No, he's not. Focus on the original goalposts.
He said that you cannot live a happy and fulfilling life if you're not married and you don't have children.
That's provably false. It takes 12 seconds to run a search on influential people from history who were unmarried and had no children.
People like Isaac Newton, Nikola Tesla, Immanuel Kant, Jean-Paul Sartres, and Susan B. Anthony all lived unmarried lives and had no children.
In 100 years, people will still speak their names but no one will remember the random pleb who had a few kids who never did anything to change the world.
He's ignoring the individual circumstances with which other people must contend...circumstances he has never considered like war injuries, child abuse, sterility, etc.
One size fits all is bullshit and if you're a Bitcoiner, as an Austrian economist, you should understand that. It's pathetic that you do not.
Replies (7)
Big Reddit energy on all of this guys posts lol
Those names you listed are remembered because other people’s children learned to read, built universities, and carried forward civilization. Genius outliers don’t sustain societies. Normal people building families do.
Your exceptions don’t disprove the rule. They prove you’d rather optimize for being remembered than for actually mattering.
And yes, some face legitimate barriers. This wasn’t for them. It was for those hiding behind philosophy when they’re really just hiding from commitment.
You are one of the rare individuals here who are not in the herd mentality, I congratulate you
This is hilarious, and it's an ad hominem.
As someone who talks to people who have kids vs talking to Tesla, I'd rather talk to Tesla. Having Tesla's mind would be world changing. Would I give up my kids to have Tesla's mind? Of course not, but I don't have kids right now so I have nothing to give up. This is talk of oxytocin, not logic. Forget it Red, you will never get through to these people.
Yes it's for the greater good...
TIL influential = happy + fulfilled
