Objectivisim: To The Ramparts

My. Not sure why you feel as you do about animals- for the most part I appreciate what they contribute to the world. Not all of them, but most. Very sorry to hear of your cancer. Had a nasty variety when I was 40 surgically removed and luckily it was caught early and never came back. Hopefully, you will have the same good fortune.

 

Thanks for the kind thoughts, and I surely will hope for the best. As for animals, I don't dislike them, I just don't accept them as being all that big of a deal. I can enjoy and understand the majesty of an eagle soaring from mountain heights to snag its prey. Its quite a sight. Still, for the most part, wild animals are more trouble than they're worth. Zoos, or parks, or reserves, fine. But roaming free in the wild to cause havoc, pain, suffering, and sometimes death. Nope. Lock 'em up.

But again, I do recognize the majesty and beauty in many of them. For the record, my favorite is the cheetah, with a black panther coming in a close second. Hopefully, I'll never meet either in the wild.

 

The Death of Free Speech



This lady hates this country, this lady hates free speech, this lady hates our laws. All this anger and hatred over a hat asking to make a American great again. She is a product of public education, and today's college education. Hats are now the cause of genocide, free speech murders people who aren't white, and property rights are irrelevant if I disagree with your politics.

Free speech is the last foundation to fall before tyranny becomes full grown and mature. The seedlings have been planted, i.e., safe places, hate speech laws, feelings over reason, banning of certain books because they are seen as racism, BLM--which triumphs the rights of the collective based on color over the rights of individual of any color, Dr. Seuss being portrayed as racist because a black cat encourages children to misbehave, and among the many other acts against free speech.

Ayn Rand: "The difference between an exchange of ideas and an exchange of blows is self-evident. The line of demarcation between freedom of speech and freedom of action is established by the ban on the initiation of physical force."--http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/free_speech.html

 

Altruism is not giving your neighbor a couple dollars you can spare for milk for their baby during a rough spot they are going through, altruism is letting your baby starve while you give your money to feed someone else's baby, who you don't know or care about.

Ayn Rand: "Do not confuse altruism with kindness, good will or respect for the rights of others. These are not primaries, but consequences, which, in fact, altruism makes impossible. The irreducible primary of altruism, the basic absolute, is self-sacrifice—which means; self-immolation, self-abnegation, self-denial, self-destruction—which means: the self as a standard of evil, the selfless as a standard of the good.--http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/altruism.html

Altruism is anti-reason, anti-man, anti-life. It is the moral foundation of evil, not an action of the good.

 

There was a good book out on this at one point--the Art of Selfishness. Rather helpful at the time. Note the first review.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/644475.The_Art_of_Selfishness

 

Are we talking about the Mother Theresa who thought suffering was actually a good thing for mankind, and ran what was basically houses of misery where people suffered and died without access to proper medical care, all the while she herself got extremely expensive care when she got sick?

Yeah, what a lovely example of humanity!

 

Ayn Rand has been dead for a very long time and not 1% know anything about her. Move on into the reality of the present.

 

amen, brother, amen.

 

Moving forward toward the future promoting Objectivism. As for the present, many may have heard of her as evidenced by the shows she's mentioned on and the sales of her books, (in the millions), and the attention given to her at the beginning of the Tea Party movement, but most know nothing about her philosophy except the what the haters preach: she hates the poor, loves the rich,;consider charity evil; hates God, religion, faith, tolerates none who disagree with her.

If she was understood, the writers and creator of Elementary wouldn't keep taking pot shots at her while having the hero, Sherlock, practice the very fundamentals she promoted and valued, and all those associated with the show would be ashamed of themselves for accepting money from the capitalist system they despise and mock.

When the anti-trust laws are repealed, when the free market controls the insurance and medical industry, when minimum wage laws are outlawed, when a constitutional amendment is passed that separates the economy from the state, and another amendment is passed that separates the educational system from the state, When the constitution is rewritten that gives the state only the power to control theft, fraud, rape, and murder, and settle disputes between men in a civil court. When Man on pedestal instead of on the cross is viewed as the moral and is the norm through out the culture, then I'll still keep writing about who I consider the mother of the human race, and the first truly human to walk the planet, Ayn Rand.

BTW: Saw Ayn Rand mentioned on Elementary, yesterday. But for the sake of argument, say you're correct, she is no longer relevant, or there is nothing more to say about her, what are you afraid of that you'd rather I didn't mention her? You don't have to come here. It's not required that you have anything to do with her, or me, or her philosophy, and I'm not harming you. I assume you've decided she's failed, her philosophy is not spreading, the world has moved past her, and she is no longer relevant today, despite the murder of free speech on the college campus, despite her books hitting the best seller list every year, despite the growth of the state, and the loss of rights. So tell me, what do you fear? This:

"Man is a heroic being, with his own happiness the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute."--Ayn Rand

When this idea, thought, view of man dominates American culture, then, and only maybe then, I might rest for a day of two, but I will never desert nor betray Ayn Rand and her philosophy of Objectivism.

