0:08 - Contractor Relationships
1:58 - The Great Gatsby Analysis
10:11 - Faith vs. Good Works
19:21 - Picky Eaters and Parenting
22:18 - Navigating New Relationships
27:20 - Confronting Toxic Family
29:37 - Religious In-Group Preferences
31:47 - Universal Basic Income Concerns
34:42 - Closing Thoughts and Farewell
In this episode, I delve into the complexities of maintaining professionalism while navigating personal relationships in a contracting environment. A listener shares their concern about the potential for romantic advances from female contractors during business engagements. I emphasize the importance of integrity, conveying that any potential romantic interest should not compromise professional ethics. A woman of true virtue will respect boundaries and not put you in an awkward position, thus allowing for authentic connections only after contracts have been fulfilled.
Shifting gears, I reflect on the timeless themes encapsulated in "The Great Gatsby." This literary exploration prompts a discourse on American ideals and the often unjust dichotomy between wealth acquired through virtuous trade versus that through illicit means. I critique the novel's portrayal of perspectives, arguing that it subtly encourages disdain for wealth while romanticizing the allure of characters that exhibit both admirable and woeful traits. The narrative cleverly utilizes aesthetic appeal to engage the reader with emotionally charged perspectives, which can overshadow rational analysis.
I then pivot to a philosophical inquiry about the significance of 'faith' versus 'good works' in defining virtue. Drawing a parallel with fitness, I illustrate that mere belief in being healthy is insufficient without the practice of healthy habits. Similarly, I propose that while faith can inspire good deeds, virtuous action must arise from a robust understanding of moral principles. This lays a foundation for discussing how people can achieve genuine virtue through consistent behavior informed by thoughtful reflection and guidance.
In addressing the issue of picky eaters, I articulate the importance of empathizing with a child’s feelings rather than labeling their behavior as fussy or picky. I assert that a child’s food preferences may genuinely stem from physical or emotional cues and should be approached with compassion rather than dismissal. Further exploring the intricacies of interpersonal dynamics, I respond to a listener's recounting of their social interactions with a recently single woman, advising them to be supportive while respecting her emotional space as she navigates her previous relationship.
This episode also touches on the experiences of confronting family dynamics and past traumas. I highlight the potential risks involved in addressing family issues openly, particularly in cases of significant neglect or abuse. I emphasize that any confrontation should be approached cautiously and preferably with the guidance of a therapist to ensure one's safety and emotional well-being.
Lastly, I tackle the metaphorical implications of religious in-group preferences and the irony therein, showcasing how some religious individuals may overlook or dismiss the suffering of others due to a flawed understanding of morality. Additionally, I explore the concept of universal basic income and its implications for societal control, drawing attention to the challenges of balancing individual agency against governmental oversight.
Through these diverse discussions, I weave together threads of philosophy, personal experience, and social commentary, inviting listeners to reflect deeply on their values, relationships, and the moral frameworks that guide their lives.
[0:00] Well, all righty, all righty. Hope you're doing well. Stefan Molyneux from Freedomain and questions from freedomain.locals.com.
[0:08] First off, a senior business partner and I are currently hiring contractors for our acquisition startup and scheduled an interview with a promising candidate next week. He gave me a heads up that it is common for female contractors to seek romantic relationships with clients, caution me to expect to face romantic interest from all of them and advise me to either not get romantically involved or wait until three months after concluding their contract before agreeing to a personal relationship. Any tips for addressing advances from a new contractor as the hiring client when both parties are currently single and aiming to found a family on a bedrock of virtue?
[0:44] Well, do you want to date these women? Right? Do you want to date these women? So a woman of integrity will not ask you to violate any foundational professional ethics in pursuit of a relationship, right? Because you want to have a woman with integrity and virtue and so on. So she's not going to put you in an awkward position, right? So if there's some interest in each other, then you have to wait until the contract is concluded and then you can be in contact with each other. But any woman who kind of pursues you in contradiction to basic professional ethics and best practices with regards to this stuff any woman who pursues you in this way or is too open and too forward against professional ethics will make a terrible wife and you should in terms of avoiding it.
