Naval Ravikant and Aaron Stupple — How to Raise a Sovereign Child, A Freedom-Maximizing Approach to Parenting (#788)

Hi Tim, long time listener and huge fan of the show. Many of your shows over the years have radically changed my life. But this one… oh boy. I tried to keep an open mind, I really did. But honestly, this was the worst thing I've heard in a long time. I'm a therapist in hippie Oregon and I've worked with dozens of victims of this style of parenting. I could go on and on about the harms that this causes. I don't recall ever hearing of it working. Unrestricted freedom is not good for a person of any age. Unrestricted screen time? Even adults can't handle that. This style of parenting is neglectful and wildly irresponsible. Also a massive straw man argument, to suggest that having limits is authoritarian. I have rules and limits with my child, but that doesn't mean we don't talk about WHY, talk about feelings, explore barriers/resistance, get creative about solutions. But at the end of the day, my kids have to go to school and brush their teeth, because I love them.

Similar feelings to the below- im a single mom of 4, with another on the way..eldest is 12. I love naval but ya, curious how his kids feel about being unschooled? also he's projecting his love for ''no rules'' on his kids. I love breaking rules and defying the status quo, im a scientist/researcher by training so its in my blood..so its not ''either/or''.. I send my kids to school but very lax overall, we have a basic structure so we function daily, I do hate mornings (!!) but kids love going to their little community and when it comes to all the rules or school, I encourage the kids to be open minded.. i.e. in other countries they learn different facts, different strategies so school learnings are not set it stone but take the good and stay curious. thoughts in no particular order: write a book when you've actually RAISED your kids, Aarons eldest is like 7? thats such an easy age still. wait till they are 30, right now this is a theoretical livestream experiment, def. nothing to write a book on! lots of opinions expressed in the podcast about traditional parents sound really conservative- majority of parents I know dont have ''rules'' like the way these guys make it sound, but simple things that give kids a safe framework to thrive. Aaron and Naval really make it black/white. Kids look at adults to be leaders, not their peers. Everyone says things like ''brush your teeth because cavities will rot them otherwise and it'll hurt'', not 'brush your teeth because I say so''. My point is parents have become naturally better and more attuned over the years.Schools are not prisons, my middle schooler especially used to beg for a sick day and now he's like first out the door as he's really seeking the socialization in a safe place where he is slowly transitioning to independence (outlunch!). we're in NYC and the teachers we have are amazing and the kids are lucky to have their life enriched with all these special people they wouldn't encounter otherwise. im sure all over the globe this holds true.Screen time, im not the screen police here, I do agree iPads are great babysitters, and given life is more and more entrenched in tech its a disservice to the kids not to get them used to tech early. and agree gaming has a very interesting positive effect to strategy, cognition, negotiation, and online ''how to be civil'' effect. However cant have screens instead of school, and the kids dont want that sort of thing either. duh with the treats, if you offer them liberally without restrictions kids naturally restrict and seek good food choicesthere is nothing wrong with having kids same age in classes!!! they like having their ''true'' peers, especially in those ages it REALLY matters that they hang out with kids the same age. aside from developmentally they are similar, they can empathize and share experiences/disappointments that really strengthens them internally. most schools combine kids in the afterschool realm. again Aaron/naval made it too dogmatic and ''black''.. Overall @Tim I think you should interview Janet Lansbury she has a much more reasonable approach to parenting kids that resonates to normal child psychology not this ''faux'' out-of-the-box parenting style these guys talk about. also she raised her kids without screens but this was decades ago where it wasn't the way it is today so I suppose it made more sense, and her daughters are grownup now so she has something to say about that. I actually mentioned this podcast to my eldest and he didnt like the idea of not going to school at all! so with all due respect to Aaron/naval maybe consider what your kids actually need and seek rather than creating this artificial rebel against a status that truly has the best intentions for the kids

Yes to comment re: Janet Lansbury! And to the work of plenty of other folks (John Holt, Alfie Kohn) who have written extensively about taking children seriously, rethinking rules, unschooling etc in a nuanced way. And as an adult who seeks actively to restrict my own screen time use, often resorting to apps, hacks, rules for myself, etc, a lot of the discussion around unlimited screen time didn't resonate at all with my own experience. My child is only a toddler, but there are so many ways to get at the basic principle here — treating your child respectfully, taking their opinion seriously, collaboratively and creatively navigating boundaries — in what seems to be like a more balanced way.

Excellent podcast. I unknowingly have practiced this form of parenting and both of my sons one a teen and the other is an adult are very responsible empathetic young men. My son's pet cat has also been raised with a lot of freedom and she is also exceptionally well behaved

I listened to this whole episode with one eyebrow raised. There are seeds of truth there, sure, about school not nurturing interests very well, and taboos creating more desire, but the premise is so oversimplified that it's been turned into a minefield of potential disasters. There are times when loosening rules and restrictions, along with deliberate communication and monitoring, for certain types of children, in certain circumstances, can be extremely beneficial. Especially when navigating the needs of neurodivergent/precocious children. But to take this as a blanket philosophy that can be applied to any child, under any circumstance, is going to leave a lot of kids feeling lost and dysregulated, with dopamine addictions, nutritional deficiencies, and all sorts of issues around self-discipline as they reach adulthood. The expectations of college and the working world are going to completely derail these kids if they're not used to living with rules. It's probably my least favorite episode yet BUT, that said, it was good to hear a lot of devils advocating. Because that's exactly what was called for in this situation. I'm 100% on board with Dr. Becky. Sturdy, calm, regulated, outside-the-washing-machine parenting is the way to go, kids need to know they have boundaries AND that their parents are willing to work hard to set them in the right ways. This just came across as a lazy, self-important mess.

Can you start posting YouTube/YouTubeMusic podcast link too?

As a fellow Tim, I also try to keep an open mind. However this episode is one of bottom ones – the theories are of a privileged 1% class of self-appointed geniuses. Naval – perhaps genius in high tech and making money and "Dr." Stupple – father of 4 or 5 kids who have not even touch teenagerhood. As a father of 5 who do have kids living into adulthood, I can only say kids do want direction, guidelines and even rules to manage their lives. Not only for their sake, but for your own sake. U don't want them be 100% addicted to video games or bad friends and skipping out on a career to be self-supporting. Many of us don't have the Naval millionaire / billionaire status to support their kids thru every mistake. Let's see how this episode holds up (or not) in 10 or 20 years… but I applaud your bravery in posting. I'm also deeply disappointed in Naval on his child raising ideas – these are not investment companies where if it fails, it's ok. If the kids hit drugs, bad influences and simply don't have a career, u will be holding the bag with endless stress till you die. I say this because I've seen it in the family. My poor mom – never a moment of peace. Now it really makes me doubt Naval's his high-tech analysis or is it an Elon-gift to talk investors and Wall Street ? Sorry, I want back my time in listening to these 2 "experts" and I applaud u for being the skeptic in the room. Just my 2 cents.

There seem two different arguments here: 1. Non-parenting. Kids make all decisions. And 2. A style of parenting that involves explaining why, letting kids learn from their choices, fail up, etc. These are two very different things. Your guests don’t seem to be practicing the first in actuality. What they describe as their actual practices is everything I learned about classroom management as a teacher and the very practical reasonable way I also parent. So what are they advocating?The issue deserves clarity.

I haven't listened yet, but I'm curious. I think this type of parenting could work well for some and not others. My parents were massively controlling of me – I'm smart, sensitive, and disciplined already, and their input nearly destroyed my life. I ran away at age 15, only to end up finding a teacher that directed me to Harvard (full scholarship) and moving in with a friend whose mother was never home. While my friend partied and had parties, I stayed in my room and studied biology. It was a gift to not have an overbearing parent around. My sister on the other hand, never received rules or discipline from my parents. They let her do what she wanted, and she went off the rails. Alcohol addiction at age 14, cocaine addiction at age 19. Some children need limits (like my sister), others need to be left alone (like me).

I'm a parent and really have a tough time getting parenting advice from anyone. With that being said I know of someone who has a really great approach that could be a good podcast guest. Her name in Laine Lipsky – Calm Heart Parenting. She specializes in helping parents whose kids are "tough assignments".

I’m a mom of two who genuinely enjoyed this and think it’s a workable approach with one major caveat – this seems to rely on one or both parents being in the home during the working day. I thought it was strange that neither men mentioned whether their wives stay at home. If they do, that would be an extremely important bit of intel? If I’m going to apply some of this to our family (and I hope to!) I’d love to understand that dynamic better. Also, this is completely non workable when the parents are abusive, disregulated, etc. not only will the be unable to authentically implement it…many kids rely on school as a respite not a prison when their home life is terrible (myself included, despite not embracing the authoritarianism. The alternative was worse.)

Interesting. But I’ll stick with the Good Inside approach.

