Stefan Molyneux is the founder and host of Freedomain, the largest and most popular philosophy show in the world. With more than 4,500 podcasts, 10 books and 600 million downloads, Stefan has spread the cause of liberty and philosophy to millions of listeners around the world.
Mr. Molyneux holds a Masters Degree in History from the University of Toronto; his graduate thesis focused on the History of Philosophy, detailing the relationship between the metaphysical arguments and the political ethics of major Western philosophers such as Plato, Kant, Locke and Hegel.
Prior to launching Freedomain, Stefan built a thriving career as a software entrepreneur and executive. In 2007, he left his work in the tech industry to devote his efforts to spreading philosophy. Now a full-time parent and philosopher, Stefan has given speeches at liberty-themed events all over the world. His speeches cover subjects ranging from politics, philosophy, economics, relationships, bitcoin, parenting and how to achieve real freedom in your life!
Stefan Molyneux is the founder and host of Freedomain Radio, the largest and most popular philosophical show in the world. With more than 3,500 podcasts, 10 books and 250 million downloads, Stefan has spread the cause of liberty and philosophy to listeners throughout the world.
More content
612d66
0
The follow is a Criticism of the podcast "How I forgave my mother".
5:02 “Now, why did I want to believe that she could make better choices”?
Better choices relative to what? Relative to what you might have perceived of as better. Or relative to what she perceived as better? Can an argument not be made that your mother did deliberate and arrived at a conclusion that she perceived of as better? Thus, leading to the conclusion that she was making better choices.
This standard of “better choices” is something that you criticized Ayn Rand for in her suggestion of a standard of morality being “that which promotes life”. You criticized this due to its subjectivity. What promotes life for George Bush will be radically different from that which promotes life for Afghani citizens. Thus, it would be impossible to universalize this standard. This exact criticism applies to this standard of “better choices”.
5:20 “A puppy can’t make better choices, so you don’t have to forgive the puppy for peeing on the floor. A baby can’t make better choices so you forgive the baby for peeing in your eye.”
Is it reasonable to liken the cognitive capacity of a fully grown adult woman to a baby and a puppy?
6:01 “It would be wrong to be angry at someone who can’t make choices”.
I agree. It would be wrong to get angry at someone who cannot make choices. It would be wrong to get angry at someone in a coma. It would be wrong to get angry at someone with a very severe cognitive impairment. It would be wrong to get angry at a baby. Does a fully grown adult woman fall into any of these categories?
6:22 “In a strange way it is because I wanted to stay close to her that I stayed angry at her because if I can make better choices and my mother can make better choices, then we are similar. We’re in the same category”.
Would it not be more reasonable to suggest that the categories which the two of you inhabit are that of moral and immoral? As opposed to having choice and not having choice? Since by “better” I am assuming that you mean “better” relative to the ideal of virtue.
8:20 “By the time I met her she was post free will”.
Would it not be more reasonable to suggest that by the time you met her she was post morality? That she lost the capacity to opt for the morally virtuous choice.
8:40 “By the time I met her she was a robot. By the time I met her she was post free will”...