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"
- 14 replies
- 1801 views
- Add Reply
- 24 replies
- 4522 views
- Add Reply
- 1 reply
- 1168 views
- Add Reply
- 20 replies
- 2724 views
- Add Reply
Hi I'm an undergraduate attending Universtity of Toronto but I'm from New York. I wouldn't call myself an Objectivist, but I share many Objectivist views (minimal government, atheism, raw hatred for hippies and environmentalism, existence exists, etc.), most of which were formed before I really became familiar with Ayn Rand's works (only a couple months ago). Im not an Objectivist because I view it as an incomplete philosophical system, but I believe its a good approximation of one. Furthermore I think we can mutually benefit from trading ideas. And, I find Rand's work to be refreshing considering its accessibility versus the mass of modern philosophical garbage I have unfortunately witnessed firsthand(I attended art school for a while). If any of you are good Objectivists and wish to debate me on whether Objectivism is a closed system, that would be interesting- but really I'm looking for some pure philosophical discussion, especially metaphysics, religion, human destiny, art, mathematics. Some philosophers/artists I respect: Aristotle, Newton, Gadamer, Bergson, Popper/Poussin, Redon, Turner, Renoir, Rubens. philosophers/artists I hate: Plato, Kant, Marx, Hegel, Nietzsche, Derrida, Wittgenstein/Marcel Duchamp, Pollack, Dali, Picasso, post-Marcel Duchamp(with few exceptions). My own views are based on these assumptions (in a nutshell): the utimate basis of reality is time(defined as pure change). time is indistinguishable from the mathematical one. and from that: complexity cannot be posited independent of time. (2 presupposes 1) so I agree with Aristotle in the necessity of an original cause. And then from that- reality is one, the ultimate value is the future, reason is the ability to control the future and comprehend time, temporal definitions are always the most basic and accurate, Being is only time in disguise (first cause). Actions speak louder than words.
By Guest DonGalt,
Since taxes are used to force people to live for others benefits, are you not violating objectivism to pay taxes? Some might make the argumetn that the government provides services, and thus you should pay for those serives. But this violates the idea of value for value-- the level of tax burden is approximately 10 times the fair market value for the services you recieve. (Realize that this is easy to show as most government money goes into the financial pyramid scheme of the deficit, foriegn aid, etc.) Half of your life you are not living for yourself, you are living for others. And you are not doing so because its in your interest-- you're doing so because you are threatened with force if you don't. This is clearly not a situation of free traders exchanging value. So why do so many so-called objectivists seem to think paying taxes is moral? With the big rift that came out of one objectivist just talking to some (allegedly) non-objectivists, how can so many objectivists directly fund their own opression with taxation? Seems like there's a conflict there.
Hi, My name is James Hughes. I live in Arkansas, and I am an independent salesperson from Kirby Enterprises. I've read most of Ayn Rand's books, and both of Leonard Piekoff's works. I learned about Ayn Rand through Anton LaVey and the Church of Satan (a philosophy which claims rational self-interest in ethics). After discovering Ayn Rand, I divorced myself from that movement, and have been preparing a critical essay about it. I am interested in philosophy, psychology, science, and capitalism. My favorite fiction book by Miss Rand is "The Fountainhead," and my favorite nonfiction book is "The Virtue of Selfishness." I am interested in volunteering for this forum, depending upon what that entails, of course. This looks like a great forum, and I hope to be a productive member of it.
...if, one day you awoke to find yourself in the Dark Ages? To give you some background on the question, I am asking this in the context of living a virtuous/rational life in a culture of irrationality. Under such conditions, how should one live one's life? What could/would one do to make one's life more 'livable' as an objectivist in a 'society' steeped in blatant irrationality and in which such irrationality had no rational counterpart (and indeed where the such rationality could run you afoul of the church and thus place your life in mortal danger). I am curious to see what the suggestions are from those on the board.