If you are not already a supporter checkout everything you are missing out on in the Preview Article.
Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Freedomain
Hi there, this is Stefan Molyneux - welcome to Freedomain, the Locals community! One of the last homes for real philosophy in the world!
Feel free to have a look around, chat with other members, share your thoughts, objections, arguments and memes!
This is a place where we strive to achieve the truth through consistent virtue - a great playground for innovative ideas and interactions!
Feel free to have a look around, chat with other members, share your thoughts, objections, arguments and memes!
This is a place where we strive to achieve the truth through consistent virtue - a great playground for innovative ideas and interactions!
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
Stefan Molyneux@freedomain
May 21, 2024
UPB and Sex!
"Hey, Stef, what are your thoughts on the ethics of actions that are, in the immediate moment, not unethical, but in the long run, have the risk of becoming so? Let's say, for example, you develop a sexual relationship with a woman only for the sake of satisfying your vanity, insecurities, and sexual needs without the intention of a long-term commitment. If this action is between two consenting adults and doesn't violate the NAP or UPB, it can't be called unethical. However, should a pregnancy occur, either the resulting abortion or the child raised by two parents who are only drawn together by lust has the potential for unethical outcomes. The promiscuity isn't unethical if both parties are honest about what they're doing, but the consequences can spiral into unethical territory. What then is the ethical status of promiscuity if it is voluntary? Is the correct word irresponsible rather than unethical?
"Is the failure of parents to secure a safe environment for their children to be raised in unethical if they had the chance to do so? If so, does this mean that we can create a term like retrospective ethics, which refers to ethical judgments that are validated only by looking backwards in time after the consequences are played out instead of through reason alone? Before the ethical judgments are validated, they are simply speculative, so maybe they can be referred to as speculative ethics before consequences validate or invalidate the judgments. The main problem I found with this reasoning is in finding the first cause. If promiscuity is unethical only when certain consequences occur, why do we focus on the act of sex rather than the preceding acts such as the flirtation and escalating behaviors? How would we locate the first domino that kick-started this unethical chain in order to assign ethical judgment to the correct behavior? Is this why UPB and ethics as a whole cannot be based on consequences?"
Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!
Get my new series on the Truth About the French Revolution, the Truth About Sadism, access to the audiobook for my new book 'Peaceful Parenting,' StefBOT-AI, private livestreams, premium call in shows, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and more!
See you soon!
00:17:48
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
SHARE PEACEFUL PARENTING!
All donors get the Peaceful Parenting book / audiobook / AI access to share with any and all parents you know who need help!
THANK YOU SO MUCH!
00:01:00
How NOT to be Bitchy! Twitter/X Space
In this flash 20th October 2025 X Space, s explores technology's impact on science and society, using touchscreen frustrations as a metaphor for our quest for clarity. Highlighting skepticism and acceptance in scientific inquiry, inspired by Richard Feynman, they emphasize the importance of rigorous testing. The session culminates in a discussion on truth and encourages attendees to challenge assumptions, advocating for ongoing inquiry into knowledge and communication's role in our shared experience.
SUBSCRIBE TO ME ON X! https://x.com/StefanMolyneux
Follow me on Youtube! https://www.youtube.com/@freedomain1
GET MY NEW BOOK 'PEACEFUL PARENTING', THE INTERACTIVE PEACEFUL PARENTING AI, AND THE FULL AUDIOBOOK!
https://peacefulparenting.com/
Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!
Subscribers get 12 HOURS on the "Truth About the French Revolution," multiple interactive multi-lingual philosophy AIs trained on thousands of hours of my material - as well as AIs for ...
03:20:26
What Does "Forgive 70 Times 7" Mean?
This clip comes from "MY MOTHER MADE ME FAT!! Twitter/X Space", get the full show at https://fdrpodcasts.com/6147
Understanding true forgiveness is key ✝️ It requires repentance. Let's not fall for the lie that forgiveness can be granted without repentance. The post being read: https://x.com/MarkWDouglas/status/1970348389339382256
Watch and share more shorts at https://fdrurl.com/tiktok
00:01:42
Learn how to reason with "The Art of the Argument"!
In "The Art of the Argument," philosopher and host of Freedomain Stefan Molyneux delivers a no-nonsense guide to mastering persuasive talk. Beyond winning debates, it's about sharp logic, emotional smarts, and ethical persuasion to elevate your communication game.
Molyneux breaks down building airtight arguments, exposing fallacies, and handling heated exchanges with wit and depth. Key insights include:
-
Argument basics: What works, what flops.
-
Socratic method: Questions that uncover truth.
-
Emotions in play: Harness them without losing ground.
-
Ethics: When to fight, when to fold—with integrity.
For debaters or anyone sharpening their voice, this book arms you with tools for real, transformative conversations. Rethink how you argue and persuade.
SUBSCRIBE TO ME ON X! https://x.com/StefanMolyneux
The concept of Universal Consequentialism 😱
A year ago, I presented a different view of consequentialism in this community, which is to devide the concept into rational and irrational consequentialism.
Here's a different approach to explain what consequentialism actually is, based on an example Stefan is providing in his book "Peaceful Parenting", chapter 11, page 153, timestamp 38:19 in the audio book. Quote:
"Since you are all very clever readers, you will be replying to me in your mind something along the lines of this: 'Ah, you say, Mr. Philosopher, that no one can accurately predict the future, but you also state that hitting children has negative outcomes!'
That is certainly true – both that I make that claim, and that hitting children does have generally negative outcomes.
However, we do not judge the morality of hitting children based upon positive or negative outcomes.
For instance, we know that state control of the economy leads to massive inefficiencies – but we don't judge the morality of state control of ...
Freedomain Premium Content!
In the vast tapestry of human experience, this collection of premium content stands as a beacon of reflection and introspection! Each episode is a journey into the complexities of our shared existence. From the intricate dance of self-forgiveness to the harrowing tales of personal adversity, these moments of life challenge, provoke, and inspire.
