People sometimes tell me I change my mind a lot, but my view is that most don’t

change their minds nearly enough. And I think those who’ve known me over the years
or followed my work understand there’s always been a consistent core to what I
believe. Compare my development to, say Sohrab Ahmari, who as one profile describes
it, has been “a rebel, Iranian expat, an atheist, a bohemian dissident, an anti-
Mormon provocateur, a communist, a lawyer, a teacher, a libertine, and finally, a
Christian.”

In contrast, since discovering the basic arguments for capitalism and evolutionary
psychology in my teens, I’ve always been something of a free market fundamentalist
with a worldview heavily influenced by hereditarianism. There have been a few major
changes in terms of policy opinions: on the value of democracy, foreign policy and
immigration. But there’s a consistency here in the fact that in each case I’ve
moved in the direction of favoring globalism and open societies, while continuing
to give Darwin and Smith the respect they deserve.

More often, I don’t actually change my mind, but I’ll identify more or less with
one side of the spectrum or the other based on a shift in priorities or real-world
events. I’ve always been pro-abortion rights, and that has obviously become much
more relevant over the last couple of years. Few imagined that there would soon be
an assault on IVF, yet here we are, and someone might notice me taking more shots
at the right recently and think that this means I’ve somehow changed positions,
when it only shows that we are in a new political reality.

I’ve rarely seen anyone discuss the topic of what is ideal from the perspective of
how often and to what degree one should change their mind. As mentioned, a person
constantly jumping from one extremist ideology to another is usually a sign of some
kind of mental instability. At the same time, if an individual never shows any
development, it indicates that their mind is closed. Many people incline towards
mostly exposing themselves to the work of others who agree with them, and simply
become more convinced in their worldview. An individual who thinks the US must use
its military power to defend the free world gets into the political science
literature on the benefits of democracy and devours the memoirs of dissidents
living under authoritarian regimes. Sohrab Ahmaris, people who change their minds
all the time and in all kinds of weird directions, are rare, with most tilting too
far in the other direction. Those that do change are often just moving with the
ideological currents. A lot of conservatives became more anti-trade and anti-
immigration around 2016 for self-interested or tribalist reasons, and leftists
similarly adopted new weird ideas about gender over the same timeframe. Such cases
aren’t very interesting. Ideally, I think you want to change your mind much more
than the average person who cares about politics, but not too often on too many
fundamental things and not for careerist or tribalist reasons.

As you might have guessed, this is all a long-winded way of saying that I am the
best thinker, not only because I have the correct opinions on everything but
because the development of my thought over time reflects a commitment to logic,
intellectual integrity, and epistemological humility. Through the entire process,
there’s been a kind of teleology to my development. I’ve always been anti-equality
and in favor of processes of creative destruction that move humanity forward. This
meant starting out as unthinkingly liberal, because leftists were supposedly on the
side of progress, before realizing that they were actually the radical egalitarians
and becoming something close to a conventional conservative, and then shifting back
towards the middle as theocratic, conspiratorial, and populist ideas came to occupy
center stage on the right.People sometimes tell me I change my mind a lot, but my
view is that most don’t change their minds nearly enough. And I think those who’ve
known me over the years or followed my work understand there’s always been a
consistent core to what I believe. Compare my development to, say Sohrab Ahmari,
who as one profile describes it, has been “a rebel, Iranian expat, an atheist, a
bohemian dissident, an anti-Mormon provocateur, a communist, a lawyer, a teacher, a
libertine, and finally, a Christian.”

In contrast, since discovering the basic arguments for capitalism and evolutionary
psychology in my teens, I’ve always been something of a free market fundamentalist
with a worldview heavily influenced by hereditarianism. There have been a few major
changes in terms of policy opinions: on the value of democracy, foreign policy and
immigration. But there’s a consistency here in the fact that in each case I’ve
moved in the direction of favoring globalism and open societies, while continuing
to give Darwin and Smith the respect they deserve.

