If you are not already a supporter checkout everything you are missing out on in the Preview Article.
Hi Stef, what role should history play in determining philosophical truths or falsehoods? I ask this question knowing your background in history and how you have integrated it into your communication of philosophy, however, the point of conflict for me is this.
When history is used as evidence for a problem existing, the debate is then about causality rather than principles.
Since causality can't be proven with certainty, neither is it encouraged because we have free will, the utility of a philosophical claim rests on whether or not the person is persuaded by the causality you have presented. From a logical and syllogistic point of view, the argument might be valid, but it might not be true without the empirical evidence to back it up since put simply, truth is a status that a claim has relative to its correspondence with the world.
For example, if you were to say child abuse is wrong, and use reason alone to make that argument, someone might not be convinced that how we treat children is even a problem. As such, you’ll then need to use history to support your reasoning. You would examine the French revolution, the childhoods of people in call-ins, look at other literature and research that uses a greater data set of human history to investigate if how we treat children is a problem.
At this point, someone might then be convinced since you have presented them with history, but maybe instead they’ll debate you on the causality of historical events. You won’t be able to convince them through principles, nor history. You could even try delve into their childhood only for them to say that they turned out alright.
At this point, we determine that the person can’t be reasoned with regarding this topic and move on, however, the problem remains regarding the role that history plays in making a philosophical claim that is valid, useful. If people can’t accept a truth statement, it isn’t useful even if it is true. History seems to be indispensable in persuading other people to accept truth statements, however, the battle is then about causality and how it is perceived or interpreted rather than principles.
If the first battle as a philosopher is about making valid truth statements, is the next battle about using history to persuade others of their validity, thereby rendering them ‘useful’? Is the final battle for the human mind about causality now that UPB is in the picture?
Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!
NOW AVAILABLE FOR SUBSCRIBERS: MY NEW BOOK 'PEACEFUL PARENTING' - AND THE INTERACTIVE PEACEFUL PARENTING AI AND AUDIOBOOK!
Also get the Truth About the French Revolution, the interactive multi-lingual philosophy AI trained on thousands of hours of my material, private livestreams, premium call in shows, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and much more!
See you soon!
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!
REMASTERED "STATISM IS DEAD" PART 4
Free Range Empires and the End of Human Farming - Why freedom always leads to tyranny under statism.
FOLLOW ME ON X! https://x.com/StefanMolyneux
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 Real-Time Relationships, Bitcoin, Peaceful Parenting, and Call-In Shows!
You also receive private livestreams, HUNDREDS of exclusive premium shows, early release podcasts, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and much more!
See you soon!
https://freedomain.locals.com/support/promo/UPB2025
In this episode, I tackle audience questions, starting with George St. Peterson's role in the Russia-Ukraine war and the importance of diverse opinions. I discuss the potential resurgence of Christianity in the West, emphasizing the need to apply rationality to moral discussions.
I explore the influence of childhood experiences on ethics and offer insights on co-parenting with an irresponsible partner, stressing the social context of relationship choices. Additionally, I analyze how welfare programs impact family dynamics and accountability and confront the complexities of free speech in incendiary contexts.
Finally, I reflect on originality in thought-sharing and encourage critical engagement with ideas amid widespread misinformation, expressing gratitude for the audience's support in navigating these discussions together.
FOLLOW ME ON X! https://x.com/StefanMolyneux
GET MY NEW BOOK 'PEACEFUL PARENTING', THE INTERACTIVE PEACEFUL PARENTING AI, AND THE FULL AUDIOBOOK!
...
Subscribers get early previews for shows!
"Hi Stef! My name is [x] and I've been listening to your show for a couple years now, my husband introduced it to me shortly after we got married. I've really enjoyed learning about philosophy and self-knowledge and have been applying it to my marriage and other relationship queries. I was hoping to talk to you about some struggles I've had maintaining relationships (friendships) throughout my life. I've never had a local friendship last more than a few years. I'm about to continue my self-knowledge work by going to a Christian group therapy (Freedom session) and I was told I would need a sponsor (a friend or relation) to closely connect with for these group sessions. It occurred to me that I don't have any close friends and no one I could ask (besides my husband). To me that is alarming. I feel as though I should have at least one long term close friendship. My husband and I talk about this often - how I often have difficulties maintaining friendships. I've ...
If you are not already a supporter checkout everything you are missing out on in the Preview Article.