Can Stefan Molyneux’s Philosophy Make You Fulfilled?

Motivational shouts to pursue your passion!! seem to be the goal of inspirational thought leaders. However, even among those who advocate pursue your passion, hard work and sacrifice seem to be key components of their solution. Happiness and/or fulfillment is what many people search for in life. As a result, people explore ideas from many different thinkers on the subject. The psychological definition of happiness, according to Emily Smith (2017 video embedded bolow) is “a state of comfort and ease.” Alternatively (or synonmously) there is the concept of “eudaimonia.” It means “human flourishing” and has been the subject of much of philosophy and “philosophers.” How do we reach this state? By chasing happiness?

Chasing happiness can make people unhappy.

So what does one do if chasing happiness will leave them disappointed? I’m really asking. This isn’t a self-help article as much as it is me trying to answer this question for myself. One TED Talk on YouTube purported to have a handle on this.

-Despair (an important psychological condition that comes when it is known nothing will change) comes from a lack of having meaning in life.

One guide to a meaningful life

4 Pillars of Fulfillment

1. Belonging- Being in relationships where you’re valued for who you are intrinsically. Smith (2017) contrasts this with a “cheap belonging.” A cheap belonging is one where you are valued for what you believe and for who you hate. “True belonging springs from love. It’s a choice, you can choose to cultivate belonging with others.” In the discussion of Molyneux below, this is important to remember.

2. Purpose- “Using your strengths to serve others.” This can be a job, endeavor, etc. I’ve also heard it said that the best way to be happy is to make other people happy.

3. Transcendence- Feeling connected to a higher reality (art, church, writing).

4. Storytelling- “The story you tell yourself, about yourself” (Smith, 2017). I’ve noticed that sometimes I tell a great story about myself and sometimes I don’t. Self-improvement and being your own hero is important. I’ll investigate “Hero with a thousand faces” in future writings.

Watch the full video.

##Compare that to Stefan Molyneux’s “Philosophy”##

For the purpose of Molyneux’s philosophy, I want to focus on one of the only real prominent suggestions that might have originated with him (and not Ayn Rand or Hans Hoppe). Stefan Molyneux has a practical philosophy that you can apply to your life right now... the practice of defooing.

Defooing

means to disassociate from, and ostracize, your family of origin. FOO is an acronym used in the psychological community. It >stands for Family Of Origin. It arose out of a need to easily distinguish between ones birth family and ones marital family. Your >Family Of Origin could be your biological parents, adoptive parents, step parents, grandparents, etc. Anyone considered to be a >primary caregiver, extended family, or sibling during your childhood is part of the FOO.

Why does Molyneux use psychological terms? Molyneux’s wife, Christina Papadopoulos, runs a PsychoTherapy clinic in Mississauga, Ontario. The practice of Defooing, however, is something that Stefan brought to the relationship. This was not something Papadopoulos had done before. However, on Molyneux’s Defooing website, it is claimed that Stefan helped facilitate, without pressuring, the “Defooing” of Papadopoulos’ parents because they “continuously harassed” her and Stefan for years.

CHRISTINA’S DEFOO
Two years after marrying Stefan, Christina made the difficult decision to DeFOO. Her parents have continuously harassed she and Stefan for years. Here is an example of one of their emotionally manipulative emails attempting to lure Christina back to them:

“Dear Christina and Stefan, Hello.
Just to let you know, on October the 8th we are going to Greece. Christina it has been almost two years time since we last saw you and you said “a few months”. We have respected your wish and we have not bothered you other than a couple of ‘just to let you know’ notices. Ma is very depressed and cries everyday, very seldom smiles. We really really wish and hope to see you and Stefan, or at least talk to you on the phone before we go, and if we have said or done anything unintentionally that hurt or offended you, please forgive us as we don’t hold anything against you. The only thing that we have for you is love and only love. Love that comes from the heart. So please, if you can find “it” in your heart, call us. We only want to know how you are, and with that we wish you and Stefan health, love, happiness, and prosperity and all your dreams and wishes to come true.
With love, Ma and Ba”