Ayn Rand: "It is not in the nature of man—nor of any living entity—to start out by giving up, by spitting in one’s own face and damning existence; that requires a process of corruption, whose rapidity differs from man to man. Some give up at the first touch of pressure; some sell out; some run down by imperceptible degrees and lose their fire, never knowing when or how they lost it. Then all of these vanish in the vast swamp of their elders who tell them persistently that maturity consists of abandoning one’s mind; security, of abandoning one’s values; practicality, of losing self-esteem. Yet a few hold on and move on, knowing that that fire is not to be betrayed, learning how to give it shape, purpose and reality. But whatever their future, at the dawn of their lives, men seek a noble vision of man’s nature and of life’s potential."--
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/man-worship.html

This is that view in action, and what man's future holds for him, if he keeps his fidelity to the Rand's vision of man.

 

It is still sold and sells well. Have read it many times and given a couple of copies to my grandchildren. Excellent book, fantastic presentation of the concept, and very helpful guide for living life on earth.

Ayn Rand: "The Objectivist ethics holds that human good does not require human sacrifices and cannot be achieved by the sacrifice of anyone to anyone. It holds that the rational interests of men do not clash—that there is no conflict of interests among men who do not desire the unearned, who do not make sacrifices nor accept them, who deal with one another as traders, giving value for value"--http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/selfishness.html

 

So what are they? And if you want to leave a limiting belief but are so bound up in it that it forms almost your whole identity, how do you do that? If you want to take this to PM to get more information, I won't mind.

A well-summarized description of the free market. But there's a fly in the ointment. Not to be accused of being a liberal, but the reality is that somewhere in the neighborhood of 15% of the populace has zero market value to offer. They have neither the brains nor the skills necessary to be worth even $5 an hour to an employer. They are incapable of learning even routine tasks and cannot demonstrate even routine work skills, like showing up on time or putting in a full day's labor. By and large, they make up the majority of the welfare and criminal classes. What should we do with them?

 

Ya wanna know where Objectivism came from?



(Forgive me if it's been in already)

 

Which you must be on. Bye.

(Geez, you are one ugly SOB)

 

I'm ugly as sin and twice as nasty.

I am, however, a son of the most sainted creature that has ever trod the soil of this beleaguered planet, and if you EVER say what you just implied about her again I will certainly report you, and may seek other venues to continue the discussion

 

I disagree with the number of people that have no value to offer, but they certainly do exist. Many of those who appear to have nothing to offer simply have no intention to offer it, and that is choice. I know a well qualified engineer who has simply given up on society, and makes no attempt to work or even discuss his area of expertise. He is convinced the world has become filled with morons- and this was an extremely competent and insightful man many years ago, and a close personal friend. Now, he's a bum because he sees no purpose in life; he's a total drop-out.

The only people truly incapable of learning are mentally impaired, and they do not have a choice. However the number of people unwilling of becoming motivated to be valuable is vastly larger- and they do have a choice. In some ways it may not make a difference as to what we can expect from that group or the impaired, but it makes a difference in how we should treat them. There have always been fools that spend their lives trying to make life easy, even free with various schemes that avoid labeling anybody as worthless- including those who chose to be so. These people promote the idea that all but average man is a victim of the rich, that work is slavery, that profit is theft- it goes on and on. That produces a horrible attitude that makes life miserable, tells them they have no power over their own lives, destroys pride and self-respect, leaves them no hope except to take from others. Some of those people will simply refuse to try, and that too is a choice... to be powerless. Life is and should be a challenge, and meeting the challenge- proving yourself to yourself- is what makes us strong and free. If this were easy, what we gain would not be of much value.

Those who do their best but are in need help for some reason get my help. I will give them a hand-up, to get them back on their feet and back in the game- knowing they they will recognize that others believe in them, and will probably pay it forward later. Those who could but chant "I can't" and seek continuous hand-outs, I have no sympathy for at all. Hunger and pain are nature's motivators, and for some it takes more than others to do the job. How much is up to each of us- we are what we choose to be. That is responsibility, or denial of it- mother nature delivering the consequences of our own choices.

 

I believe you, and it's not the first time I've been exposed to this message. I have changed a major issue in my life, so I know it can be done. (I'll tell you that story if you want to hear it.) But as you say, I'm trying to rewrite the BIOS while still using the operating system, and part of the problem is a great belief in my own powerlessness, that nothing I do makes a difference, nothing I do changes anything. So I am using affirmations (in a variety of ways) and reading self-help books and PDF's, but I haven't changed any of the major programs except in very small ways, at the fringes, if you will. And I've been working at it for a LONG time now.

So what are the other three principles? And if simply relaying information doesn't trigger the change necessary, what does? Have you figured that part out?

 

She already died.

Her "philosophies" were narrow and jaded.

I have read them and I am not impressed.

Aristotle is impressive.

Descartes is impressive.

Roger Scruton is impressive.

But Ann Rand is not.

 

Hell don't feel bad, it only took me 20 years, and yes, I have figured it out but found it depended on the dedication of the person doing what has to be done. But, I'm really pleased to see that you are a person grasping the concept and it sounds like you are gaining on it.

. I would also be pleased to share and help if I can, with everything I have. Just send me a private message so we can establish contact not open to all the potshots of the forum, and I will.

Smith, yes I have figured it out, but it depends on the dedication of the person to do what is needed. Hell, it only took me 20 years. It's the nature of how we think that limits us far more than the world or others. and that is hard to master. It amazed me that it could actually be so simple once you do.

Good analogy in "trying to rewrite the BIOS while still using the operating system", because that is indeed parallel.

I would help you in any way I can. just send me a private message (click the icon and use Open a Conversation" and we can communicate without the forum trolls chiming in!

 

As I am not with you

Ayn Rand: "When one enters any intellectual battle, big or small, public or private, one cannot seek, desire or expect the enemy’s sanction. Truth or falsehood must be one’s sole concern and sole criterion of judgment—not anyone’s approval or disapproval; and, above all, not the approval of those whose standards are the opposite of one’s own.
"--http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/argument_from_intimidation.html

 

Before I post today's commentary on Ayn Rand and her philosophy of Objectivism, and though I am an atheist, a prayer goes out for those feeling the horror and hurt of evil that took place in Las Vegas. My thoughts are with them, and my heart is much sadder today than it has been since Sandy Hook. It hurts beyond belief, but remember, there are many who care and will offer whatever help they can, not as a sacrifice, not as an altruistic act, but for the most selfish reason of all, the love and admiration for the best within you. Don't give up, and don't surrender to this evil by filling your hearts with hate and anger toward life. It is not the good of life that attacked you, but one very evil man. May he rot in hell, and may those who express the opinion you got what you deserve because you are probably gun toting right wing religious white racists republican nuts, rot with him.


The poor, bore:

The poor bore me, because its mostly whining and blaming everyone else for their predicament, and never a self examination of their role in their state of being. Though I do have compassion for the children of the poor as their plight is not their doing. However, there are ample examples of the poor rising by their own effort, my parents being such an example, and living a prosperous productive life in America. Ayn Rand once asked, and I'm paraphrasing, "If poverty is your concern ask yourself, why some nations prosper, and others don't."

Such questions as: Why is capitalist South Korea prosperous and North Korea poorer than the peasants of the dark ages? Why does America build space ships, and Cuba, re-education camps? Why did East Berlin build a wall to keep people in, and why did West Berlin become a haven for those who could escape? My answer, capitalism, the most hated economic system in the world, but yet the one that creates prosperity and happiness. The one system that is good because it based on the principle of individual rights and free will. The system that is good, and hated for being so. There's the answer for those who care.

Ayn Rand "If concern for human poverty and suffering were one’s primary motive, one would seek to discover their cause. One would not fail to ask: Why did some nations develop, while others did not? Why have some nations achieved material abundance, while others have remained stagnant in subhuman misery? History and, specifically, the unprecedented prosperity-explosion of the nineteenth century, would give an immediate answer: capitalism is the only system that enables men to produce abundance—and the key to capitalism is individual freedom."--http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/poverty.html

The Ascent of Man by Sylvia Bokor
More romantic art @ http://cordair.com/
with some very beautiful pictures, paintings, and sculptures to view to help get through these days of evil. There is beauty and good in the world, don't let it go.

 

It's rationalizing evil, that's what it does. Helps the big shots sleeping better at night. In that way Rand's work is a continuation of Protestantism, which was created with the same goal.

Those interested in Rand's philosophy should take a good look at Laveyan satanism, and accept their true patron.

 

Earlier in this thread I posted my view on animals.

Here is just one example of what I was referring to:

The headline: British hiker attacked, devoured by wolves
Here's the story: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/0...cmp=ob_article_sidebar_video&intcmp=obnetwork

 

The Heroic and the Beautiful: Ayn Rand's Vision

There is in us, even as a children, a joy in the heart that is experienced when a universe is discovered that is wondrous. It can be the discovery of books, or the first time one sees a jet, hears a piece of music that touches something inside that makes one feel the pride of being alive and human. This is the hero in the human soul, the love of one's own life in universe worthy of one's breathe. Then one watches as others spit at it, urinate on flowers while laughing and smirking, and make life the butt of insulting jokes, and one feels a loneliness that is almost too much to bear

This idea of the heroic and the ugly is explained by Ayn Rand in her book, The Romantic Manifesto. She describes the difference between a romantic artist and natural artist. She pointed out that the romantic artist paints a beautiful woman by emphasizing the essentials of her beauty, while a naturalist emphasizes the accidental and the pointless. A romantic artist will strive for the perfection of beauty to show what is possible, while the naturalist paints the face of a beautiful woman and adds the emphasis of an ugly pimple to demonstrate that beauty in reality is an illusion and unworthy of contemplation. A good example of this attitude towards the reality or illusion of beauty is a short story by Nobel Prize-winner Gabriel Garcia, Eyes of a Blue Dog.--a story that nauseates me with boredom. Its premise is beauty and love are an illusion never to be lived in reality, but only to be longed for in dreams. Its purpose is to destroy any vision of romantic heroism, to spit in the face of life. Intellectually, it is the same purpose as the man in Vegas, and the teenager in Sandy Hook, the destruction of a vision of life as worthy of living.

If one is to grow and live as a human being, it is this romantic vision of man and life that must be embraced and worshipped. Ayn Rand's works of fiction are the highest and best examples of this romantic vision I have ever experienced. Read her novels, read her non-fiction, let the hero in one's soul be reborn, and let it create a world of tomorrow worthy of one's vision.


Ayn Rand: "The thinking child is not antisocial (he is, in fact, the only type of child fit for social relationships). When he develops his first values and conscious convictions, particularly as he approaches adolescence, he feels an intense desire to share them with a friend who would understand him; if frustrated, he feels an acute sense of loneliness. (Loneliness is specifically the experience of this type of child—or adult; it is the experience of those who have something to offer. The emotion that drives conformists to “belong,” is not loneliness, but fear—the fear of intellectual independence and responsibility. The thinking child seeks equals; the conformist seeks protectors.)"--https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/432.Ayn_Rand?page=13

Ayn Rand: "Throughout the centuries there were men who took first steps down new roads armed with nothing but their own vision. Their goals differed, but they all had this in common: that the step was first, the road new, the vision unborrowed, and the response they received—hatred. The great creators—the thinkers, the artists, the scientists, the inventors—stood alone against the men of their time. Every great new thought was opposed. Every great new invention was denounced. The first motor was considered foolish. The airplane was considered impossible. The power loom was considered vicious. Anesthesia was considered sinful. But the men of unborrowed vision went ahead. They fought, they suffered and they paid. But they won."--http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/creators.html



It is real. It can be done. Don't be afraid. Spread your wings and soar.

 

True statement.

The Relativists and Sophists would disagree with her of course, but Socrates and Plato would agree.

There is however nothing particularly impressive about Rand's statement though. Just means she disagrees with Relativism and/or Sophistry. As do I.

 

The Empty Zoos of Venezuela:

There once was country, the richest on a continent. It exported oil. It grow food in such abundance, it was exporting some it. The poor, the middle class, the rich, were happy and becoming more and more prosperous. The cities beamed with lights, business was radiating wealth to all sectors of society, families visits the zoos for fun and picnics. It was on the road to a paradise usually only dreamt of by the desperate on lonely nights.

Then came a man who promised all could be rich without production, without the creative, without the thinkers, and businesses were looted, agriculture nationalized. The rich left, the middle class became poor, the poor starved, and the creative mind disappeared. This caused oil to stop flowing, food to stop growing, wealth to disappear, desperate despair, depravity, poverty, and hopelessness to thrive, and the zoos to become empty of all life. The hell of socialist collectivism had infected the healthy nation of Venezuela, and it was the man who made the promise that gave the nation the infection, Hugo Chavez, South America's Lenin. And now the infection as grown full blown under a totalitarian dictator, South America's Stalin, Nicolas Maduro.

And why are the zoos empty? The people of Venezuela ate the animals to avoid, temporarily, starvation. This is the reality of the promise of unearned rewards.

Ayn Rand: "When one observes the nightmare of the desperate efforts made by hundreds of thousands of people struggling to escape from the socialized countries of Europe, to escape over barbed-wire fences, under machine-gun fire—one can no longer believe that socialism, in any of its forms, is motivated by benevolence and by the desire to achieve men’s welfare."--http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/socialism.html

How soon will it come to Venezuela, the slaughter of millions trying to escape horror on earth.




Want to know more: