Stefan Molyneux takes on objections to Universally Preferable Behavior as a moral framework. He pushes back against the idea that morality stands on its own, stressing the need for clear definitions in any philosophical talk. When it comes to tying morality to gods or divine sources, he points out that fuzzy claims don't hold up as real arguments. Molyneux questions whether morality can just be about chasing the good, the true, and the beautiful, pulling in examples from religious texts to show the inconsistencies there. He looks back at how Christian morality has fallen short over time and doubts whether theocratic setups really deliver on ethics. In the end, he calls for a straightforward grasp of morality and what UPB means in practice, urging people to check their own biases and lean on real-world evidence in these discussions. Email from listener: UPB reduces down to "Morality is being". Or "By the act of living, you prefer life". Or Universal Preference for Being. But even without beings, morality still exists. So morality is God based, and is the rational pursuit of, participation in, and defense of the Good, the True, and the Beautiful (with evil being precisely whatever actively undermines or destroys those ends). Plato would agree. Jesus said, to love God with all your mind heart soul and strength, and love others as yourself, and the whole of the law rests on these two principles. It means to fight for the Good, the True, and the Beautiful - for order. Of course, this can only be done through rationality and power. So, the Good must take the power back. This cannot be done through secular materialism which only reduces to hedonism. People that hear their conscience seek rationality and God more than anything else, because everything else is temporary. However, Christianity displays false theories. The biggest one is the idea that an innocent person needed to suffer and be sacrificed for evils committed by everyone else. God would never require this because God is 100% good. The reality is that Jesus needed to be killed and resurrected so that His story would be way bigger and spread Goodness to way more people, and last forever. So, he did die for sins in that sense alone, so that more people would hear His story and turn away from sin. There is no other practical moral framework to turn to. Philosophy alone is rational, but it does not ground morality the same way God does. Actually, rationality requires one to accept God. Without God, people literally have absolutely no reason to be moral at all. And Deism's impersonal God doesn't connect with people. Christianity was working until the Jews brainwashed society and the Church and destroyed its influence on society. Notwithstanding its misinterpretations, Christianity appears to be the only effective thing people can actually believe in and follow. And Neitzche would say the will to power is too potent for UPB to control. However, Christianity at least affords a will to power of the True, the Beautiful, and the Good. Jesus whipped the little bastards in the Temple. That needs to come back, because that is all the little bastards can understand. Someone wants steak for dinner and the other person doesn't, or go hungry forever, that does not make the steak guy forcing the other to eat the steak immoral. UPB is a logical construction that fails in the real world, and honestly, not even to be a jerk, but literally no one at all gives the slightest fuck about it. Sorry for the language. And I really do appreciate your efforts and all your good works. And sure, UPB is a true logical construction, but people are irrational and will never be rational. And that is why the real world philosophy is 100% might makes right. And this is why Christianity must be forced down their throats until the world is functional again. Irrational people only understand force, and Christianity is the valid, justified, moral, virtuous, reason and purpose of true physical force against irrational and evil people. There is an attempt at logic in UPB, and it sort of works, but not really. Morality already existed before Mankind, and UPB only points out the effects of immorality, it does not define morality. And lastly, to include with all the arguments I have made against UPB. I will just say that bottom line, UPB is merely a survival instinct desire and not the creation of morality. Every person would agree that they don't want to be attacked or stolen from, simply because they want to live and survive, so that would make that universally preferable behavior. However, because this is all survival instinct based, as soon as a person sees a chance to steal or attack, that best serves their own survival, they will immediately not care the slightest about UPB because they are about their own survival over everyone else's. UPB is matter-based biologically-based morality, and simply does not hold up, just like all the other secular ethical frameworks before it - they all failed, and all secular ethical frameworks will always fail. This is because God-based, soul-based morality is the only Truth, as proven at dynamicentity.com GET FREEDOMAIN MERCH! https://shop.freedomain.com/ 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 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