More often, I don’t actually change my mind, but I’ll identify more or less with
one side of the spectrum or the other based on a shift in priorities or real-world
events. I’ve always been pro-abortion rights, and that has obviously become much
more relevant over the last couple of years. Few imagined that there would soon be
an assault on IVF, yet here we are, and someone might notice me taking more shots
at the right recently and think that this means I’ve somehow changed positions,
when it only shows that we are in a new political reality.

I’ve rarely seen anyone discuss the topic of what is ideal from the perspective of
how often and to what degree one should change their mind. As mentioned, a person
constantly jumping from one extremist ideology to another is usually a sign of some
kind of mental instability. At the same time, if an individual never shows any
development, it indicates that their mind is closed. Many people incline towards
mostly exposing themselves to the work of others who agree with them, and simply
become more convinced in their worldview. An individual who thinks the US must use
its military power to defend the free world gets into the political science
literature on the benefits of democracy and devours the memoirs of dissidents
living under authoritarian regimes. Sohrab Ahmaris, people who change their minds
all the time and in all kinds of weird directions, are rare, with most tilting too
far in the other direction. Those that do change are often just moving with the
ideological currents. A lot of conservatives became more anti-trade and anti-
immigration around 2016 for self-interested or tribalist reasons, and leftists
similarly adopted new weird ideas about gender over the same timeframe. Such cases
aren’t very interesting. Ideally, I think you want to change your mind much more
than the average person who cares about politics, but not too often on too many
fundamental things and not for careerist or tribalist reasons.

As you might have guessed, this is all a long-winded way of saying that I am the
best thinker, not only because I have the correct opinions on everything but
because the development of my thought over time reflects a commitment to logic,
intellectual integrity, and epistemological humility. Through the entire process,
there’s been a kind of teleology to my development. I’ve always been anti-equality
and in favor of processes of creative destruction that move humanity forward. This
meant starting out as unthinkingly liberal, because leftists were supposedly on the
side of progress, before realizing that they were actually the radical egalitarians
and becoming something close to a conventional conservative, and then shifting back
towards the middle as theocratic, conspiratorial, and populist ideas came to occupy
center stage on the right.People sometimes tell me I change my mind a lot, but my
view is that most don’t change their minds nearly enough. And I think those who’ve
known me over the years or followed my work understand there’s always been a
consistent core to what I believe. Compare my development to, say Sohrab Ahmari,
who as one profile describes it, has been “a rebel, Iranian expat, an atheist, a
bohemian dissident, an anti-Mormon provocateur, a communist, a lawyer, a teacher, a
libertine, and finally, a Christian.”

In contrast, since discovering the basic arguments for capitalism and evolutionary
psychology in my teens, I’ve always been something of a free market fundamentalist
with a worldview heavily influenced by hereditarianism. There have been a few major
changes in terms of policy opinions: on the value of democracy, foreign policy and
immigration. But there’s a consistency here in the fact that in each case I’ve
moved in the direction of favoring globalism and open societies, while continuing
to give Darwin and Smith the respect they deserve.

More often, I don’t actually change my mind, but I’ll identify more or less with
one side of the spectrum or the other based on a shift in priorities or real-world
events. I’ve always been pro-abortion rights, and that has obviously become much
more relevant over the last couple of years. Few imagined that there would soon be
an assault on IVF, yet here we are, and someone might notice me taking more shots
at the right recently and think that this means I’ve somehow changed positions,
when it only shows that we are in a new political reality.

I’ve rarely seen anyone discuss the topic of what is ideal from the perspective of
how often and to what degree one should change their mind. As mentioned, a person
constantly jumping from one extremist ideology to another is usually a sign of some
kind of mental instability. At the same time, if an individual never shows any
development, it indicates that their mind is closed. Many people incline towards
mostly exposing themselves to the work of others who agree with them, and simply
become more convinced in their worldview. An individual who thinks the US must use
its military power to defend the free world gets into the political science
literature on the benefits of democracy and devours the memoirs of dissidents
living under authoritarian regimes. Sohrab Ahmaris, people who change their minds
all the time and in all kinds of weird directions, are rare, with most tilting too
far in the other direction. Those that do change are often just moving with the
ideological currents. A lot of conservatives became more anti-trade and anti-
immigration around 2016 for self-interested or tribalist reasons, and leftists
similarly adopted new weird ideas about gender over the same timeframe. Such cases
aren’t very interesting. Ideally, I think you want to change your mind much more
than the average person who cares about politics, but not too often on too many
fundamental things and not for careerist or tribalist reasons.

As you might have guessed, this is all a long-winded way of saying that I am the
best thinker, not only because I have the correct opinions on everything but
because the development of my thought over time reflects a commitment to logic,
intellectual integrity, and epistemological humility. Through the entire process,
there’s been a kind of teleology to my development. I’ve always been anti-equality
and in favor of processes of creative destruction that move humanity forward. This
meant starting out as unthinkingly liberal, because leftists were supposedly on the
side of progress, before realizing that they were actually the radical egalitarians
and becoming something close to a conventional conservative, and then shifting back
towards the middle as theocratic, conspiratorial, and populist ideas came to occupy
center stage on the right.People sometimes tell me I change my mind a lot, but my
view is that most don’t change their minds nearly enough. And I think those who’ve
known me over the years or followed my work understand there’s always been a
consistent core to what I believe. Compare my development to, say Sohrab Ahmari,
who as one profile describes it, has been “a rebel, Iranian expat, an atheist, a
bohemian dissident, an anti-Mormon provocateur, a communist, a lawyer, a teacher, a
libertine, and finally, a Christian.”

In contrast, since discovering the basic arguments for capitalism and evolutionary
psychology in my teens, I’ve always been something of a free market fundamentalist
with a worldview heavily influenced by hereditarianism. There have been a few major
changes in terms of policy opinions: on the value of democracy, foreign policy and
immigration. But there’s a consistency here in the fact that in each case I’ve
moved in the direction of favoring globalism and open societies, while continuing
to give Darwin and Smith the respect they deserve.

More often, I don’t actually change my mind, but I’ll identify more or less with
one side of the spectrum or the other based on a shift in priorities or real-world
events. I’ve always been pro-abortion rights, and that has obviously become much
more relevant over the last couple of years. Few imagined that there would soon be
an assault on IVF, yet here we are, and someone might notice me taking more shots
at the right recently and think that this means I’ve somehow changed positions,
when it only shows that we are in a new political reality.

I’ve rarely seen anyone discuss the topic of what is ideal from the perspective of
how often and to what degree one should change their mind. As mentioned, a person
constantly jumping from one extremist ideology to another is usually a sign of some
kind of mental instability. At the same time, if an individual never shows any
development, it indicates that their mind is closed. Many people incline towards
mostly exposing themselves to the work of others who agree with them, and simply
become more convinced in their worldview. An individual who thinks the US must use
its military power to defend the free world gets into the political science
literature on the benefits of democracy and devours the memoirs of dissidents
living under authoritarian regimes. Sohrab Ahmaris, people who change their minds
all the time and in all kinds of weird directions, are rare, with most tilting too
far in the other direction. Those that do change are often just moving with the
ideological currents. A lot of conservatives became more anti-trade and anti-
immigration around 2016 for self-interested or tribalist reasons, and leftists
similarly adopted new weird ideas about gender over the same timeframe. Such cases
aren’t very interesting. Ideally, I think you want to change your mind much more
than the average person who cares about politics, but not too often on too many
fundamental things and not for careerist or tribalist reasons.

As you might have guessed, this is all a long-winded way of saying that I am the
best thinker, not only because I have the correct opinions on everything but
because the development of my thought over time reflects a commitment to logic,
intellectual integrity, and epistemological humility. Through the entire process,
there’s been a kind of teleology to my development. I’ve always been anti-equality
and in favor of processes of creative destruction that move humanity forward. This
meant starting out as unthinkingly liberal, because leftists were supposedly on the
side of progress, before realizing that they were actually the radical egalitarians
and becoming something close to a conventional conservative, and then shifting back
towards the middle as theocratic, conspiratorial, and populist ideas came to occupy
center stage on the right.People sometimes tell me I change my mind a lot, but my
view is that most don’t change their minds nearly enough. And I think those who’ve
known me over the years or followed my work understand there’s always been a
consistent core to what I believe. Compare my development to, say Sohrab Ahmari,
who as one profile describes it, has been “a rebel, Iranian expat, an atheist, a
bohemian dissident, an anti-Mormon provocateur, a communist, a lawyer, a teacher, a
libertine, and finally, a Christian.”

In contrast, since discovering the basic arguments for capitalism and evolutionary
psychology in my teens, I’ve always been something of a free market fundamentalist
with a worldview heavily influenced by hereditarianism. There have been a few major
changes in terms of policy opinions: on the value of democracy, foreign policy and
immigration. But there’s a consistency here in the fact that in each case I’ve
moved in the direction of favoring globalism and open societies, while continuing
to give Darwin and Smith the respect they deserve.

More often, I don’t actually change my mind, but I’ll identify more or less with
one side of the spectrum or the other based on a shift in priorities or real-world
events. I’ve always been pro-abortion rights, and that has obviously become much
more relevant over the last couple of years. Few imagined that there would soon be
an assault on IVF, yet here we are, and someone might notice me taking more shots
at the right recently and think that this means I’ve somehow changed positions,
when it only shows that we are in a new political reality.
I’ve rarely seen anyone discuss the topic of what is ideal from the perspective of
how often and to what degree one should change their mind. As mentioned, a person
constantly jumping from one extremist ideology to another is usually a sign of some
kind of mental instability. At the same time, if an individual never shows any
development, it indicates that their mind is closed. Many people incline towards
mostly exposing themselves to the work of others who agree with them, and simply
become more convinced in their worldview. An individual who thinks the US must use
its military power to defend the free world gets into the political science
literature on the benefits of democracy and devours the memoirs of dissidents
living under authoritarian regimes. Sohrab Ahmaris, people who change their minds
all the time and in all kinds of weird directions, are rare, with most tilting too
far in the other direction. Those that do change are often just moving with the
ideological currents. A lot of conservatives became more anti-trade and anti-
immigration around 2016 for self-interested or tribalist reasons, and leftists
similarly adopted new weird ideas about gender over the same timeframe. Such cases
aren’t very interesting. Ideally, I think you want to change your mind much more
than the average person who cares about politics, but not too often on too many
fundamental things and not for careerist or tribalist reasons.

As you might have guessed, this is all a long-winded way of saying that I am the
best thinker, not only because I have the correct opinions on everything but
because the development of my thought over time reflects a commitment to logic,
intellectual integrity, and epistemological humility. Through the entire process,
there’s been a kind of teleology to my development. I’ve always been anti-equality
and in favor of processes of creative destruction that move humanity forward. This
meant starting out as unthinkingly liberal, because leftists were supposedly on the
side of progress, before realizing that they were actually the radical egalitarians
and becoming something close to a conventional conservative, and then shifting back
towards the middle as theocratic, conspiratorial, and populist ideas came to occupy
center stage on the right.People sometimes tell me I change my mind a lot, but my
view is that most don’t change their minds nearly enough. And I think those who’ve
known me over the years or followed my work understand there’s always been a
consistent core to what I believe. Compare my development to, say Sohrab Ahmari,
who as one profile describes it, has been “a rebel, Iranian expat, an atheist, a
bohemian dissident, an anti-Mormon provocateur, a communist, a lawyer, a teacher, a
libertine, and finally, a Christian.”

In contrast, since discovering the basic arguments for capitalism and evolutionary
psychology in my teens, I’ve always been something of a free market fundamentalist
with a worldview heavily influenced by hereditarianism. There have been a few major
changes in terms of policy opinions: on the value of democracy, foreign policy and
immigration. But there’s a consistency here in the fact that in each case I’ve
moved in the direction of favoring globalism and open societies, while continuing
to give Darwin and Smith the respect they deserve.

More often, I don’t actually change my mind, but I’ll identify more or less with
one side of the spectrum or the other based on a shift in priorities or real-world
events. I’ve always been pro-abortion rights, and that has obviously become much
more relevant over the last couple of years. Few imagined that there would soon be
an assault on IVF, yet here we are, and someone might notice me taking more shots
at the right recently and think that this means I’ve somehow changed positions,
when it only shows that we are in a new political reality.

I’ve rarely seen anyone discuss the topic of what is ideal from the perspective of
how often and to what degree one should change their mind. As mentioned, a person
constantly jumping from one extremist ideology to another is usually a sign of some
kind of mental instability. At the same time, if an individual never shows any
development, it indicates that their mind is closed. Many people incline towards
mostly exposing themselves to the work of others who agree with them, and simply
become more convinced in their worldview. An individual who thinks the US must use
its military power to defend the free world gets into the political science
literature on the benefits of democracy and devours the memoirs of dissidents
living under authoritarian regimes. Sohrab Ahmaris, people who change their minds
all the time and in all kinds of weird directions, are rare, with most tilting too
far in the other direction. Those that do change are often just moving with the
ideological currents. A lot of conservatives became more anti-trade and anti-
immigration around 2016 for self-interested or tribalist reasons, and leftists
similarly adopted new weird ideas about gender over the same timeframe. Such cases
aren’t very interesting. Ideally, I think you want to change your mind much more
than the average person who cares about politics, but not too often on too many
fundamental things and not for careerist or tribalist reasons.

As you might have guessed, this is all a long-winded way of saying that I am the
best thinker, not only because I have the correct opinions on everything but
because the development of my thought over time reflects a commitment to logic,
intellectual integrity, and epistemological humility. Through the entire process,
there’s been a kind of teleology to my development. I’ve always been anti-equality
and in favor of processes of creative destruction that move humanity forward. This
meant starting out as unthinkingly liberal, because leftists were supposedly on the
side of progress, before realizing that they were actually the radical egalitarians
and becoming something close to a conventional conservative, and then shifting back
towards the middle as theocratic, conspiratorial, and populist ideas came to occupy
center stage on the right.People sometimes tell me I change my mind a lot, but my
view is that most don’t change their minds nearly enough. And I think those who’ve
known me over the years or followed my work understand there’s always been a
consistent core to what I believe. Compare my development to, say Sohrab Ahmari,
who as one profile describes it, has been “a rebel, Iranian expat, an atheist, a
bohemian dissident, an anti-Mormon provocateur, a communist, a lawyer, a teacher, a
libertine, and finally, a Christian.”

In contrast, since discovering the basic arguments for capitalism and evolutionary
psychology in my teens, I’ve always been something of a free market fundamentalist
with a worldview heavily influenced by hereditarianism. There have been a few major
changes in terms of policy opinions: on the value of democracy, foreign policy and
immigration. But there’s a consistency here in the fact that in each case I’ve
moved in the direction of favoring globalism and open societies, while continuing
to give Darwin and Smith the respect they deserve.

More often, I don’t actually change my mind, but I’ll identify more or less with
one side of the spectrum or the other based on a shift in priorities or real-world
events. I’ve always been pro-abortion rights, and that has obviously become much
more relevant over the last couple of years. Few imagined that there would soon be
an assault on IVF, yet here we are, and someone might notice me taking more shots
at the right recently and think that this means I’ve somehow changed positions,
when it only shows that we are in a new political reality.

I’ve rarely seen anyone discuss the topic of what is ideal from the perspective of
how often and to what degree one should change their mind. As mentioned, a person
constantly jumping from one extremist ideology to another is usually a sign of some
kind of mental instability. At the same time, if an individual never shows any
development, it indicates that their mind is closed. Many people incline towards
mostly exposing themselves to the work of others who agree with them, and simply
become more convinced in their worldview. An individual who thinks the US must use
its military power to defend the free world gets into the political science
literature on the benefits of democracy and devours the memoirs of dissidents
living under authoritarian regimes. Sohrab Ahmaris, people who change their minds
all the time and in all kinds of weird directions, are rare, with most tilting too
far in the other direction. Those that do change are often just moving with the
ideological currents. A lot of conservatives became more anti-trade and anti-
immigration around 2016 for self-interested or tribalist reasons, and leftists
similarly adopted new weird ideas about gender over the same timeframe. Such cases
aren’t very interesting. Ideally, I think you want to change your mind much more
than the average person who cares about politics, but not too often on too many
fundamental things and not for careerist or tribalist reasons.