[1:39] I'm very much a broken record right i mean if if someone wants to do something with me and i don't want to do it with them i'm just like oh i'm not available oh i can't i'm not busy and you know most reasonable people who aren't funny boiler stalkers will get the hint so you know just be unavailable and and uh and so on.
[1:58] All right, Stef, do you have any philosophical thoughts or analysis on the book, The Great Gatsby? Well, I mean, there's a reason why it's taught in schools, or I don't know if it still is, but it was for many, many years. I remember reading it when I was in grade nine or 10 or something like that. And it's very dense. It's very abstract. It is very sort of anti-Western. It's very anti-wealth and so on. And it doesn't differentiate between wealth that is acquired through trade and wealth that is acquired through criminality and that to me is far from ideal so you know and there's racial elements that are pretty pretty obvious and clear so it's it's put forward so the way that that propagandistic art generally works is you don't make good arguments, you simply attach perspectives you don't like to unpleasant or unappealing characters. And then you attach the perspectives that you do like to attractive and appealing characters.
[3:12] It's about as, you know, there's this old Simpsons clip where this guy is at a boat show, a bunch of guys at a boat show, and there's a very pretty girl who is showing off the boat and a man comes up and she says, he says, do you come with the boat? And she just giggles. And then the next man comes up and says, do you come with the boat? And she giggles. Like it's just as a repetitive thing, right? So, I mean, I think in general, obviously in general, we understand that people.
[3:43] That she doesn't come with the boat, right? We understand that she does not, does not come with the boat, right? And we also understand, obviously, that it's a very cheap marketing technique to have a pretty girl and a boat, right? So, it's like for beer, for beer commercials, right? It's all kind of ridiculous, right? Because they have all of these people with absolutely fantastic physiques trying to sell beer. Now, beer may have some burpy qualities, it may have some, dizzy qualities but one quality it does not have is providing regular beer consumers with a great physique it does not it you know makes beer guts and cellulites and all kinds of horrible carby sugary alcohol-y stuff so uh so so what's the great gatsby is all about is you have unappealing characters.
[4:43] And they have certain perspectives that don't really have anything to do with arguments or personality. So you just make the least pleasant or the most unpleasant personality say the thing that you don't like. And then you have the most appealing personality say the things that you do like. We've seen this a million times that the person who's restless and vainglorious and overly painted and overly made up and has ridiculous clothing and is is just has negative characteristics they spout off stuff that the writer doesn't like and then the warm-hearted pleasant characters spout off the stuff the writer does like it's not an argument at all it's just a form of slander it's a form of defamation against an argument to have an ugly person spout it in in a novel so it is fairly typical stuff that had been said i did find many years ago and so we born born ceaselessly back against the tide like this sort of rowboat thing going back guess born ceaselessly back into the past well that is a very powerful line and at some point i thought this was sort of.
[5:55] Psychological you know in that it's sort of about your sort of own your own your own life and your own history. Let me just get, I'm not doing the quote justice because it is really, really a lovely, a lovely line, a really lovely line. So the last line, yes, here we go. Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that's no matter. Tomorrow we will run fast to stretch out our arms farther. And then one fine morning, so we beat on, boats against the current, born back ceaselessly into the past. So this is not just about personal psychology, this is not just about the people in the book, this is about society as a whole.
[6:43] This is about society as a whole. So if you have a highly revered prophet or holy man, people will try to wedge their statements or have the holy man's statements reinforce what they want. So then it gets the additional credibility of being said by the holy man. And for arguments that they dislike, usually for emotional reasons or financial reasons or political reasons, arguments that they dislike, they will put into the devil character or the negative character or something like that. And so it's not arguments, but holiness that resolves the dispute sort of reason and evidence and facts and rhetoric. It is the holiness. And so you make characters attractive and you put your perspective into the mouths of those characters and people believe it. Why? Because the characters are attractive, right? And it is rare to have a good speech from a bad character, right?
