In this episode of Functional Philosophy, I answer the following question:

00:48 - "Should a competent (that is, not mentally retarded or mentally hindered in some significant way) adult be held equally culpable for both their conscious premises and those they hold implicitly? I’m referring specifically to those most fundamental to a person’s philosophy, such as free will, benevolent vs. malevolent universe premise, and whether they hold the cardinal virtues to be moral or immoral. I feel as though evasion is the only way one can refrain from consciously considering these most important issues, and it also requires evasion and/or dishonesty to consciously adopt morally abhorrent premises. Is this correct, or am I missing something?"

***

Functional Philosophy is the weekly Q&A podcast that helps you develop the philosophical foundations required to achieve certainty, success, and happiness.

Subscribe to hear Objectivist philosopher Charles Tew answer your questions on Ayn Rand's philosophy and its application to politics, career, romance, and more. New episodes on Mondays.

Website: https://www.charlestew.com

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/charlestew

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/charlestew