Ok, this is me and with this intro edit I want to watch this! Also, might be my go to "thesis" interview to sent people to going forward. You did a great job.

"You could prevent these negative memetic bubbles from forming, so long as society doesn't normalize any area that you're not allowed to criticize". Dude, EXACTLY PERFECT. (It's the socionormative retention of the free speech ethos that allows EVERYTHING ELSE to function).

New drinking game: Every time Malcolm says “memetic’…

I've recently watched some of their videos, so interesting to see you two come together like this.

One of the most interesting interviews I've ever watched!

Great interview.

Benjamin , this fellow is quite interesting and he is fun to listen to . Please ask him to come on your show , again ...

I will have to listen to this multiple times to grasp all the very interesting points Malcolm made. I really enjoyed this - please have him back and maybe try to focus on one subject to help idiots like me keep up!

Thanks for this interesting thinker.

Yes, oxytocin causes both in-group bonding, and out-group hostility.

Malcolm was in top form here, thanks. Such a breath of fresh air. Can't wait to see how their kids turn out! Can you imagine it as a reality TV show?

Fan of both you gentlemen. Honest request: please ask Malcolm why he's never been in the same room with his wife. I have lingering doubts.

Love this!

Yay one of my newest favs is on one of the first KZfaq channels I ever followed!

yes, i did love it, and i want more of it and i shared it with as many people as i could.

Malcolm is totally animated in just this little clip! This is gonna be GREAT! PS> 11th place! [Homer Simpson whoo hooo x's 11 😸

Malcolm Collins has zero understanding of the Christian definition of love, which has nothing to do with emotion... but otherwise, great interview and well worth watching!

Wow this guy is wild. Super interesting 👍🏻

"urban monoculture" is simply the latest workaround for avoiding naming and criticizing feminism

Very interesting! I like his train of thought, very non dogmatic.

Well, that was fun!

I agree with a lot more of this than I expected I would, but I think it ought to be understood as a layer on top of Catholicism. "You can go to a Christian and deconvert him pretty easily by saying, 'well, do you really think this nice Jew would go to hell?'" Bingo. Exactly how they (my liberal church) got me when I was sixteen. I wish I'd known then what I know now.

"If you start dedicating your life to the cake, that's gonna lead to very negative outcomes". The number one thing Malcom should be doing professionally, is printing bumper stickers.

Saying taboos have minimal efficacy, is almost like saying social norms don't matter as far as influencing behavior, and helping determine which are successful groups. The Collins's private research institute doesn't always plug-in the correct variables to their random number generator 😂

Spitting facts 📠

Premiere in 24 hrs? That's usually enough time for yet another TBOR to 'drop'.

Hah yeahhhh, also Simone. (I disagree with the majority of ideas that they spitball every week that I happen to hear, but the main argument for using embryo selection for healthy traits mainly intelligence, and obviously also reproducing earlier/more often, is definitely good. My favorite goofy based tech-y clever nerds online, bar none).

Malcolm "the 3rd VlogBrother" Collins.

Hilariously good description of Harvard.

I found myself consuming a fair bit of Malcolm's KZfaq content over the last month and came away feeling fairly alienated from their worldview. There are a few points of theirs that have stuck with me “urban monoculture as deathcult” seemingly mirroring my own observation of living near a midsized fast growing college town/capital city. But apart from that I feel a certain hubris or overconfidence comes through in Malcolm’s prescriptions that gives me pause. Not to the degree that I feel any need whatsoever to actively oppose them … just some of them seem a bit fantastic and speculative to a degree that makes me think that if stabilizing birth rates is the sine qua non of any civilization then I’d stay clear of any group involved with such techniques. Specifically because it would seem to introduce innumerable points of failure into the propagation of the species, is poorly understood on a generational timescale, and may necessitate a level of technological sophistication that cannot be taken for granted, or may even necessitate the subjugation of other populations to maintain, which to my mind is inherently destabilizing and risky for those attempting it. The obvious counter to this may be that without such interventions population collapse will be inevitable but that seems to only be the case for groups that are not religiously observant who are not suffering from it and these groups don't appear to require or desire fertility tech interventions. Any critiques or misgivings aside, it's probably good that Malcolm is such a dogged proponent of his cause given the general ignorance of the topic.

No Simone? Darn.

Y'alls need to look at Zeihan's quadrants, for the part abt our current political realignment.

You need to invite Robert B. Spencer

I’m coming to terms with my affinity for nihilism, which causes me to more deeply realise Nietzsche’s concerns about nihilism. Unfortunately for the “good guys”, they’re only so good, but at least they’re against the bad guys; i e: Wokoharam™ but no one’s perfect Oh & a “Monogenēs” without the weight of Western religious milieu seems very unlikely

Other channels are making hit pieces on malcolm and his wife already, watching them blowup in realtime is crazy.

[Apropos of nothing, I sometimes re-post my longer essay-comments from Stephen Hicks's channel here, because they seem to deal in fairly similar subject areas] Although I became fairly interested in philosophy for a period of time, especially philosophy of mind, a decade ago in my early 20's, and I largely consider myself a philosophical and political Liberal in the Classical sense like Professor Hicks, I can't get past the observation that interdisciplinary fields in the sciences have afforded us fairly robust explanations in relation to many of the age-old questions, within the last few decades. Therefore, it might be more accurate to delineate myself as a political (Classical) Liberal, with differing philosophical commitments. However, I'm not sure: aren't Lockian/Millian Liberals committed to scientific empiricism? While biologists are still learning new things about phenotype, behavioral geneticists have nearly arrived at what resembles a Nietzschean picture. Although, important caveats must be included: as Hicks argues, Nietzsche could well have been considered overly cynical, in retrospect. It's increasingly difficult today to argue, from a scientific perspective, that certain genes aren't winning out over others, governed by the same natural selection processes as everything else. However, (this could almost be considered an updated, 'meta' perspective,) what if the more adaptive genes in humans, turned out to be those that involve some predisposition toward agreeableness, cooperation, healthy self-consideration, and a kind of accompanying ostensible 'weakness' as seen through a Nietzschean lens? Indeed, it's hard to argue against the adaptive utility of a group of bundled traits that includes agreeableness and conscientiousness, Nietzsche's "slaves" can now be better understood as more adaptive in certain specific ways than the "masters". Neuroscientists study the continuity of clearly perceived "selves," and clearly continual, cohesion of thought processes (cognition) amidst various stimuli, and find both to be essentially absent. It's clear enough as to why, the subcategory of naturalism in the process of being established by interdisciplinary cognitive scientist John Vervaeke, draws significantly from Heideggerian philosophy. With these facts established, nevertheless, the science of mind is far from complete. Researchers from what I gather, tend often in this subject area, to simply swap-out a more traditional definition of "agency" for the one used in control systems, which essentially denotes a goal-directed, self-monitoring entity that remains deterministic. (Like a temperature thermostat, though the obvious difference compared to humans for biophysicists generally, would be the level of complexity of the entity). But once again, in reference to the incomplete science of mind: what allows us to fully explain the mind as a kind of 'projection machine?' Meaning, why do we 'tell ourselves a story' continuously, about having agency, and about being discrete individuals? Researchers can subconsciously prompt subjects, with red-colored images for example, and then when asked to randomly choose a color will pick as expected, yet when asked why will tend to fabricate an explanation. Evolutionarily, why is it apparently adaptive for us to be evolved to tell ourselves these stories? The answer seems to have to do with mitigating the neuroticism that comes with constant uncertainty in response to environmental stimuli, which results in a physiologically unhealthy state for the human organism. The complete answer is not yet fully understood. This is where philosophies like those of Rand, and Liberalism enter the picture. Because it is clearly adaptive for humans to understand our world, and interactions in a certain way, with a degree of continuity wherein we perceive ourselves as individuals, and have a measure of environmental/volitional control, a curious philosophical contrast can be discerned: It is Rand's philosophy that tracks more closely with what we can now understand about the adaptive HEURISTIC aspects of human perception in interaction with the world and society, and Nietzsche's philosophy that tracks more closely from an updated REALISTIC scientific perspective. While this rendering might seem ultimately Nietzschean, consider these examples: When a police officer is in a shootout, or person is in a car accident, they report the phenomenon of time slowing down. They don't interact with people and their surroundings normally, they are narrowly focused, yet find themselves more aware of numerous details of the surrounding area. After such incidents, they experience exhaustion, and some residual symptoms. It is difficult to communicate with people when in such a state. So, was this experience of the world more 'real,' because people were taking in more details of the world? It would seem so, if total, accurate, moment to moment sensory info is the arbiter, for 'most real'. (We know that what's happening in those states, is that adrenaline causes hyper-attentive focus, which stresses the nervous system until adrenaline is depleted). The point is, someone totally focused on realistic details of experience moment to moment with 'tunnel vision,' is not engaging a clearly navigable perspective on events and interactions, even if the associated prospectus could be deemed more reflective of empirically established reality. To subscribe to the Randian philosophy over the Nietzschean, one must incorporate an updated understanding of what it means to say people have selves, agency, and grasp clear universal morals. What these things really entail, for the modern educated person, is the recognition that they involve an adaptive mode for humans of interacting with the world, more than they entail empirically verifiable truth claims. To claim in contrast, that one is instead a Nietzschean, is more like saying, that one's preferred perspective on the world, is that of someone who is always in a car crash, or always in a shootout. It is therefore amusing to note, that Nietzsche would no doubt appreciate this extreme characterization.

Polar opposite personalities, but made it work. Congrats.

Man any videos related to this topic just get sniped by the algorithm. 1000 views? This should be at 1M, at the very least 100k

ethics is dependent on aesthetics. Part of how we got into this situation was by believing that if we said it was the other way around, it would make it true. Wrong. Pretending that preferring Marvel to Shakespeare has nothing to do with this is pure cope. Now we reap what we sowed.

More of a ‘versation this time…maybe the first time I’ve seen a guest not be calm.

wow worlds collide

ok? This was fun. I think. 🐿

Interesting point on 'societal repression,' but obviously there's such a thing as healthy repression, to a certain extent.

Thoughts on "ethical" Polygyny (a.k.a. Multiple Wives) for babymaxxxing?

Cat wizards!!!!! 😻

Benjamin doesn't have a chronic debilitating addiction to all games, why would anyone even suggest such a notion??

Oh dear.

❤️🐈🐕💜

What if a main part of the intergenerational improvement of humanity, IS to become predisposed and enculturated, to be more loving? *Malcolm-bot's brain explodes*

Im sorry, but dude and his wife are on some other weird level i just can't understand. I am also not sure it is a place the rest of humanity should try to go. Secondly, the fact that him and his wife are huge fans of genetic testing to screen out diseases from children, but are willing to make an exception for autism because "it is an identity" makes it hard for me to take anything else he has to say seriously. It shows they are more than willing to out their personal biases and political viewes in front of serious work that could actually be done.

Yeah marriage needs to be more pragmatic most of the time, it's true "marriage for love" is in large part a relatively recent historical development. Didn't it come from...um...Romanticism? (I'd say, you probably still should rly like someone with whom you enter into an important lifelong social/legal contract, duhh. And if you happen to love them right away, well that's splendid).

KInda of sad that malcom is still constrained in terms of his thinking in the box when it comes to Nazism and Israel lately but to be honest most people are and it is hard to relate outside of our current mainstream history overtone window

"god is love" comes from ancient Christians teachings (-_-)

this is a childish take on the story of Helen of Troy, and also a completely false understanding of perennial mysticism. Dude is obviously smart, but too obsessed with his own egotistical hipster irony a la 2003.

I had to slow down the video - Malcolm, please, take a breath and slow down. I enjoyed the calmversation but geez loueez, my blood pressure went through the roof as I struggled to keep up. LOL. The worst decisions are made solely through emotion and not critical thinking. Woke Libs are all about emotions and want everything to be seen through an emotional lens IMO. I agree with a lot of what Malcolm was stating. Now, please excuse me. I have to go put cold towels over my ears. The road to hell is paved with good intentions is a truism passed down to us through centuries. Disregard it at your peril.

COME ON , this speaker is accurate in his intelligent thoughts ...

Oh boy, oh boy. Running his little mouth like a ten-year old about CHROY, and love motivating the disaster.

Malcolm slapping his 2 yr old son is super weird and evil..

Malcolm failed to explain Islamist-Progressive co-operation. It's purely about shared hostility to their common enemies/targets. Interesting that he ended this by rejecting a New-Age-like value of 'love above all', which seems to be Benjamin's sentiment. Will Ben reconsider, or double down? *based Greeks are based.*

I can't tell if this is a political converZation or a philosophical converZation. Blurred lines, that's all I'm saying. #Thicke. Lol.

This person seems hopped up. I mean, his speech patterns are sporadic. He needs to slow down. The novelist Karl Ove Knausgaard said something akin to literature (the words that last) is the ability to slow thinking down. Maybe he was just nervous or something.

Pffff 🙄, Troy was not about "love." What a child Malcolm is. I'm outa here already.

Hey, Malcolm. Maybe don't slap your toddler while being interviewed. He is just 2 years old, you. If you cant parent a child without abusing them, then maybe dont have them.