TruthBeTold

http://news.utexas.edu/2016/04/25/risks-of-harm-from-spanking-confirmed-by-researchers

Spotted this article which I think is relevant to a lot of conversations here. Never hurts to brush up! http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01100/full "Fifty psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid: a list of inaccurate, misleading, misused, ambiguous, and logically confused words and phrases" Full list of terms they go over: (1) A gene for (2) Antidepressant medication (3) Autism epidemic (4) Brain region X lights up (5) Brainwashing (6) Bystander apathy (7) Chemical imbalance (8) Family genetic studies (9) Genetically determined (10) God spot (11) Gold standard (12) Hard-wired (13) Hypnotic trance (14) Influence of gender (or social class, education, ethnicity, depression, extraversion, intelligence, etc.) on X. (15) Lie detector test (16) Love molecule (17) Multiple personality disorder (18) Neural signature (19) No difference between groups (20) Objective personality test. (21) Operational definition (22) p = 0.000 (23) Psychiatric control group (24) Reliable and valid (25) Statistically reliable (26) Steep learning curve (27) The scientific method (28) Truth serum (29) Underlying biological dysfunction (30) Acting out (31) Closure (32) Denial (33) Fetish (34) Splitting (35) Comorbidity (36) Interaction (37) Medical model (38) Reductionism (39) Hierarchical stepwise regression (40) Mind-body therapies (41) Observable symptom (42) Personality type (43) Prevalence of trait X (44) Principal components factor analysis (45) Scientific proof (46) Biological and environmental influences (47) Empirical data (48) Latent construct (49) Mental telepathy (50) Neurocognition

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPUTrIgdCZI I found this interesting, especially right at the end, where it talks about both the conceptual and objective aspects of mathematics.

I think a church based on rationality is highly needed for the future of this movement. It should draw upon the most effective aspects that churches based on mysticism use to keep themselves prolific generation after generation. Religion is a virus, and what we need to start using the same mechanism to start spreading truth over falsehood and myth. First and foremost, there need to be central locations to congregate and learn on a regular (weekly) basis. The gatherings are the core of the social dynamic which keeps the community united against outside influences. Much of these gatherings right now are being held online, informally. There are some events like libertarian conventions (ex PorcFest) which gather people together, but its not local and its not frequent enough to develop a true sense of community. There also need to be traditions such as holidays, songs, ceremonies, etc. These things trancend generations and become something people look forward to experiencing over and over again, so they preserve them. What really frightens people right now is that the creation of such a "church" inherently relies on a few people organizing and "running" it. From the inside and outside of the movement, this is seen as "culty" (even though we know it is far less culty than traditional religions or statism itself). Even still, I would give anything for this sort of church for my family.

I actually do a huge amount of work evangelizing FDR in many areas and help counter misinformation about Stefan and the show. In a way, what I tried to do in this thread was return with some common feedback from outside of the FDR community with the intention of bringing it here and starting a discussion. I don't see this at all as an "us vs them" mentality - we're all for freedom, and if there are barriers between these communities, I think its nice to work towards alleviating them. That said, I'll have to take some time and reflect about how I approached the topic here in this thread to see if there is something I could have done more effectively.

This response is not only insulting, incorrect, and unconstructive but is itself an attempt at trolling. I started the thread to discuss objective results in an attempt to help the show find a larger audience among a group of people that are already on the side of freedom. I appreciate greatly the more rational responses, though I'm still at a loss for any takeway from this discussion other than the general consensus to be (to paraphrase) "fuck em". I'd hoped for better, but if this community doesn't want to reach out, then I can't make you. I think its a missed opportunity, though.

I don't think it solves anything to reduce this to dismissing them as "haters". In fact, by doing so, you are becoming haters yourselves. This can go back and forth forever, just generating more animosity and allowing either community to create mental ghosts to burn over and over again rather than approaching each other with curiousity and honesty. Concerns have been raised there about certain actions as they understand them. I think there could be a lot of gains if Stef were give a bit of directed outreach to the subreddit. I would be happy to help facilitate this sort of outreach in any way I can, both at Reddit and elsewhere.

This is a valid request and one I had hoped came across in my original post. Reddit is a top 25 website worldwide and top 10 in the US. The /r/Anarcho-Capitalism sub-reddit has 21k subscribers. That community should be one that supports FDR my a large majority - but they do not. If FDR is not able to find a strong level of support among a community like that, then I think that is a very dire sign. The companion sub-reddit /r/Libertarian is another one which rarely gives support to the FDR videos posted there. The same is true for the Objectivism, philosophy, ex-Christian, atheist, and parenting sub-reddits that topical videos have been posted to. If the data we're talking about is a measure of the level of support, then the data seems to show that certain aspects (ex. length) of the presentation of the show are the major stumbling block to more widespread popularity. I have "evangelized" (for lack of a better word) FDR for a long time in the reddit community and elsewhere, so I do feel qualified to give a fair evaluation of the level of support. The best responses to FDR I've ever gotten is from the older, shorter content like "The Sunset of the State", "Story of your Enslavement", certain interviews, etc. In fact, I myself came to follow Stef after seeing the "Jon Stewart's 19 Tough Questions for Libertarians!" video posted to r/Libertarian.

First point, they are not "my" readers - they are anonymous individuals within the freedom movement giving a wide range of feedback, a majority of which is negative on long call-in show content. As for evidence, I'd love to see some - its what I asked for. There have been many opinions stated, but nothing in hard numbers. Has there been any work done that would be considered "market research" (to borrow terms from business: "new customer acquisition", "customer satisfaction", or "customer retention")? I am extremely sincere about seeing the world improve. I do not doubt your sincerity, I ask that you don't doubt mine.

I didn't state a preference. I gave relevant personal experience and asked questions seeking empirical evidence. I'm feeling very mocked by this sort of assumption. I think I'd feel better if you'd asked me to clarify the communities I spread his videos to rather than make up a scenario like this. To clarify, I spread videos extensively across several non-libertarian communities, for example, a video on atheism to atheist forums.

If the call-in shows are the "most downloaded", does it follow that those shows are the best way Stefan can help achieve freedom in the world? My suspicion is that the listeners of the call-in shows are already fans, but fail almost completely in attracting new listeners. I choose to promote FDR by spreading videos in non-libertarian communities with the hope of improving visibility. I've tried very hard to post relevant call-in shows to these outside areas, and they almost always get lackluster or negative reactions The usual complaints are the length and the dry "talking head against a grey background" look - its very hard to get people to sit through a long call for the great take-aways. Topical videos (usually those made well in the past) tend to do a bit better. A lot of the feedback in the reddit thread is constructive criticism about the content - from a community which should be embracing FDR. For some reason there is a fundamental disconnect. If Stefan instead spent 7-8 hours on other content (writing books/papers, interviews, etc) rather than call-in shows, could he be doing more good for the world?

This thread on Reddit raises what I think could be some valid concerns about the quality of content which has been coming out of FDR recently. Here are some quotes: "Mr. Molyneux's chief trouble is that his deontological moralisms and argumentation ethics are irrelevant to anyone who isn't already a Libertarian/Ancap/Objectivist stalwart or at least sympathetic to that worldview." "With Stefan... not so much. I look at a 2.5 hour podcast, and from past experience, it's not going to be nearly as dense and informative as (Tom Woods). Most will be a complete waste of time..." "I agree with the people here that he's just not progressing. He's stagnant and it's the same stuff over and over." "It's really not much of a surprise that people in this sub have generally moved away from Moly. Aside from the gradual migration in this sub towards egoism/nihilism, Moly has another large issue with the people here -- and perhaps libertarianism as a whole: he's really not producing new content." "Even as much as I value what the guy says about freedom in personal relationships and peaceful parenting and find those who bash him on these points either annoying or outright malicious, I have to agree with this post. He had tried a new segment where he went over topical current events but there has been no new edition that I'm aware of even though that was even well received on this sub." My personal viewpoint is that some of Stefan's best work was in short topical content: his daily drive podcasts, his appearances on Schiff Radio, and his speeches. I am and will always be a fan because I believe Stefan has said more correct things than I have ever heard in my life, and I truly want him to be known for excellent content and remembered for centuries. So my question to the listeners, staff of FDR, and Stefan himself - is the time spent on call-in shows more valuable for the cause of freedom than other work Stefan could be doing (such as short daily topical podcasts, guest interviews, books, public speeches, books)? Please give some empirical evidence to back up your viewpoints as best you can.

My understanding is that his blog titled "Freedomain" at http://freedomain.blogspot.com started first, and so when the podcasts began, he tacked on Radio to indicate it was a broadcast from Freedomain. I honestly think that taking a good look at the branding and floating around some ideas is a good thing. In fact, now may be the best time because things are still on an upward swing, his popularity is growing, he has a loyal base that will follow along, and he's got the new studio and (hopefully soon ) the documentary. It seems like a pivotal moment, and a re-launch using the right type of branding could reap big rewards.

Having one of Stefan's videos embedded into a Time article is pretty damn significant, for sure. And whoa boy, you weren't kidding about the search hits - https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=Freedomain%20Radio%2C%20Stefan%20Molyneux&cmpt=q