[7:47] There was a line, I think, in Air Force One with Gary Oldman talking to the president, and he says, you go to war for 10 cents a gallon for the price of gasoline, and yet you call me the terrorist, right? So it is usually to, and I've really tried to do this in my own novels when I write evil characters or malevolent characters and so on. I really try to give them good arguments and perspectives that you can empathize with. Because otherwise you're just cheating, right? Otherwise you're just cheating. So when it comes to accepting arguments, we have these contradictions, right? So on the one side, we want to reproduce, which means we're drawn to attractive people. And so an artist who puts a particular perspective into the dialogue of an attractive person is at war with our reason, right? He's using our lust, our genes, our desire to reproduce and copy-paste our DNA. And so we nod along with the character, with the bad ideas, but the great face and figure because of genetics.
[8:59] And this is the general rule of modern art, that ugly people have ugly ideas and beautiful people have beautiful ideas. And this is a war of lust and biological aesthetics against reason and evidence. Because ugly people can have wonderful ideas and beautiful people can have absolutely appalling, wretched, and corrupt ideas, but you put bad ideas or your own preferred ideas into the mouths of beautiful people so that you trigger people's desire to reproduce and thus nod along, right? This is the old thing about, like, why are women into more than men, into, like, numerology and astrology and all other kinds of woo-woo nonsense, because men want to sleep with them and therefore don't want to contradict them, right? So bad ideas use beauty to reproduce, and this is the history of our species. And so, in the line from the Great Gatsby, we said, born ceaselessly back into the past, that is the past of how we made decisions, which was through aesthetics and lust rather than reason and philosophy. All right.
[10:11] Somebody says, at the risk of improperly using philosophical tools for a theological conversation, can you provide some insight as to why there's an emphasis on by faith alone versus good works as a prerequisite for virtue.
[10:25] As I understand it, we can only know what someone believes by observing what they do. And so one has no valid claim to virtue unless they have proof of behaving virtuously, earning that credibility and inspiring love in others, themselves likewise virtuous. Bonus points if you can incorporate a fitness analogy. Ah, yes, the bonus points. We do love them. All right.
[10:47] So faith alone versus good works, right? This is a distinction in men's theological systems, right? And to me, it is a very interesting set of ideas to unpack. And I think it has more to do with income than anything else.
[11:09] So, can you be saved by faith, right? Or do you have good works? Now, because I'm hungry for the points, in the fitness analogy, then this would be something like, if you believe fervently that you are fit, does that make you fit and healthy? Or do you have to practice fit and healthy habits in order to be right? So if I picture myself with V-shaped, wiper back, deltoids, triceps, biceps, and abs, if I really visualize that and I really have faith in that, does it change my body? Well, no. But on the other hand, how can I achieve those things if I do not visualize them ahead of time? In other words, is faith necessary but not sufficient?
[12:09] Is faith necessary, but not sufficient? Now, if a person, Bob, let's call him Bob, if Bob can do good without faith in God, right? If Bob can do good, can be good, can be virtuous, without faith in God, then the goal of virtue, which is a societal good, is achievable without faith. And this is the Dawkins argument the Dennett argument, the Harris argument, the Hitchens argument, that we can be perfectly good without God. So if you can be good, which is perceived of as a value and as a social good, let's say that thou shalt not steal, can you respect property rights without the biblical injunction thou shalt not steal? Well, UPB says that yes, you can and you should. It's universally preferable behavior to respect property rights because the opposite is impossible, both practically and because it results in insurmountable contradictions to say thou shalt steal.
[13:13] So, faith or good works? Now, I think for most religious people, the ideal would be faith that leads to good works. Faith that leads to good works. And they would also say that good works are not good without faith. Because belief in God is belief in morality, and you cannot be good without a belief in God, because God is the ultimate good. God is the fountainhead of the source from which virtue springs. So it would be like saying you can eat well and exercise well without believing in any nutritional or exercise best practices.
[13:58] You couldn't, you would just randomly do things and then you'd injure yourself and then you'd get fat and then your muscles would get softer, then you'd hurt yourself again. And it'd just be kind of random, right? Like you see some people, if they're trying to deal with some health issue that keeps nagging away at them and bothering them, they just try a whole bunch of random different things. And, you know, it's really kind of catch as a catch can.
[14:19] So you do have to have principles in order to achieve the good. Another analogy would be, since maybe we'll get more points this way, is science. Can you achieve scientific certainty without adhering to the scientific method? And I'm not talking about certainty as a whole, scientific certainty. I know that sounds almost tautological, but it's important. I mean, animals are certain of gravity. Cats are. That's why they twist themselves around, but they don't have science to establish or prove it or to analyze it in an abstract fashion. So can you achieve mathematical truth or mathematical validity without using principles of mathematics? Can you achieve scientific certainty without using the scientific method? Can you achieve the good without a belief in principles? And the answer generally would be no, because even if you do happen to land on some scientific truth without using the scientific method, it's not reproducible. It's sort of just by accident. It's like the wind carving the phrase E equals mc squared into a sand dune. That's not scientific knowledge. That's just a sort of coincidence, right?
[15:30] Someone might hit upon a diet that really works for them, but they don't know why, and they can't reproduce it for others. So, faith is a belief in the virtue and validity and principles of goodness, and can you have consistently good actions? Because in order for something to be virtuous, it has to be consistent, right? In order for something to be the good, it has to be consistent. I mean, even a blindfolded guy might once in his lifetime hit a hole in one on a golf course, but he couldn't reproduce it. And because he couldn't reproduce it, he's not a good golf player. He's just lucky. Like my daughter, when we would occasionally play pool, she just randomly whack things or roll the ball, hoping for a cool sink shot. It drove me a little crazy because like I said to her, like, you're not good if it just randomly goes in. And she's like, yeah, but it's fun. And it's like, okay, well, you have me. If the purpose is fun, that's one thing. If the purpose is to be a good pool player, that's a different matter. And she was right. It was fun. Once I gave up that standup.
[16:30] So, somebody has the virtue of honesty if they are consistently honest, not if they tell one truth a year, right? They're not like a liar, liar, liar, honest, liar, liar, liar, right? I mean, it has to be consistent. So, can you achieve consistent virtue without the principles? Now, the principles in religion are conformity to the will and wisdom of God, which is why you don't just consult the Bible and look up the Ten Commandments. What you do, of course, is you pray for guidance and God guides you, and that's the North Star by which you navigate your path to virtue and heaven and paradise and so on right so you can't just look up the answers because it is the continual guidance of what god would do what jesus would do that gives you your consistent virtue in other words you have to deeply deeply understand the scientific method and how to apply it even to new situations or novel situations you can't just follow you know five steps to science because there's going to be things that deviate and you won't necessarily be able to apply it to new things and stuff, right? So if it's good works, then you can just look up the answer. If it is faith, then the good works manifest, the good works manifest from your consistent relationship with the all-knowing, all-virtuous God, right?
[17:57] So, that is, I think, very important. So, a Christian, I don't want to obviously speak for the faith, but my understanding would be that a Christian would say that a man is consistently virtuous to the degree to which he manifests the will of God that he continually consults through prayer. Not because he's following a recipe, right? I mean, that's you. One more analogy. A cook. Is someone a good cook? Because they can follow a recipe with no particular understanding of what they're doing. Well, no. A good cook is someone who really understands, you know, spices and temperatures and cooking and consistency and flavors and, you know, can mix and match and really has tried everything under the sun and moon, because even somebody who's not a good cook can cook a fairly complicated meal just by following the instructions. So you're a good cook if you understand the principles of cooking rather than simply following a recipe.
[19:00] So, to be a virtuous person means you understand the principles of virtue, you don't just do good works, and you can't be considered virtuous if you just do good works, because there has to be a deep understanding of the principles behind it, which you can only achieve in the theological sense from a deep communion with God. So, I hope that helps. All right.
[19:21] Is the label picky eater neglectful in the sense that the parent does not wish to listen and empathize with the child's needs and preferences, or is there really such a thing as a picky eater in general when it comes to a parent-child relationship?
[19:35] Well, I don't like a picky eater because it's like a fussy baby. Babies aren't fussy. Babies are emotional babies are passionate babies are communicating but fussy is a is a diminishment of what is going on emotionally for the baby right if your wife is really angry at you for some you know legitimate reason you did something you know kind of wrong thoughtless or bad or mean or whatever right.