I liked Tim’s sceptical questions and I think he really did a good job with navigating this controversial conversation. But what worries me is that with this conversation the Tim Ferriss show joins the ranks of media content, that publishes almost anything just to whip up emotions and get more exposure. I hope this was just a blip of that, and that the show is not going down that road. The guest in this podcast surprises me that he would risk altering the children’s gut bacteria, oral and general health, mess with the dopamine cycle, just to make a point in his parenting philosophy. Even though we might not have scientific proof for all the damage that could be done, I personally would still like to be on the safe side with kids. I think it’s better to save them from potentially irreversible changes that can be easily avoided.

This podcast was wild and fascinating to me. I don't buy into it- he largely backed his claims based on, "No kid ever says they wanted their parent to have more control." I've said that! I was given too much independence and too few boundaries and while elements of it served me well, there was some collateral damage. There are many other reasons I disagree with the premise, but most have been echoed in the comments already. BUT I liked the way the info was presented and I like how Tim respectfully debated. I think it's healthy to not only get different opinions and perspectives, but also witness people respectfully disagreeing- especially in this era of polarization. That took courage, Tim, and although painful to listen to at times, I was fascinated by this episode and it sharpened me. Strangely I've been recommending it to people just because it stirs up fascinating conversation and makes me think more about what I believe and why. Thank you for this episode, it was highly entertaining to me (and quite scary at times :D). I'd welcome more episodes like this.

Thank you Tim for experimenting with this one and posting. I liked the way you tried to push back to avoid the "1 or 0" extremism the 2 were getting into with wording. Did you feel like you held back on your questioning? Those two were embodying what you mentioned a lot about being a public persona/influencer: "becoming a caricature and going more and more extreme into statements to feed what brings them attention". Here are more questions / remarks: What was Naval's or Aaron's childhood like? They seem to paint everything in a binary way.How did their parents parent them?What did they appreciate about their parents way of raising them?Did they get bullied at school as kids?So they are at peace to leave YouTube/Apps teach their kids for 8 hours a day what they should want and be interested in in life? They are millions of channels on YT, most for profit not for benefit of the kid viewing.Schools is managed by the government (voted by the community we live in) and has a goal to "educate" kids NOT FOR PROFIT. IPADS/YOUTUBE/APPS are all FOR PROFIT directed by companies whose underlying goal is profit for investors through keeping one's attention. How do they think about this?Naval says he can't control his eating or screen time so why help set boundaries for his kid? So because Naval cannot bring mindfulness to his actions, he decides he won't help his kid learn safe boundaries? Not surprising though – hard to preach what you don't live by.What kind of involvement do they have in daily life preparation? Setting the table, preparing food, cleaning dishes, cleaning house etc? If none, it sounds like kids live in a hotel. What about the importance of contributing to one own's community ? What about building the awareness and gratitude for how they are able to live? Last: Tim you're known to bring world experts and deep dive, here neither are experts. They have kids and none of them are old enough to have a full parenting cycle to look back on. A bit surprising you shared if I'm honest. It seems to me that the two need to dive into deep personal work and heal their childhood wounds to find a balance to what they preach. It seems that so much comes down to their own fears of not being loved by their kids ! Much love.

I really tried to keep an open mind while listening to this podcast and struggled to relate but still kept an open mind. And then I realized that I actually did take this hands off, heavy freedom approach during Covid time out of complete necessity and many disasters came out of it. Aaron’s oldest child is 7, just 7! Still an easy age and stakes are not that high. There are periods of time when I take this approach such as unlimited screen time or let them eat what they want or not brush your teeth every night (sickness, vacations, long flights, crunch period at work etc). It would be an absolute disaster if I let that continue. The after effects can be observed in short to medium term, you don’t even have to wait for a long time. Also 3 dudes talking about it (I know Naval commented on this) when we all know that kids are at their worst behavior with moms and moms have the hardest time balancing all of it. All in all, this is lazy style of parenting and feels like a cop out.

probably the most thought provoking and potentially controversial episode…. and still didnt understand what I have to do when my kids want to eat Nutella instead of vegetables. Using the sunscreen example: should I wait 20years so they grasp the side effects when it's too late?

This was a great interview. I have been pushing an interest based learning premise for many years. The things that I have learned that have served me well are all from a passion and interest based drive. Those things that I accomplished from that passion and direction gave me the knowledge framework to approach anything I have had an interest to pursue. Your example of the youtube videos with your daughter is a great example of how a single interest will lead you down a road of learning all the things that are attached to that interest. All of the things that were pushed at me to be compliant I still have disdain for to this day. They may have been well intentioned but the end result is that baggage needs to be removed to reframe the real reason to learn and know the value of those things. The dishonesty and clear disception from many adults around you as you are earnestly trying to make your way in the world as a young child and into your adult years is astounding and insulting as you observe the reality around you and it does not add up. Many of the comments below are the mindset that perpetuates tradition that likely does not serve us any longer and delays autonomy from childhood into adulthood. Thanks

Hi Tim, Long-time reader and listener here. This was one of the most thought-provoking episodes in a while—maybe because I’m a dad and the topic resonates with me, but also because of the “extreme” or fringe philosophy presented. I understand why some might be put off or confused, and while I don’t agree with most of Aaron’s views, they made me think and reflect deeply, which I truly appreciate. That’s what makes an episode stand out. I’d much rather hear something that challenges my thinking than another repeat guest (not that I don’t enjoy Seth or Greg, but we’ve already heard the essence of their insights in past episodes). So, for what it’s worth, I’d love to hear more of these “controversial” discussions! Best, Dee B.

This was definitely an eye opening conversation that I looked forward to after hearing about the book from a number of fellow parents. As Naval said, there are ideas / approaches to be tested, but being 100% completely hands off (IMHO) could be potentially quite dangerous (unhealthy eating habits, screen time addition, laziness, etc). Will be interesting to observe over time how children who get parented in this style grow into capable (or incapable) adults ready to survive and thrive in "the real world." Thank you guys.

Tim, you were looking for evidence of this style of parenting working. There should be plenty. There was a trend in the 1960's & 70 called non-authoritarian parenting that resembles taking children seriously. I spoke to my parents (both 40+ years of experience in education) and raised three kids. Apparently it was incredibly difficult to be around the kids raised in such households. My father contrasted a lax Dutch approach with the strict French approach which wouldn't shy away from a whack on the ears). Phrases "tu te tais" or "remain silent" with a very stern look were clearly meant to be Intimidating. Say what you will about that, but these children were able to sit stilll in a restaurant for two hours, whereas Dutch children with considerably more freedom were often hard to deal with (spoiled) screaming and running around. Yes more childlike, but definitely not as easy to work with. This obviously is anecdotal evidence and it is harder to verify to what extent these parents not only applied "the removing rules" but also "being a guide/creative problem solving ander understanding" part. Also my Father defended the mandatory public schooling by saying often times the brightest children could fare well without support and more freedom, but giving maximal freedom to children who were not doing so well by school standards would often lead to even further backsliding. This is seen in more areas, for example in making quarterly conversations with the parents optional those who most needed to show up, often didn't. Ofcourse if one were to let go of exams, perhaps the benchmarks lid shift. In fact some European countries don't have exams, but only entry tests for university, which in essence makings exams opt-in versus non-negotiable. He made the point that there isn't a one size fits all approach. He acknowledged that there are definitely problems with the current system (and he didn't reject a factory farming analogy), but for better or worse it more or less works. I wouldn't be the first one to massively dislike the school system, but a few years later ending up being very grateful for having been forced to learn French, when I found out through and exchange that I really like language learning. After the conversation I thought: perhaps there are ways to create more freedom within constraints within the current education system. Perhaps not every kid should be able to dodge the school systems altogether and perhaps not every parent is ready to be a guide. Perhaps thoughtful action is best directed at the teacher/ and parent level. As I heard Jacob Collier say it best in relation to music, but It applies equally to teaching: the thing that is right for you will meet you where you are, and modulate you slightly away to somewhere else in an interesting way

Also, to claim tht children are adults with less knowledge is probably to ignore huge swaths of developmental psychology around brain development (such as under development of the neo cortex). And claiming that addiction is overrated might also ignore data around patterns of behaviour that get cemented due to early age exposure (much like how kids before the age of 25 that have never smoked likely never will – yes I am aware that nicotine is highly addictive, but it's more about the analogy here)

Such an interesting take on parenting i have never been exposed to before and the total opposite of how i was raised!! Why? Because i said so was my dad's reasoning, which never made any sense to me. I understand children under the age of 7 are just downloading the programme of how to be a human, they don't have the full use of the pre-frontal cortex which is still developing. I have met some god-awful free range children of hippy parents and this was my knee jerk reaction in the begining, but listening on i was fascinated. Thank you so much for making me think and giving me such interesting interviews!! xx

