Galt's Gulch

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by AMeador1 4 years, 4 months ago
    The Ayn Rand Institute is a good place to start - they have a LOT of material there that goes into this answer - and it is not a short one if you want to really understand what it is. Be cautious of what you find in quick Google searches as there are also a LOT of people that do not understand what it is that have a negative opinion of it - because they misunderstand it - or, they do understand it - but are collectivists that are threatened by what Objectivism is and what Objectivists say.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 4 years, 4 months ago
    I, personally, don't think the question is all that complex. To me, Objectivism is placing one's self at the focal point of ones existence. Personal self interest is paramount and uncontestable.
    I think all the rest is detailing the points of what I said. And what I said also highlights the inonsistant points in the philosophy. But hey, I'm just a constitutional convervative.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by AMeador1 4 years, 4 months ago
      The details are important here. As a saying of the religious would say "The Devil/God is in the details". This @cspeter8 is the kind of thing I warned you about. Ayn Rand's "details" make all the difference in understanding, properly, the greatness of Objectivism verses taking an overly simplistic negative view in short. In the thousands of pages, many speeches, articles, etc... that she and others have written - explaining these details and how to properly conceptualize and integrate her ideas - to think it can clearly be summarized in a short sentence is not intellectually honest. Even on the pro side. The topic is simply too involved to give such a short answer like this and expect someone to claim they could understand what it truly is. Much like saying that capitalism and communism are just political systems - how different could they be? Surely anyone with a modicum of knowledge can see that the details make quite a distinction.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 4 years, 4 months ago
        When it boils down to it's core I believe it's what I stated. That not to say there isn't more to be said to understand the philosophy more completely or to apply the philosophy in many areas of one's life, should you choose to. As for anything, faith, philosophy, religions or atheism, they ALL boil down to free will, self determination, and concious choice of what one chooses to follow/believe, no?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by AMeador1 4 years, 4 months ago
          No, not if you understand the nature of faith, philosophy, religions, and atheism. Faith and religion demand you relinquish reason - and are generally indoctrinated in people from the time they are babies which makes the 'choice' of choosing rational reason very difficult and unlikely. Philosophies that are anti-reason are the same - which seems to be most of them. Both of which are collectivist in nature. Atheism is neither. Not having faith/religion has no bearing on whether one's personal philosophy will be rational or not. Yes they have the freedom to choose - but a choice of what? In our environment the education system in indoctrinating collectivism and are trying to destroy the idea of individualism, rational thinking, capitalism, etc... Without being shown the alternative of Objectivism (properly taught by those who actually understand it) - what choice do they have? Without choosing to study Objectivism - pretty much all their other choices are varieties of collectivism - whether by following the church, religion, faith, socialism, communism, liberals, conservatives, Democrats, Republicans, etc... Objectivism is different and is the only one that actually, from the ground up, prescribes rational reason and individualism.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 4 years, 4 months ago
            I understand what you're saying. Where I part ways is that fundamentally a person chooses his or her own path in life, that includes ALL beliefs of any variety and to whatever degree. As I said initially, everything above an individual choice is details (personal justification) for believing what one chooses. Suggesting "understanding the nature" suggests I do not. Still any of those things are choices, choices for a life path and a structure for how to conduct one's self. No?

            I've never been forced to, made to, believe in anything. Sure people and society influence but ultimately my decisions are my own. Different religions may teach different things and one may be predisposed to certain beliefs from the start but the individual can see, reason and choose whatever path they wish to follow in life and to what degree they wish to follow it. Making that choice may be only actual right a person has and everything else is built on it.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by cspeter8 4 years, 4 months ago
            Isaiah 1:18: "Come now, let us reason together, says the LORD: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool.

            Acts 17:2-5 And Paul went in, has was his custom, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ.” 4 And some of them were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a great many of the devout Greeks and not a few of the leading women.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by AMeador1 4 years, 4 months ago
              Didn't say they can't use reason sometimes. I was greatly influenced by Rush Limbaugh for decades. I find him to be very rational most of the time. The problem creeps in when the reason and justification for things is based on faith alone. Faith and religion require people to have faith and to believe in their God - to just accept the word of "God" or that "God" knows best and so on. It is at the core. Yeah - "let us see reason" - until you don't understand - then just have faith. Believe in God/Jesus - or you will go to hell - again based on unknowing faith. Don't try to pitch the non-sense that religion pursues reason and rationality. I have plenty of life experience to the contrary. The history of religion has shown the contrary. They have always been about "believe what we tell you "God" says, or you will die, be damned, etc..."
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo