things from one date to the next and so on? And does she have any particular thoughts about your life that might be helpful to you or anything like anything like that. Just looking for somebody who is going to provide value to you based upon their own desire to make someone who's in a relationship with them happier and better. And it doesn't sound like the your house is too small woman was particularly focused on that.
[1:16:54] Is this more or less the same advice you would give to women who are looking for a virtuous man?
[1:17:01] Yeah, I think so. I think for women... To look for a virtuous man means that, you know, women want to look good. And I love the fact that women look good, but with looking good, I was sort of trying to explain this to someone the other day. So this is my second round at it. So imagine if you as a man could never hide your wealth. Let's say that you were worth $5 million or something like that. And it was mandated through some gypsy curse or something. it was mandated that you had to show up in a Lamborghini. You had like full on Andrew Tate Bugatti style, right? You had to wear like three Rolexes. Um, you had to wear like crazy expensive clothing and you had to take a woman to dinner where it was like 500 bucks for dinner, right? And you know, bottle service or whatever it is, right? So if you as a man could not hide your wealth. That would have a pretty distortionary effect on your dating, right? Because you'd probably end up with some women who might be there, you know, for sort of resources and gold digger kind of stuff, right?
[1:18:14] So for women, the problem is attractive women can't really hide that they're attractive. You know, this sort of fantasy of like, well, she takes off her glasses and she lets her down and she goes from a four to a 10. It's like, that's not really a thing. Now, of course, women can dress up to be more attractive or less attractive and so on, right? I mean, in terms of like putting their TNA on a shelf or on display. But in general, a woman who's attractive can't hide it. A man who's attractive, a man who's wealthy can hide it. He can just dress in old clothes. He can show up in a beater.
[1:18:52] He can take you to McDonald's. he can hide the fact that he's wealthy and therefore can eliminate the potential for gold diggers to some degree. But a woman who's attractive has a tough time eliminating the men who are there for reasons of lust.
[1:19:10] And so how do you do that? Well, I mean, not dressing, you know, the sort of videos that this semi-creepy guy takes of the Manchester in nightlife you know the women who are just like boobs on a shelf and ass half hanging out their their shorts and so on so if a woman of course is dressing considerably for sex appeal that's like the man showing up in the bugatti and complaining about the gold diggers so a woman who dresses to uh to bring lust to a man and i'm not talking anything like you gotta be in a burka i'm not talking anything like that but don't dress to massively accentuate your attractive features as a woman. Of course, you want to stay healthy and relatively slender and exercise and all of that. And so she can do that. I think a woman who.
[1:20:00] Uh challenges a man in a fairly decent and good humid way because you know we all have our little piccadillos and vanities and all of that and a woman who is uh challenging a man but not in a hostile way can find out whether he can be contradicted can find out whether he can grow through being challenged that's a very good sign as a whole so don't don't be too agreeable but again don't be hostile or anything like that but um making jokes at the other person or something like that. Can see if the person has a sense of humor about themselves, which can be quite important in life. And just look for the general signs of integrity in the man, which is, I mean, all men and women with integrity have enemies. So you can ask about conflicts and so on. Look for individual thought. And the most important thing I think that women can look for and need to look for, this is true for men as well, going the other way, is it's impossible to be virtuous without reference to an external standard that is universal and objective?
[1:21:04] Right? So, I mean, that could come from religion. I think ideally, of course, it comes from moral philosophy, but does the man have external standards of virtue that are universal that he feels very strongly that he has to aim for? I mean, however much we reach them is somewhat variable, but to to aim for it so if he says so for instance you know like i i want to tell the truth like i'm really i really want to tell the truth and sometimes that's tough right so the woman can say well tell me about some times that have been tough where you tell the truth or whatever it is and it's like well you know maybe over covet i had some skepticism about the vaccines and i tried to bring this up with friends and family and i got you know kind of dumped on and then called a you know an anti-vaxxer who wants old women on ventilators or something like that right so Or, you know, at work, there was an issue where I thought that the salespeople were being a bit sketchy in what they were selling to the clients, and I tried bringing it up with them and, you know, got into trouble that way. Or, you know, so somebody who's willing to make some sacrifices for the sake of some kind of moral ideal is good because...
[1:22:16] If the person doesn't have an external standard of virtue that they want to conform to, they're going to just kind of be hedonists. They're going to just do what feels good in the moment. They're going to get along to go along and you won't have a particular person to love, right? So, we love the virtuous in each other, but the virtuous is not generated by each other. It's sort of like um you like being healthy but your health is not just generated by you it is you're healthy relative to some external standard of diet and exercise and whatever it is that you're doing and there has to be some external standard by which you're judged to be healthy you know if you're face down in a hospital bed being operated on for nine hours you're probably not in your peak level of health so it's the same thing if you're you know as we were kids and and you're in the playground and you're choosing everyone for the baseball team, well, you have some judgment about how good they are at baseball relative to some objective standard.
[1:23:17] Can they actually hit the ball? Can they catch? Can they throw? Do they understand the rules? And so on, right? So in order to be good at a sport, you have to have some objective measure by which, by this sort of money ball argument, has to be some objective measure by which you're good at the sport.