As you might have guessed, this is all a long-winded way of saying that I am the
best thinker, not only because I have the correct opinions on everything but
because the development of my thought over time reflects a commitment to logic,
intellectual integrity, and epistemological humility. Through the entire process,
there’s been a kind of teleology to my development. I’ve always been anti-equality
and in favor of processes of creative destruction that move humanity forward. This
meant starting out as unthinkingly liberal, because leftists were supposedly on the
side of progress, before realizing that they were actually the radical egalitarians
and becoming something close to a conventional conservative, and then shifting back
towards the middle as theocratic, conspiratorial, and populist ideas came to occupy
center stage on the right.People sometimes tell me I change my mind a lot, but my
view is that most don’t change their minds nearly enough. And I think those who’ve
known me over the years or followed my work understand there’s always been a
consistent core to what I believe. Compare my development to, say Sohrab Ahmari,
who as one profile describes it, has been “a rebel, Iranian expat, an atheist, a
bohemian dissident, an anti-Mormon provocateur, a communist, a lawyer, a teacher, a
libertine, and finally, a Christian.”

In contrast, since discovering the basic arguments for capitalism and evolutionary
psychology in my teens, I’ve always been something of a free market fundamentalist
with a worldview heavily influenced by hereditarianism. There have been a few major
changes in terms of policy opinions: on the value of democracy, foreign policy and
immigration. But there’s a consistency here in the fact that in each case I’ve
moved in the direction of favoring globalism and open societies, while continuing
to give Darwin and Smith the respect they deserve.

More often, I don’t actually change my mind, but I’ll identify more or less with
one side of the spectrum or the other based on a shift in priorities or real-world
events. I’ve always been pro-abortion rights, and that has obviously become much
more relevant over the last couple of years. Few imagined that there would soon be
an assault on IVF, yet here we are, and someone might notice me taking more shots
at the right recently and think that this means I’ve somehow changed positions,
when it only shows that we are in a new political reality.

I’ve rarely seen anyone discuss the topic of what is ideal from the perspective of
how often and to what degree one should change their mind. As mentioned, a person
constantly jumping from one extremist ideology to another is usually a sign of some
kind of mental instability. At the same time, if an individual never shows any
development, it indicates that their mind is closed. Many people incline towards
mostly exposing themselves to the work of others who agree with them, and simply
become more convinced in their worldview. An individual who thinks the US must use
its military power to defend the free world gets into the political science
literature on the benefits of democracy and devours the memoirs of dissidents
living under authoritarian regimes. Sohrab Ahmaris, people who change their minds
all the time and in all kinds of weird directions, are rare, with most tilting too
far in the other direction. Those that do change are often just moving with the
ideological currents. A lot of conservatives became more anti-trade and anti-
immigration around 2016 for self-interested or tribalist reasons, and leftists
similarly adopted new weird ideas about gender over the same timeframe. Such cases
aren’t very interesting. Ideally, I think you want to change your mind much more
than the average person who cares about politics, but not too often on too many
fundamental things and not for careerist or tribalist reasons.
As you might have guessed, this is all a long-winded way of saying that I am the
best thinker, not only because I have the correct opinions on everything but
because the development of my thought over time reflects a commitment to logic,
intellectual integrity, and epistemological humility. Through the entire process,
there’s been a kind of teleology to my development. I’ve always been anti-equality
and in favor of processes of creative destruction that move humanity forward. This
meant starting out as unthinkingly liberal, because leftists were supposedly on the
side of progress, before realizing that they were actually the radical egalitarians
and becoming something close to a conventional conservative, and then shifting back
towards the middle as theocratic, conspiratorial, and populist ideas came to occupy
center stage on the right.