[20:02] If your wife is really upset with you for a legitimate reason, and you say to your wife, oh, hey, you're just being fussy. You're just being fussy. You're just being whiny. You're just being overly picky. Well, your wife would be upset and frustrated and annoyed and all these kinds of things. And it would be pretty hard to argue with that. So fussy and picky and all of that whiny and so on. These are just ways of diminishing the validity and value of a child's emotions. Now, of course, there are children who are, you know, maybe they have particular consolations of taste buds, or maybe they have allergies, or maybe they have digestive issues, or maybe they're lactose intolerant. But those are genuine things. They're not just being picky eaters. They are responding to the physiological cues that they had. Now, the other thing, of course, that happens is if a child is bullied or aggressed against or diminished or insulted, then what happens is the child will resist in passive-aggressive ways.
[21:09] So, I remember when I was a student, every now and then, if a class was bad and the boring or the teacher was being annoying, people would cough. And then everyone would start coughing at once. And sometimes the coughs would last for a couple of minutes. Now, this was a rebellion because the teacher can't get mad at everyone for coughing because every individual can say, well, I really did have to cough but you can't all have had to cough at the same time but they would look petty that way, right? And so it would start, it would last and it would last just long enough for the teacher to get upset but not get really mad. And so you'll get these resistances. So if a child is over-controlled, then the child will push back by exercising control. Now, what control can the child exercise if the child feels pushed around and bullied? What control can the child exercise? Well, the child can exercise control, not over his environment, right? He's got to stay home, not over whether he goes to school, right? Not when he goes to bed necessarily, but the child can exercise control over what he puts in his mouth. So it often is a sort of passive rebellion against over-control.
[22:19] Somebody says, do you think it would be beneficial for a listener of Free Domain to upload your videos to a YouTube channel, all the classics as well as the new shows? I mean, if you want to give it a shot, you can certainly try. I think that they might take you down, but I certainly have no objection to it.
[22:34] All right, a matchmaker question here. Back for more advice from the Love Master after a recent development. Yeah, so this is a couple of shows back. I, 31, oh, this is a guy who's got a matchmaker who might be interested in him. All right, I, 31, attended a social dance organized by friends with a new young lady, 27, from my Catholic group. While dancing and talking together for a while, we seemed to have good chemistry. As the night progressed, I eventually asked her out, and she informed me she had a long-term relationship that ended a few weeks ago. However, she said she really enjoyed the night and would love to continue getting to know one another at events like these. Any tips for delicately nurturing relationship potential with someone who has implied mutual attraction but is still processing a breakup? I don't want to seem too eager, Beaver, because I've listened to enough of her shows on the tripwires that come with pursuing newly single women, but I won't wait for her if another romantic prospect comes along in the meantime.
[23:27] Well, if you want to be a little bit of a player, then you would ask her lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of questions about her relationship. What went right? What went wrong? What red flags she missed? Why it went on so long? If it was bad, why it ended badly? And also, what did her parents think of the guy? What did her friends think of the guy? So you can map out her entire social life and standing with regards to this relationship. Now, that will help her process it, which maybe will accelerate, right? Your relationship's over when there's nothing more you can learn from it, right? And the reason why relationships tend to go on and on after the breakup in people's minds is because they haven't learned what they need to learn from the relationship, right? So relationships end, really end, not just sort of we've broken up, but they end in terms of your mind when there's nothing else to learn from the relationship, right?
[24:30] So if you, with regards to, I don't know, my mother or whatever, like I don't really think about my mother anymore, I can go a week or two without thinking about her. And because there's nothing else I need to learn about the relationship. There's no landmines that are screwing me up in the future. There's not interfering with my current relationship. so there's nothing else I need to know. It just becomes automatic, right? Like you have to really concentrate when you're learning a new skill, right? The piano, or I guess when you're walking on it, you have to really work hard when you're learning a new skill. But after you've learned it well, it just becomes automatic. So if you help her get to the true lessons, right? People have a tough time letting go of relationships because deep down they understand that they're still in danger because they haven't learned all of the real foundational lessons of those relationships in order to avoid a repetition in the future. So you can't commit to someone new if you don't know why you committed to someone wrong. You can't love the right person if you don't know why you, quote, fell in love with the wrong person. So yeah, just talk to her about a relationship.
[25:32] All right. Also another question. If you've distanced yourself from someone toxic but still find the thought of them painful, isn't that a sign you haven't processed it properly? My therapist once said that certain pain points never really go away, and you just have to learn to live with that feeling. But I wanted to see what you think, so I think I just answered that. Can you speak more about your approach to homeschooling Izzy? Did you have certain subjects you insisted upon teaching, even if she wasn't very interested? Did you always have her enrolled in online classes in some form, or was there something she naturally grew into when she got older? Yeah, so there's certain things that she does sort of have to work on and complete, and she's very good at doing those things. I would say that most of our education has occurred in conversation, oddly enough, or maybe not oddly enough, often when we're driving somewhere.
[26:17] I would say that it is in conversation where you just talk about things that kids learn the most and certainly the most useful stuff as a whole. Somebody says, I've got a few questions related to defooing. You've mentioned in the past how you've brought forth issues, grievances, and moral problems with your family with the genuine goal of having those problems confronted while I assume not expecting much. I'm curious as to if you had worries or problems after the fact. Legal issues, harassment, did they show up to your work, show up to your home, contact the police, et cetera? If so, how did you deal with these proverbial thorns in your side? I would say not in particular. Yeah, not in particular.
[27:02] So because I gave everyone every conceivable opportunity to say and do the right thing, they really didn't have much of a leg to stand on. Like if you've given somebody every conceivable opportunity to do the right thing, and they don't, they tend to avoid you because they're really avoiding their own conscience.
[27:21] If that is short-circuited, then there's a sense of incompleteness that can bring kind of stalky stuff. All right. Somebody, he goes on to say, I'm going to be confronting family members on similar topics, looking for some restitution and resolution to how I was parented, the abuse I faced from them correctly, and how they neglect and abuse led me to me being sexually abused repeatedly from the age of four or five to 12. I'm so sorry. I just like heartbreaking, absolutely heartbreaking, I'm so, so sorry. The extreme bullying I received in school, how my father was my original bully, amongst others, all but the goal of giving myself a future theory of trashy and dysfunctional people, especially for when I start my own family. I'm gravely afraid of my family, an extended family, trying to make my life a living hell for standing up for myself, And potentially separating from people I know aren't good people at best and are abusive at worse. I'm by worry they may show up in my workplace, claiming I'm crazy, hand off my meds. I don't take any medication. I've never been prescribed any. Yeah, spreading lies and so on. Okay.
[28:21] So I've always sort of said, and, you know, I don't have any entities in this area. So you really do have to, you know, engage with a good therapist who's gone through this kind of stuff and really work with the therapist on this. But in general i've always said confront your parents honestly and openly if it is safe for you to do so i don't want anybody walking into a lion's den with ketchup all over their shoulders right so if your family is this volatile or this aggressive i would consult the therapist and try figure out a way to not confront because really i mean is there really any restitution that's possible for all that you suffered, especially the sexual abuse, which is, I mean, just absolutely so sad. And I'm so, so sorry. Is there really any restitution that's possible? It's hard to imagine. So certainly don't do anything to put yourself in risk. I know that this is like one of these things that's just kind of obvious to say, but it bears repeating. Don't put yourself at risk. If your family is this volatile and aggressive, then maybe confrontation might not be the best thing because the purpose is to get closure. And given all that's happened, And it sounds so appalling that maybe closure can come simply through talking with a therapist about it rather than talking to people directly as possible. All right.