This is so irresponsible and an extremely privileged way of approaching parenthood. To give up your own career ambitions in order to be present enough for your multiple children to properly provide them with "opportunities" as Aaron liked to point out is not only a privileged baseline but also a harmful example of the parent/child relationship as those children mature into adults. Their only example of a family dynamic will be a stay-at-home parent at the ready to serve the desires of the children but only at their whims. This does not show work ethic, stability, leadership, or even how to navigate the outside world. The fact that these fathers have the means to forever support their children regardless of their outcomes is also at play. If you have a multimillionaire safety net, sure explore your interests to your hearts content. But if they had to really hustle and learn the realities of the world, this is so irresponsible and negligent. These kids aren't learning basic habits that they will have to form later on in life and that's very very difficult. I'm very ashamed that Naval is using this approach, it makes me question his intelligence now. I don't think Aaron has any authority for writing this book and shouldn't be lauded as an "expert." His "excellent" relationships with his (basically) toddlers will turn into an absolute nightmare once they get to preteen/teen years. Good luck.

Hey Tim, I actually enjoyed this episode because it made me feel less alone. My kid has ADHD and is a "learn it the hard way" kind of person. We've had to adopt a philosophy similar this because she pushes back on every request we make of her. I keep hearing the friends you interview tell you about how happy they are and how great parenting is and that you need to jump on board. If you haven't already, I encourage you to reach out to friends who are struggling as parents because sometimes you get a really hard kid. And, they'll break you in ways you never could have expected. Your heart will break because of how hard things are for them and your heart will break because of how hard you try to support them. You try everything every expert tells you to do and nothing works. They'll challenge your relationships in ways you never could have imagined. Most days are hard. I don't know if you have friends experiencing this. We often drop out of social circles because it's too painful to be around our friends who think they can relate, but can't. As part of educating yourself on parenting, I encourage you to seek them out.

I'm agree with you. These are the ideas of a rich 1% who want to be live up to their brand / PR image of being like the nouveau thinker, rebel and rule breaker. Some things are timeless – like have rules for your kids and giving them guidance. I've ranted in a separate post so I'll stop here.

I completely agree about the privileged self-appointed geniuses thing. It came across more as "Look at me I have this brilliant idea, and I understand kids better than anyone because I'm so smart" rather than anything practical or even conceding to an understanding that every kid is unique and this may work in moderation sometimes for some kids, but it's not a revelation by any means. I never got structure as a kid, and I crashed and burned HARD, so I would never risk putting my child through that. I give him space and agency, but there are always limits.

The trick for most kids is finding a middle ground. Giving them freedom and agency but watching and guiding them. Never being overbearing or controlling, but always opening paths, allowing them to experience natural consequences whenever possible. There is definitely a healthy middle ground with myriad ways to organize the details, but these guys just didn't hit it. There were some good seeds of insight, but it's not an idea that should be approached as an absolute solution. I was more like your sister, and it was a nightmare. I'm still recovering from the avalanche of trauma that came from having no guidance but endless criticism.

So glad this was the top comment. I came to say the same thing. I knew that we were in for a ride as soon as I heard the phrase, "at the point of a gun." I nearly stopped there because I knew the premise of the rest of the dialogue would be filled extreme opinions dripping in confirmation bias, and that was confirmed over and over again. The notion that there is a binary manner in which you raise a single individual, not to mention multiple kids over the course of the lives is naive at best and destructive at worst. Not to mention, a free-wheeling 4 and 6 year old is nothing in comparison to those same kids at 14 & 16. God help those that attempt to have relationships with these humans in the future.

Hi, Manav – YouTube Music links are provided in the links section of the blog post, just after the bio of the guest. YouTube video links are provided at the end of that section when Tim does a video interview. Best, Team Tim Ferriss

Agreed–a lot of times what they're saying sounds a lot more radical than what they're doing. I think the inflammatory statements have a "made you look" quality where then people find a less controversial theory underneath. Perhaps a good hook–but like you it made me wonder if the words & actions really matched up.

Haha yes! Doesn't "unschooling" kids require parents to be "unworked"?? I also got a lot of value from this episode but was very nervous about characterizing children as "adults with less experience"–not to catastrophize, but when this is the messaging kids get, it seems they could be very vulnerable around unsafe adults who cross appropriate boundaries by playing on a false peerness between children and adults. Like many people (esp. girls) called "so mature for their age", as an adult I realized how what seemed like harmless flattery as a child could be weaponized in the wrong hands.

An underrated comment! Along with the other good points in this thread, this was in the back of my mind. Tim actually mentioned this a bit in the interview, but this style of parenting is only possible if you're extremely privileged and your kids will never have to navigate the normal world. It's hard to be interest driven when you're focused on surviving or clawing your way out of poverty. I also agree about Aaron not being remotely qualified to write a book. His oldest child isn't even half way grown up and the teen years are by far the hardest.