Christina replied:
“Dear Ma and Ba.
I received your letter this week. I was afraid to open it. I feared so many things. It pained me to read it. I realize that it is nearing two years since we last saw each other. I am amazed by that. I think of you everday. I wonder how you are, I wonder what you’re thinking, and I wonder what you’re saying to yourselves about my absence. I am not unfeeling or uncaring as you might perseve me to be. It has never been my intention to hurt you or punish you, it is only because I have been hurt and mistreated that I felt it necessary to distance myself from you. Having read your letter I was painfully disapointed to see that you have not realized this. Two years have passed and you still don’t understand why I have left you. I don’t know that you have even made any effort to find out by trying to understand your own actions toward me. I believe this because of the contents in your letter, you blame me for Ma’s depression and then you insult me by suggesting that I have no feelings. You try to use guilt to make me act. Ma did this earlier this year when she called to insist that I attend at your surgery. The only message I received from your correspondence is how badly I’ve hurt you. There is never any credible admission of responsibility on your part, or any genuine curiosity about why this has all happened. What I’ve realized in the past two years and in the year leading up to our last conversation is just how manipulative and self centered you are. You claim that you would do anything for your children, but nothing is for your children. Your needs, your desires, your self image. Sadly, I don’t believe you will ever understand this about yourselves. I can’t and I won’t subject myself to your narcissism and will not allow myself to be susceptible to your guilt. Since this is how you operate, we have no relationship. Leave me alone. Each time you try to contact me you only make it worse for yourselves, because it is more obvious to me how you operate and what your end goals are. You draw less sympathy from me each time.

The photo from the “DeFOO” event, which Molyneux seems to see as a celebration.

What about any of this is fulfilling? This seems like a lazy and narcissistic attempt at punishing someone you love.

I don’t know the specific circumstance of the “DeFoo” nor do I care about the sanctions levied agains Papadopoulos by the College of Psychologists or other professional entities. What I want to know is if removing biological family from your life will help a human reach “fulfillment.” I don’t think it will. I think having a difficult relationship with family cand and should be a fulfilling part of life depending on how you approach it... but you must approach it.

Some of the most prolific human beings on earth have had to endure enormous hardships. This includes abuse, violence, sickness, rape, and genocide. Some of the softest and unproductive humans on earth have had a good life from start to finish. They are born into a modern life that their evolutionary heritage hasn’t prepared them for. Avoiding hardship in order to live an easy life, and I’m psychologizing with myself out loud, will make you into a weak, soft, and lazy person.

Nietzsche had to deal with a tremendous amount of suffering. Genghis Khan, as horrible as he ended up on a human life scale, was strong because of his stingy, hard, nomadic upbringing (a coming of age that included killing his guardian... well, maybe not the best person to use in my argument). All of Judaism has suffered from persecution for centuries. Hardship and suffering are no reason to weaken your genetic line or ancestry.

In the past human had to deal with starvation and subsistence living. The family unit rose as a function of survival (I’m speculating here, I may be wrong). It rose as a way to transfer the knowledge of survival and proper living to the next generation, as it still does today in many capacities. However, now we have the family institution becoming less important due to welfare policies and general prosperity. While in much of the world the family provides a strong support system, people can scrape by without a family these days. This doesn’t mean they will flourish without their family, and in some cases their family might pull them down, but there are things at work other than simply the short-term beliefs presently held by all parties concerned (DeFooing family for their political beliefs rather than their actions, or advocating doing so, is repugnant).

Smith, above, mentions “belonging.” Belonging is a monumental part of finding fulfillment. Not the cheap belonging where you are you united with other people as the result of a common hatred of something (hatred of socialism, Trump, immigrants, fascism, whatever), but belonging because of an intrinsic value. That isn’t to say that life or humans have intrinsic value apart form a human valuer, but that there is an element of unconditional love (and not, not fully unconditional, but more unconditional that conditional if there was a spectrum).

Parents often have no fucking clue how to raise their children nor how to maintain a fulfilling relationship with them. People are flawed. It happens. Maybe Molyneux and Papadopoulos have a reason to DeFOO that is beyond me and that is none of my business. However, what we see in the United States is angsty teenagers leaving their homes and dissociating with their parents. If they are from a lower economic class, or even the middle class, destroying strong family ties is not a good thing.

There are not many people who will love you intrinsically in life. Be that person. Cut your family some slack. Be there for them even if they pull you down a bit. Pull them up. Even if unreciprocated, you’ll make the world a better place. You will alleviate suffering. And when your family is fucking up, be their feedback. In the act of being their feedback, hopefully you don’t get DeFooed.

I don’t have anything figured out. I don’t think life should be lived with an intent to be happy all the time. Sometimes fulfillment takes hard work, and sometimes fulfilling relationships take hard work. I believe Stefan Molyneux is a hack “philosopher” who takes cues on Aristotle and Plato from Ayn Rand and Universally Preferred Behavior from Hans Hoppe. He is not making a positive impact in the world which was ultimately manifest in his support of Trump, even as a professed anarchist. Molyneux is the philosopher of the weak-minded, easily excited, and is now one of the biggest apologists for the state, especially in regards to his sentiments on DACA.

I juxtaposed two different ways of being happy to hopefully show how much of a shyster Molyneux is. I’m not sure if I’ve done my job effectively. I would life feedback in the comments. If you think I’m wrong, I’d like to know why. Next, I want to investigate the “pursue your passion” tenet against the “deep work” tenet. Should one pursue their passion? Or is Dr. Cal Newport’s “Deep Work” the solution to a fulfilling life?

I think BIll Burr has Molyneux pegged: