objectivism

i like that one. sounds so ... romantic

__________________
-all you touch & all you see is all your life will ever be-

I thought she was a Ukranian who fled the Soviets. Mebbe I was wrong (AGAIN!)

There are many who don't like her works and claim that all she does is continue to push the "I, me, myself" idea. I admit that I was one of those who thought that she glorified selfishness and greed. But I was wrong.

I believe that I misunderstood her concepts. And I believe that my upbringing is partly responsible (my culture and political climate I grew up in). I haven't fully grasped her yet but I'm getting there.

__________________

Work in the ER is a mix of can do, can't do and "sure, what the hell..."

Watch my videos

i can understand that. i was adopted & raised in a very strict, very conservative (in every aspect), southerm baptist home where we did not drink, have premarital sex, or cuss. then i went off to college at the university of texas at austin & was introduced to an overwhelming number of different ideas & i finally began to feel comfortable w. what i believed in for the first time. i never believed in their god growing up but was forced to go to church every sunday morn & nite, & wednesday nites. it sucked needless to say. anyways the point - dont let that stop u from exploring all different ideas, philosophies, etc. its a beautiful thing.

__________________
-all you touch & all you see is all your life will ever be-

Not having a real understanding of what she teaches (I once inquired and was told she was full of shit and, rather sadly, followed the advice of staying away), I can't be an expert, but I feel like I agree with her and disagree all at once.

__________________
stchrissie is not me.

well u should read one of her books (i suggest atlas shrugged but only if u REALLY like to read cuz its over a 1000 pages long, well worth it mind u but long) & see what u think. if someone tells me to stay away from something i usually go check it out myself. at first its not really clear what shes getting at as far as her philosophies but ull def get the idea the further u get into it. or go to like an objectivist website & ull get the idea there w.o 8000 hrs of reading (even tho u should read it at some point regardless )

__________________
-all you touch & all you see is all your life will ever be-

Actually the person who gave me the advice is someone whose intelligence and opinion I respect. While I probably will read it, I don't care if it is 1000 pages long, it had better be good. Length really means nothing.

__________________
stchrissie is not me.

well some people dont even pick up books over 200 pages. as long as the words are necessary it does not matter how long it takes to get the message across.
def glad u plan to read it. maybe u can convince ur friend shes not full of shit. if they are intelligent they should at least be able to see her argument is not "shit"

__________________
-all you touch & all you see is all your life will ever be-

I do think, however, that every-man-for-himself is a pretty piss-poor way to go about living.

__________________
is snuggly

well if u put it that way. its not so much every man for himself w. no regard to anyone else as - im not gonna lie im doin this cuz i will gain somethin from it & in turn other people prob will too. we all gain from each others abilities so do what ur good at doin the best u can for ur self interest & bcuz other people will be able to gain something from it too.

__________________
-all you touch & all you see is all your life will ever be-

I've read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead, and while I don't hate the books, I don't love them ethier. They are interesting to me. The stories are entertaining to me.

Life would be very boring if you lived with Ayn Rands philosophy. She has ruined many peoples lives, so take what she says with a grain of salt.

It's alright to contemplate her ideas, but don't let them change you too much too fast. The same goes with any philosopher though.

__________________
Nader/Gonzalez '08! We only need 55 million votes to make it happen!



This is what I'm listening to right now!

See, this is where we part company - I don't think that's what objectivism is about at all. In the book, she uses many examples of cooperation - between peers. What she is railing against is the notion that you are owed something simply for being born - and considering where she grew up, that's understandable.

The premise (since I notice some of us haven't read it) is that society is supported by a relatively small number of people who actually contribute, and a much larger number of people who are simply along for the ride. The question she asks is, "What if those people making the contribution simply stopped?"

Hence the title - Atlas is the giant in mythology who holds up the world.


I don't find it boring. Could you name some people whose lives she's ruined?

Rational self-interest is the objective ethical code.

Each man should seek his own happiness through a productive life in which his own independent, rational judgement is his only guide to action. No man should sacrifice himself to others nor others to himself. The primary virtues of the Objectivist ethics are rationality, independence, integrity, honesty, justice, productiveness, trade, and pride.

Objectivism rejects altruism, the doctrine that the highest good is service to others---whether "others'' denotes a state, a deity, one's family, "society,'' or the poor and disadvantaged.

(From http://www.vix.com/objectivism/Writing/InBrief/)

__________________
is snuggly

I think this is still a long walk from "every man for himself" - the rejection of altruism as the "highest good" does not preclude helping others - it simply means it isn't the highest moral imperative. There are several examples in the book we're discussing. My take on it is simply that charity should be restricted to those who would benefit from it, rather than those who would simply make it their particular ecological niche - and that charity constitutes a debt which should be repaid by the recipient.

I should also make the point that I'm not an objectivist, I'm a Libertarian - we like Ayn Rand, she didn't like us (see "anarchist hippies"). Rand's intent was to create a philosophy, not an ideology or a political party. I think many of her ideas would fail the practical test of application, but they make a good starting point for the basis of a realistic political system.

I was more talking about the 'never sacrifice yourself for others' bit rather than the anti-altruism bit.

__________________
is snuggly