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"
Objectivism Online Chat
- 2 replies
- 303 views
- Add Reply
- 17 replies
- 595 views
- Add Reply
- 13 replies
- 314 views
- Add Reply
- 37 replies
- 1835 views
- Add Reply
What is Subjectivism? Do Objectivists think that most people are Subjectivists? Is it possible to be neither an Objectivist nor a Subjectivist?
For most of human history, "absolute truth" was the province of a select caste of priest-kings who claimed divine and exclusive knowledge of absolute truth, and the rest of society just went along with it. Now, for around the past 3-400 years or so, extremely recently wrt the whole of human history, absolute truth is said no longer to be the exclusive province of priests and kings claiming to have special dealings with the Gods, but is said to be accessible to every man, supposedly by means of things like logical syllogisms. The problem as I see it is that even honest and earnest men have always disagreed to a greater or lesser degree on what is and is not part of "absolute truth". Firstly, this is very odd if it is supposed to be "absolute" and accessible to all men. Secondly, and probably more importantly: In the modern age, now that mankind no longer believes in the claims of priests that God provides their caste with privileged knowledge of absolute truth, sheer naked force has replaced claims of divine revelation to enforce one class's or leader's version of "absolute truth" upon the rest of his fellow men, given that individual men have never voluntarily agreed on what "absolute truth" consists of . The most infamous example is Communism, where millions were sent to gulags for thoughtcrimes such as "deviationism" from Stalin's version of "absolute truth". According to all of us here Communism was "irrational", but according to itself, its leaders, and the thousands of speeches they made, Communism was a rational system of objective truth.
Benjamin Franklin wanted to achieve moral perfection so he wrote in a journal and marked in his journal everytime he violated one of his virtues... I believe this is one of the reasons he achieved such great success. I want to do something similar but with the Objectivist virtues and instead of using a journal I will be using Habitica.com. I need more examples of instances in which I can mark when I have practiced a virtue and instances I can mark when I have violated a virtue... Can you think of anymore? Here is the list I have so far: Productivity/Purposefulness Doing items on my to-do list Going to work Going to work on time Violations of Productivity/Purposefulness Spending more than 30 minutes pottering around when I have better things to do Not working on a project for more than 3 days in a row because it didn't excite me as much as it did at the beginning. Honesty Telling the truth when it's hard Violations of Honesty Lying Justice Listening to people who deserve it Apologizing when I have done someone wrong in some way Disagreeing with someone who disparages views that I agree with Violations of Justice Remaining silent when someone disparages my views Independence Paying my bills Looking at my bank account Violations of independence Buying something I can't afford __________________________________________ I can't think of any unique example for rationality and integrity, since rationality and integrity encompasses every example I just listed. Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated!
http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/08/15/my-id-on-defensiveness/ This post by Scott Alexander gives the best description of why Objectivism is unpopular I have ever seen. Though it is not specifically about Objectivism, he does mention it about three quarters of the way in. 'It is really easy for me to see the path where rationalists and effective altruists become a punch line and a punching bag. It starts with having a whole bunch of well-publicized widely shared posts calling them “crackpots” and “abusive” and “autistic white men” without anybody countering them, until finally we end up in about the same position as, say, Objectivism. Having all of those be wrong is no defense, unless somebody turns it into such. If no one makes it reputationally costly to lie, people will keep lying. The negative affect builds up more and more, and the people who always wanted to hate us anyway because we’re a little bit weird say “Oh, phew, we can hate them now”, and then I and all my friends get hated and dehumanized, the prestigious establishment people jump ship, and there’s no way to ever climb out of the pit. All you need for this to happen is one or two devoted detractors, and boy do we have them.'