[1:23:32] And so if you're choosing someone for a sport, you want them to have some objective measure by which you can test or know whether they're good at the sport. And since virtue is really at the heart of love, if you want to love someone or be loved someone by someone, there has to be some objective standard by which you can tell whether they're virtuous or not. And it can't be, well, I just do what CNN tells me and hate Trump. That's not being virtuous or even if it's the other way around. But you want somebody who is going to have a standard of virtue that is independent of their own preferences and subjective feelings that they are willing to make sacrifices for, then you can grow together in virtue. And of course, you want to be one of those kinds of people as well. And so testing for what are their standards? What are their virtues? And there's nothing wrong with asking this early on, right? You want to look for evidence of these things for sure, but there's nothing wrong with, you know, what virtues do you pursue? I'll tell you about the virtues that i pursue and you know with varying degrees of success but what virtues do you pursue and how do you know their virtues and what do you judge them by and what does it cost you i mean there's nothing wrong with those questions because you know.
[1:24:47] And life is short, particularly the fertility window for men and women is short, right? Women got like 20 to 35 or 20 to 40, minus a couple of years of dating and getting to know people before you have kids with them. So it's a pretty short window. And especially now, women are graduating with degrees in their early mid-20s. They got a bunch of debt, which they then have to pay off, which further delays things and so on. And so the window for choosing a woman is not particularly long and you kind of have to be efficient, right? I mean, if you want somebody who's got experience with a particular computer system, you'll put that in the job requirements and you won't interview people who don't have that experience. And it's the same thing with pursuing women who, or men who want to manifest virtue. You put that in the job requirement, you know, and you don't even have to ask them. You can just say, you know, here are the virtues that I'm following. Here's the pluses I've got out of these virtues.
[1:25:47] There have been some real minuses too, and these are them, and, you know, I think it's worth it, but, you know, sometimes it can be a real challenge, and maybe she's got something similar that she wants to talk about, and then that's, I think you're a way to the races, but, you know, I talk about this in the book, like, trust is based upon consistency, and consistency is based on adherence to universal principles. Uh you know anyone can hit a hole in one in golf you know you just play long enough right but you don't bring someone on your golf team or your baseball team anyone can hit a home run you know, even a blind guy could hit a home run you know once in a you know 20 years or whatever but it's the consistency that matters and you can't have consistency without reference to external standards otherwise it's just sort of blind luck or chance.
[1:26:36] And so testing people to see whether they have any kind of universal standard that is, they are trying to hold themselves to is their only chance for consistent virtue and therefore people you can trust, people you can give your heart to, and they will take care of it rather than figure out how to work its levers to get resources from you to the tune of $300,000 a year. Anyway, just a little circle background there.
[1:27:05] Final question, page 149. You said, love is a statement I want. Please clarify what you mean by this.
[1:27:12] Yeah, I mean, love is the ultimate preference. Love is the ultimate preference.
[1:27:20] Love is, I mean, romantic love in particular, is saying, I want to spend the rest of my life with you. We're going to sleep next to each other. We're going to make love. We're going to have great conversations or even tough conversations. We are going to grow old together. We are going going to nurse each other through various ailments and illnesses. And it is a statement of ultimate preference. So what are you preferring? What is it that you want? It can't just be lust, because lust will burn out. And lust, excuse me, lust involves lying. Always. Right? So lust always involves lying. So for instance, if you had said to this woman, well, I don't really know about the quality of your character, and your place is a real pigsty, but damn, you're hot.
[1:28:09] I'm really just here for the flesh. I don't really get much of a sense of the quality of your character, but you look so good on my arm that everyone thinks I'm your security guard. So lust always involves lying, because you actually just want to sleep with the woman, but you don't tell her that, right? And lust burns out, right? Because you have to lie in order to exercise lust and you both have to lie she has to pretend that she's worth all that even though she's basically just offering sexual access and you have to pretend that she's a quality person even though she's you mostly just want to have sex so because it's founded on lying you get the inevitable resentment and blowback that comes from all of that which is you're basing things on a falsehood so it's going to collapse you know if you build a bridge uh based upon bad calculations the bridge is going to fall down and if you build a relationship based on just lust or lust within the confines of love and respect and mutual moral admiration is a beautiful thing so.
[1:29:10] Moral like moral admiration is something that is going to grow over the course of your life right and and in a monogamous relationship that lasts for 50 60 70 years it has to be based on something to grow because everything else falls apart. If you just based on less, well, We all get old and wrinkled and junky and ugly and whatever, I mean, relative to our youth, right? So that can't be what lasts. You can't base it on just materialism because there's diminishing returns for materialism, right? Your first $100,000 is a big deal. You know, going from 10 million to 10.1 million is not as big of a deal, right? So it is diminishing returns. So it can't be that.
[1:29:59] Um so it has to be based on something that is going to grow over the course of your life so that you end up even more in love when you're 80 than you were when you were 25 and that has to be, wisdom a moral virtue moral courage because that's the one thing that will grow if successfully maintained over the course of your life it can't be just health because health is going to diminish to some degree over time even if you stay relatively healthy you still can't do at 80 what you could do at 25, right? So love is our ultimate preference and desire for what? It has to be something that grows. It can't be just fertility because then, you know, you do the second wife's club and you just trade in your wife when she gets too old to have kids, right? And you just go for round two. It can't be for money because maybe then the woman finds some richer guy and then she just monkey branches to him. It has to be for something that is personal and that grows over the course of your life. And that has to be adherence and growth in moral wisdom and virtue. That is the ultimate preference. And you both end up as better people because of it. And your love will grow throughout the course of your life, just as your wisdom and virtue does.
[1:31:09] Thank you to everyone for watching Keith Knight. Don't tread on anyone in the Libertarian Institute. The book is Real-Time Relationships, The Logic of Love by Stefan Molyneux. Mr. Molyneux, thank you so much for your time.
[1:31:21] My absolute pleasure. I look forward to tomorrow.
Support the show, using a variety of donation methods
Support the show
