Are Objectivists happy?
http://experts.umich.edu/pubDetail.as...
R. David Hayward has developed a survey that attempts to define happiness and correlate it with many factors (nationality, religious affiliation or lack thereof, income, wealth, etc.). The goal is to predict future health and well-being.
From Hayward's abstract:
"Religious non-affiliates did not differ overall from affiliates in terms of physical health outcomes (although atheists and agnostics did have better health on some individual measures including BMI, number of chronic conditions, and physical limitations), but had worse positive psychological functioning characteristics, social support relationships, and health behaviors. On dimensions related to psychological well-being, atheists and agnostics tended to have worse outcomes than either those with religious affiliation or those with no religious preference."
My purpose in posting this is not to say anything derogatory about atheists or Objectivists, but it is part of my personal self-assessment of whether I would be happier if I did decide to become an Objectivist. At this point, I am not an Objectivist. One question that is an entirely logical counterargument to the possibility that Objectivists might not be happier than the general population would be, "Are people who are happier than the general population delusional about their reality"? I am sure that many Gulchers would presume that most Christians are happily delusional in their mysticism, for instance.
R. David Hayward has developed a survey that attempts to define happiness and correlate it with many factors (nationality, religious affiliation or lack thereof, income, wealth, etc.). The goal is to predict future health and well-being.
From Hayward's abstract:
"Religious non-affiliates did not differ overall from affiliates in terms of physical health outcomes (although atheists and agnostics did have better health on some individual measures including BMI, number of chronic conditions, and physical limitations), but had worse positive psychological functioning characteristics, social support relationships, and health behaviors. On dimensions related to psychological well-being, atheists and agnostics tended to have worse outcomes than either those with religious affiliation or those with no religious preference."
My purpose in posting this is not to say anything derogatory about atheists or Objectivists, but it is part of my personal self-assessment of whether I would be happier if I did decide to become an Objectivist. At this point, I am not an Objectivist. One question that is an entirely logical counterargument to the possibility that Objectivists might not be happier than the general population would be, "Are people who are happier than the general population delusional about their reality"? I am sure that many Gulchers would presume that most Christians are happily delusional in their mysticism, for instance.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 5.
My conclusion: No origin is required, it simply is; existence exists, it always has been and ever shall be.............ponder it, examine it, investigate it (as our rational faculty acquires the means to do so), explore it, deal with it.
Since Ayn Rand slipped out of the grip of such a regime, I find her own atheism to be kinda ironic.
Still, I weather splashes now and then.
I'm retired from being a corrections officer at a maximum security prison for 21 years.
I can take some rough weather. In fact, I'm kinda used to it.
I just got irritated over a Christian woman with a different background than I for having to take heat just for stating what church activities she and her husband had planned for Holy Week.
The post she responded to was about Easter.
One has to hold Obj. beliefs sincerely and for the right reasons; e.g. a rational atheist must integrate his position from metaphysical and epistemological facts and premises.
I agree with Mamaemma: choose rational principles first, then achieve happiness. If you hold irrational priniciples, you can't achieve true happiness.
Beliefs can be chosen evidenced by those who convert from one religion to another. My issue is, if I am going to "believe," which beliefs improve my quality of life, adds to my ability to function in the world, allows me to think when needed, gives me the most "margin" to function. (Thoreau said, "I love a wide margin to my life.")
Margin (Howard McCluskey) is the difference between the burdens I bear and my power to carry those burdens. There is so much irrational crap in religion, I simply increase my margin by not considering it.
How many heroin overdoses were by Objectivists last year? Based on the Northeast I would say 25,000 subjectivists OD last year.
Call me a mystic if you wish. I have looked up "mysticism" and have read it defined that the word covers all religions.
Recently I was not at all impressed when a so-called Objectivenist dissed a lady Christian here by calling her a zombie.
She left the Gulch over that, though she came back to say "Happy Easter" to me last night. I asked her to stick around but don't know if she is going to.
I have been influenced by Ayn Rand and this board since I had Netflix mail me AS1 and the others I never heard of her before then. Thought I was renting science fiction.
Way before that, I became a "born again Christian" during my 20s. I turned 69 last week and I ain't ever going to disbelieve in God.
So I'm wondering-- is this board supposed to be an atheists only club with no one else to be tolerated?
I agree with khalling. Atheists and agnostics are not a monolithic group. In addition, they are operating without the comfort of faith, without railings so to speak. Therefore, it is not surprising that on average we are a little less happy, having to do a little more work to find our way with a lot less camaraderie, X-mas, easter, etc. Druids are probably happier.too. It doesn't help much that calling oneself an atheist brings raised eyebrows and some shunning from some in the mainstream. Not all of us have the think skin not to care, or to banter on the subject. No doubt this will change as well, as more and more people continue to find religion not believable and unnecessary. It would do us all good to document the objective reasons for proper behavior to provide a logical basis for morality that people can rally around.
In my case, I made up for the philosophical strain with pets. I am much happier with dogs than dogma.
Load more comments...