What is Objectivism?
Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 10 months ago to Philosophy
Someone suggested I should ask questions rather than make assertions in order to learn more about Objectivism.
Someone else asserted that I don't know anything about Objectivism. I will refrain from comment, as I will discover the veracity of that assertion from the answers to this question.
Okay, I asked a question.
Someone else asserted that I don't know anything about Objectivism. I will refrain from comment, as I will discover the veracity of that assertion from the answers to this question.
Okay, I asked a question.
Did you mean that the individual should value his life above all other lives, or that he should value his life itself above all other considerations in his life?
Could you please explain to me what you mean when you said "laissez faire capitalism"? I was taught that it means the same as "free market capitalism"; do you mean the same thing by it, or is does "laissez faire capitalism" envelop something broader or more specific than "free market capitalism"?
I meant he should hold his own values above anyone else's. There is an equivocation that I implied when I made the statement that you should value your own life above every thing, and I equated the concept of life with the concept of value.
To rephrase, an objectivist should prioritize what he values above the values of any one else. This needs an added note that the difference between an objectivist and a hedonist is that the objectivist is rational and considers his future instead of living in the moment.
I meant free market capitalism. And to be sure we're both clear on that term, I mean a capitalism that protects property rights and allows anyone to do what they want within their own property.
What does it mean to be heroic? To/from whom does one derive heroism?
If one's own happiness is the moral purpose of one's life, why wouldn't that just as likely lead to the "baddest ass on the block" as to anything noble?
Who is to quantify productive achievement?
And by what standard is reason judged?
I appreciate that you are an adamant follower of AR, but have you really examined these statements?
The "baddest ass on the block" has a lot of enemies. An individuals happiness is heavily reliant on the people around him. Or at least the people who cane before him. With this in mind, objectivism is about rational self interest, which means not living for the here and now, but thinking about what will be good for you and the things you value in the future. The "baddest ass on the block" may be able to sustain his block, but anyone who wants to take care of their children or other values will seek out the best option to do so.
Productive achievement is measured by a time to product ratio. Produce more in less time, and you are moral.
Reason is a tool that is built around the concept of immutable rules. If something breaks a rule, then either the rule is wrong, or whatever broke out doesn't exist. Using reason is what has brought humanity to such a high standard of living, which consolidates its validity as his only absolute. Ergo, his only thing to depend upon.
> "objectivism is about rational self interest, which means not living for the here and now." - How do you get that? My understanding of Objectivism (and I'll be the first to admit that I'm no expert) is that it rejects waiting for the future. The ultimate being not waiting for ultimate reward in an afterlife.
> "
Productive achievement is measured by a time to product ratio. Produce more in less time, and you are moral." - Which would seem to justify enslavement, so long as you were able to increase production in a shorter period of time.
> "Reason is a tool... Ergo, his only thing to depend upon." - So any enslaved people should have just given up and committed suicide?
Can somebody else at least provide some definitions/arguments that aren't so easily refuted?
Objectively you will enjoy your life more if you plan for the future instead of indulging today.
Slavery. Right, because that whole "sacrificing other men for my benefit" part of the motto is equivalent to how 90% of your Bible is only "metaphorical"
The logical jump you made about reason is to big for me to comprehend. I don't even know what to say to that it was so retarded.
I don't like you.
sdesapio... double standard, much?
Here is the merriam-webster definition:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionar...
And here is the dictionary.com definition:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/h...
Would you agree with either or both of these definitions?
This is the merriam-webster definition:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionar...
This is the dictionary.com definition:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/h...
Do you agree with either of these definitions?
"heroic"
"moral"
"noblest"
I've seen it before. Before your husband asserted that I knew nothing of Objectivism.
What is Objectivism?
This way you won't get any infomation "second hand."
I'm not asking for a guide to the works of Ayn Rand anymore than I'm asking for a guide to the works of L. Ron Hubbard. I'm asking what people participating *here* think Objectivism is?
Until there's an agreed upon definition, I'm going to keep coming into conflict with people whose definition contradicts others', and who become convinced that my differences with their *view* of what it is constitutes "hatred" for the actual philosophy.
Cannot Objectivists in the gulch agree upon a concrete definition of their own philosophy?
I'm not baiting anyone for the purpose of insult; I'm asking the question because sdesapio told me, in our conversation, that I would find people more willing to enlighten me if I asked questions rather than made assertions, as I did in "Proposition: America couldn't have been founded by Objectivists". Strangely, that received a more lively discussion than has this, thus far.
I'm not interested in stating my opinions in this post. I'm interested in seeing people provide their definitions of "Objectivism" and discuss if, how and why they differ. At the end of the day I hope to have a concrete definition of Objectivist I can then argue about.
'Words have meaning only in the stream of life'. Wittgenstein.