[29:37] Let's do one more. All right. What are your thoughts on the irony of religious in-group preferences, ignoring the immorality and misery all around them, and at the same time choosing to accept that in order to be successful, it's necessary to ignore the misery? This is one of the most unfortunate double standards many people have to face. Often the religions, sorry, often the religious piled on people who faced misfortune socially and verbally with additional disrespect and insults instead of just choosing to ignore it. It's like the crime and punishment double standard is definitely a thing, but ironically it has a big piece of the answer to ignore the misery. Well, it's tough, you know, one of the issues that I had with organized religion in the past was how many children were mistreated right under the noses of very religious people and institutions. I've talked about this before, and so I won't go to it to a great deal. But one of the ways that some, this is not foundational to religion, but certainly some religious people will take this approach. One of the things that religion can do for people is they can say, I'm not going to fight evil, because evil is a punishment for the corrupt.
[30:50] Or evil is a test of character that I should not interfere with, right? Like if you're a coach and you're coaching somebody, you don't go and do the sport for them, right? You give them encouragement from the sidelines, but you don't go and do the sport for them, right? If somebody's trying to bench press 300 pounds, and that's their goal, when they're ready to do it, you don't help them, you know, lift 50 of those 300 pounds, and they haven't done it themselves, right? So, So it's a way of avoiding the responsibility to stand up for those suffering under the slings and arrows of outrageous corruption to say, well, it'll build character. It's their job to face down their own devils. And the people are being attacked as punishment for some immorality. So it is tough. And I'm not saying many or most, but certainly some religious people do take that approach, and it does not. It does not help.
[31:48] What are your thoughts on universal basic income as a potential tool of government overreach, especially when tied to systems like WorldCoin and its biometric orb? To me, it feels like another push towards nightmarish centralized control. Yep. Yeah, for sure. UBI, it's just vote-by. That's all it is. It's just vote-by. It's just vote-by.
[32:09] And you know pour your energies into explaining bitcoin to people and i think that's the best you can do i met a whole group of people tonight and spent an hour talking to them about bitcoin so all right do you have any struggles when writing the inner dialogue of dumb characters it's obvious that it's easy for you to write both good and evil people but they're always smart and witty as that's the kinds of people you've been exposed to a lot throughout your life.
[32:31] Well, the problem is that dumb characters don't have internal dialogues or monologues. They just act. They have a feeling and they just act. And then they will come up with some hamphysis of justification after the fact. So I'm interested in more erudite and intelligent characters' inner lives because they have an inner life. Like you'd be, I think, desperately shocked at how little inner life a lot of people have. I mean, like a third of people don't even have an inner dialogue or monologue. They don't hear their own thoughts. They don't debate with themselves. They don't argue with themselves. So, I certainly have written less intelligent characters. Farmer Jigger comes to mind, but Farmer Jigger has no internal life. He simply acts out. So, there's nothing, right? It's like saying, you know, what is inside a solid clay figurine? Well, clay, something inside. There's no inside to it. you could say what's inside a hollow figurine well air and right now what's inside a robot machinery what's inside a computer chips and so on right there's something inside but people without an inner dialogue or monologue they have no sense of they have no observing ego they can't compare proposed actions to ideal standards whether that's through choice or corruption or just lack of intelligence they just uh they just act out and they're just uh they just act out and And so there's nothing really to write about. All you can do is show how they act.
[33:57] You can't actually get inside their minds because it's just a chaos of impulses and vague justifications and lusts and aggressions and so on. So there really isn't much to write.
[34:09] Somebody replied, said, reading through Just Poor gave me a sense that Stef could write a dumb character's actions. But it is a good point. How often is the point of view an interiority from a dumb character's perspective? Although, you know, it's a very interesting, thought. Maybe I'll give it a shot.
[34:25] Listen, and I was not raised around all of these smart and witty people. I mean, I grew up in a, you know, to a fairly significant degree, single mother welfare slums. So I was surrounded by people who weren't smart for sure. So yeah, maybe I'll take on a challenge in a future novel. I really do appreciate that. All right.
[34:42] Well, thanks everyone for these great questions and comments. I really, really do appreciate that. Freedomain.com slash donate to help out if you subscribe at freedomain.locals.com or subscribestar.com slash freedomain i i promise you will absolutely love all of the goodies and bonuses and benefits that you get all right lots of love everyone take care bye.
Support the show, using a variety of donation methods
Support the show
