Welcome to Objectivism Online Forum

Welcome to Objectivism Online, a forum for discussing the philosophy of Ayn Rand. For full access, register via Facebook or email.

  • °

    Objectivism Is The Everyman's Philosophy

    In the universe, what you see is what you get,

    figuring it out for yourself is the way to happiness,

    and each person's independence is respected by all

  • Rand's Philosophy in Her Own Words

    • "Metaphysics: Objective Reality"Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed/Wishing won’t make it so." "The universe exists independent of consciousness"
    • "Epistemology: Reason" "You can’t eat your cake and have it, too." "Thinking is man’s only basic virtue"
    • "Ethics: Self-interest" "Man is an end in himself." "Man must act for his own rational self-interest" "The purpose of morality is to teach you[...] to enjoy yourself and live"
    • "Politics: Capitalism" "Give me liberty or give me death." "If life on earth is [a man's] purpose, he has a right to live as a rational being"

    Ronald Reagan

    Asker of Questions
    By Asker of Questions,
    Leftists frequently cite Reagan as a paragon of "conservativism," by which they implicitly mean small government, low taxes, and free market ideology. Being too young to remember his Presidency, what facts support or repudiate this association? All I know about him is that he is actually the one who signed EMTALA into law—some free market guy.

    Reblogged:Corbett on That Laptop Ban

    Gus Van Horn blog
    By Gus Van Horn blog,
    In case you were wondering about the strangely circumscribed ban on large electronics from certain Middle-Eastern airports that was abruptly announced in March, wonder no more. Jon Corbett, writing at Professional Troublemakerexplains that the ban was in reaction to compromised scanning equipment. From Corbett's closing summary:
    This should come as no surprise from a government that will not openly name our enemy, much less declare war, and is now hoping to "make a deal" with some of our enemies, as if nobody has had (or tried) that idea at any point over the past few decades. (This is not to say it was ever a good idea in the first place.)

    That said, if you have the time to read the article about the laptop ban, note the author's three arguments about its impracticality, and consider how similar they sound to any Republican's protests to the effect that any standard left-wing economic measure is "impractical". However true and well-researched such points may be, they will hold no water for supporters, because they are not motivated by practicality. They are motivated by a demonstrably incorrect morality that conflictswith the requirements for life on this earth. (For what it's worth, all three of Corbett's points immediately occurred to me when I first heard about the ban.)

    -- CAV Link to Original

    Collateral Beauty (with spoilers)

    By dream_weaver,
    Since art is a philosophical composite, it is not a contradiction to say: "This is a great work of art, but I don't like it." — The Romantic Manifesto, pg. 43 Collateral Beauty. Ok. I don't know about it being a great work of art. I enjoyed it, esp. from the standpoint of concretizing between the abstract and the concrete. Howard (played by Will Smith) opens with a celebratory business oration that creates a stage for the abstractions of love, time, and death. After the tragic loss of Howard's daughter, fast forward to the successful company imploding due to Howard's inability to deal with the loss. By this time, Howard has written three letters addressed to "Time", "Love", and "Death", as revealed by a private investigator retained by one of his partners to look for evidence of incompetence. Three thespians are retained by the partners to 'answer' Howard's letters in person. As it turns out, the three partners are dealing with life issues that deal with "time", "love", and "death". An added layer of complexity is added to the plot. Going one layer of complexity deeper, Howard's ex-wife had met the character playing "Death" in the hospital while their 6 year old daughter passes away from a rare disease, passing on a tidbit about looking for 'collateral beauty' in the aftermath.   Each of Howard's three other partners are entangled with the thespian representing the area of life with which they struggle. Whit, with the relationship to his daughter in the paradigm of a divorces gets matched with "Love".
    Simone, with the resurgence of a disease in his life gets paired with "Death".
    Claire got matched with "Time", albeit the connection had something to do with having children in the future. So, yes, I found it to be a good work of art, albeit, the focus on negative aspects of life put it more on the dark-side, philosophically. If you watched the Pixar flick "Robot", it would be hard to watch Collateral Beauty and not see a connection expounded on. relative to Bigweld in Pixar's "Robots".   So yes, I think it is a good work of art, but there are elements I don't like.

    Reblogged:Forming New Habits -- or Abilities?

    Gus Van Horn blog
    By Gus Van Horn blog,
    An article at Aeon on "what know-it-alls don't know" illustrates the importance of mental integration, which Ayn Rand called, "a cardinal function of man's consciousness on all the levels of his cognitive development." Scientist Kate Fehlhaber -- focusing on the Dunning-Krueger effect, in which incompetents misjudge their abilities as higher than they actually are -- indicates that many sufferers are likely failing to perform this vital mental activity as much as they need. This becomes apparent when she contrasts that effect to Impostor Syndrome:
    In other words, victims of Impostor Syndrome know that they are doing something well and are also availing themselves of introspection when self-assessing, but may not know about (or know how to use) other sources of information about their abilities. Once they have that information, they incorporate it into their self-appraisals. Incompetents, already oblivious to their own bad results (which are a kind of feedback), don't.

    But could they?

    My first impulse, on reading the last bolded word above, was to express disagreement with the choice of the last word. But considering the method of non-integrative thinking our government schools bombard so many students with (exacerbated by doses of flattery), it may well frequently be that many can't use such feedback. At the very least, on top of psychological barriers to forming the habit of seeking out feedback (often shared by the competent), such people would face enormous difficulties knowing how to use such feedback, let alone develop the apparently missing skill of more generally checking what they take as knowledge against the facts of reality. Someone who could do this, but is not in the habit of doing so would still face the arguably "easier" task of making that practice into a habit.

    -- CAV Link to Original

Portal by DevFuse · Based on IP.Board Portal by IPS