Political beliefs
"One who acquires political beliefs early in life and rarely changes any of them is incapable of learning from experience." I came across this quote in Marilyn vos Savant's column. To me it is a very clarifying phrase. It explains why many people hold on to certain beliefs even in the face of irrefutable evidence that they are wrong.
Our society today inhibits real learning, because it's become so protective that people are shielded from having to make hard, desperate choices like our ancestors. When someone has never experienced real hardship or life threatening events, it's easier for them to exercise "magical thinking." Utopian concepts seem all the more credible to a mind unchallenged by adversity.
I read the Declaration of Independence and found
the phrase "inalienable rights". Also, I read about
the Civil War (this is Virginia; Virginia history was
taught as a separate subject from American; however, my parents were from Iowa and Min-
nesota); I thought about the idea of a state vot-
ing democratically to leave the union; but then I
thought that the right of man not to be a slave
must be more fundamental and superior to that.
So, when I was about 12, I thought that every-
body had the right to do whatever he wanted,
provided he didn't touch the body or property of
another without that other's consent (either di-
rectly or by throwing something, for instance);
but then, I thought this did not include the right
to lie about somebody or to get something from
somebody by lying to him. That became my
political creed; however, I did not know how to
validate it until I discovered Ayn Rand (which
didn't happen until I was 15).
But you tempt me to get into the discussion about the nature of truth. Truth is not an opinion. It must be the foundation upon which one's premises are built, whether you like the truth or not. When forming your core beliefs you must make sure they are real and true. If not,
you are as lost as a Kardashian in a Louisiana swamp.
The change in this perception is significant, since it philosophically reflects that the universe itself is a fluctuating matrix where things are only 'probably' at a given location, and we cannot, by definition, both see something and know where it is.
So while I am quite in accord with you that Truth is a fact, not an opinion, my ability to grasp the truth of even simple things such as 'the location of an electron' is...cloudy.
Jan, struggles gamely with this
My conclusion is close to yours: The functional is the test of the theoretical. My divergence from Objectivism is that some of the descriptions of what an Objectivist world would be like do not seem to me to be workable. What ever 'real' is: It Works.
I tend to call myself an Objectivist or a Randist when talking to my liberal friends, because that is the best shorthand for their knowing where I stand. On this site, I dodge those terms because I do feel I have a good fit for the definitions that other people have for them.
Jan, a jan-kinda-randist
I like the Holy Chao reply.
Jan
And they are still liberals.
Here's to Hope!
Jan
Imagine the surprise I found when I progressed from comics to Sci-Fi - Heinlein, Asimov, etc, then to Ayn Rand, when I learned that the artist of my favorite character, Spiderman, had become an Ayn Rand fan. Steve Ditko, that prolific artist of 50's mystery and sci-fi comics, and the co-creator of Spidey along with Stan Lee, published a bunch of proto-objectivist pieces like Mr A, etc. Really cool.
There was not the omnipresent 400 channels of distracting crap and the ultra realistic games that rob your imagination of any such creativity.
It is a natural human tendency to be curious, to seek fascination and pursue it down every avenue at all stages of life. Once this is realized cognitively, and especially when young, it will always be part of you.
I thank the stars that public education did not kill my mind. And you know what? The stirring of the imagination of comic books, sci-fi, and Ayn Rand - no thanks to public education which wasted so much of my youthful developing period - is what kept my mind alive then, and to this day.
That, my friend, is why we are here.
As a kid, I was a south Alabama segregationist (as were all my peers) who began to have doubts when I heard MLK's "I have a dream" speech.
By my early 20s I was a rabid liberal who thought socialism may be a good thing. Being against the Vietnam War (still am) and then being 1969 drafted into the Marines had a lot to do with that.
Later as a civilian I voted for Jimmy Carter.
After four crappy years of Carter, I voted for Ronald Reagan.
This since then conservative and not a racist me only learned of Ayn Rand when I had Netflix send the first Atlas Shrugged movie.
Jewish people are a mystery they invented communal living and and socialism . One group are gas chamber lemmings and the other are saunch figthters for freedom and http://life.In Israel Sabra is one group and Saudi jews are the one's who won't lift a finger ......
Who knows....
Blacks easy story Republican supporters until abvout 1880 or 1890 when Republicans abandoneed Civil rights and anti slavery position and lost their own way. Democrats always anti civil rights and anti slavery picked up on votes available no other interes until late sixties and then then not much and then Clinton decided to ve civil rights party. prior the Democrats were staunch pro slavery anti civil rights. That lasted until just after Clinton when the Democrats went whole hog socialist fascist and pro Patriot Act. Blacks have no where to go Republicans did the same. 230 years of work down the drain and the blacks got f'd used and abused. Nowhere to turn but then we are the white version with the same problem.......Same thing happening to browns latinos. We need a new party that upholds the Constitution and turns there backs on all the -isms. Else the more level headed who seek change with ballots not bullets will be overwhelmed when the bullets start flying and I can't say I blame them. so all you racists, sexist and religious bigots? I look at you to ways. How you fit in a sight picture and the trigger squeeze. Enemies Domestic. I'm a son of Norway descent and proud of it.
USA and the Constitution love it or don't let the door hit you in the ass no matter where you think it swings. left
or right. As for the Jewish people and others victimized by bigots .... why are you voting for your oppressors and those whose entire philosophy descends through Adolf and Josef Stalin. If you are lemmings or saudis i do not know you. If you are Sabras's i welcome your support and offer ours.
And as for the thin skinned crybabies who cry foul foul. Upper US.
Not as simple a simile as most portray it to be.
Sabras seem to be a stiff necked bunch. When we delivered cargo it was sundown to sunup and if a delay heads were on swivels quite unlike US citizens who can go through entire wars in comfort unless of course they wish to fly somewhere..
Not well known. I'm sure there are other less complimentary terms.Also the obstructionists in the Knesset would fit. They 'neither toil nor do they spin' even get out of the way but deride the toil of others and expect to be fed for being multi generation welfare artists.
Incidentally: When Jesus was referring to "neither toil nor spin" when speaking of plant life, he was trying to get across the point that they don't need a "boss" and that they live according to their nature.
Something that we as humans should do...
No, that voting pattern can only be explained by undying loyalty to the liars who run the party. And I can't imagine why anyone non-corrupt could or would have that loyalty.
If they were capable of learning, they'd never have accumulated the beliefs in the first place.
Sorry, the first word I learned was why, next was how. Then I stayed up all night to catch Santa, pulled the same thing on the 'tooth fairy' and caught Mom with a nickel.
Create an education system that creates non-judgemental children who fit harmoniously in a social peg board and you produce a society where - as now - college students can tell you all about the Kardashians but know nothing of how their government is structured, or why.
This shows that it is not just liberals (socialists), but also conservatives and libertarians that reject reason.
Rand remarked that "reason must be Man's only absolute." I agree. It therefore follows that all other absolutes are contextual. If so, then all rational questions are relevant, all answers tentative - subject to the "new."
― Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
Opposite side of the coin. "The truth is whatever supports the party. It may be different tomorrow as long as it supports and advances the party."
The truth from mystics is even more comical. If I have to explain you wouldn't understand and since you asked......just take it on faith."
Take out reality and truth, any truth, is not possible. Experience can reinforce a truth, but in and of itself experience must be tested before you can say it's true.
I use Democrats for an example here, due to so many experiences that I have acquired over time among many acquaintances of university professors in later life and earlier with students among whom so many were Democrats. Any attempt at questioning their allegiance was met with absolute defiance, liberal platitudes and consternation. There was no reasoning, no attempt to construct a rational discussion. I have found this utterly inconceivable, in other words, "if you can't explain it, it doesn't exist". In this realm of contention it was evident that so called "smart" people were completely deluded. They were blind, staunch supporters of anything that carried the "democratic" nuance as if this was a sanction of the good for all. There could be no exceptions and no questioning only that this was the way it had to be for them. It was as if they had been born Democrats. "Prisoners of their own device".
Rand's writings were a revelation for me as a student and it was like breathing air into scorched lungs. Finally, something that responded to questioning, actually welcomed it. Objectivism was open to dissection and the parts always returned to form the whole. It was a mathematical formula that always gave the same results. Pure. Simple. So simple that there was no escaping its reasoning. "You could run but you couldn't hide", "You could check in but you couldn't check out"... Ahhh the days of the "Hotel California" bring back my introduction to AS.
And yet thinking is the one difficult thing since it requires dedication to concentration.
P.S. I have been following your comments lately-
they are deadly serious and yet some comical, antagonistic and complimentary, precise and also expansive... You seem quite the enigma.
Enigma? Nahhhhh. I'm just a plain old ordinary former .......
Now, don't get me wrong...the brain is an amazing thing and is capable of doing most anything necessary for survival; which includes navigating society. One would be hard pressed to tell the difference in day to day situations. The most dramatic clue is blaming any discomfort or complication upon something other than self and a complete lack of ability to adapt, to figure it out or to be accountable for their part in these circumstances.
If you haven't guess already, we are talking about most people that work in, for or with governments.
Most are the worst or the most lacking within our society and incapable of ruling their own behavior.
Precious few are benign and harmless. Those that are harmless do nothing to advance society.
There are many, I suspect, that have a remote chance to become conscious and make that final connection to their own mind and there are many reasons for this.
I will be outlining some of those reasons in my next book, tentatively titled: Conscience...Those that have and those that have not. The only true division with in our society.
to change a person's early value system -- straight from Dr. Morris Massey.
the problem is that millions will not change, even when
they are subjected to the layoffs and high deductibles
and lost freedoms which their choices beget. -- j
.
.