Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
  • °

    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

    Capleton's Introduction!

    Capleton
    By Capleton,
    Greetings everyone! I consider myself to be an Objectivist. The thing is that I am more inclined to support TOC than ARI. This is not to say that I do not like ARI but that most of the information I have gotten about Objectivism comes from TOC. The ARI websites doesn't have that much commentary on social issues and philosophical matters from what I have seen. My desire to learn more about Objectivism was aided by TOC and it is for this very reason that I lean more towards them (I am new to Objectivism). I do not however agree with all of Rand’s personal views but I am in total agreement with her philosophy. I am an advocate of individual rights, capitalism (separation of economy & state) and of rational egoism. I am of the view that reality is knowable and that the primary means for a human consciousness to recognize and deal with it is by reason. I am fairly new to Objectivism so I beg that you all bear with me. I am here to learn and share in the philosophy of reason, Objectivism. Am I welcomed to this forum since I align myself (provisionally) with TOC? On another note, I was under the impression that DonGalt was harshly treated but that was before I saw him post something about Objectivism being compatible with a variant of Anarchism. At that point I was appalled! Anyhow, I hope I will be well received at this site and I look to an intellectually rewarding experience.

    Living Among the Dead

    Wilderness
    By Wilderness,
    Hello, all. My name is William. Does anyone else live the D.C. area? It is difficult to find any rational Objectivists around these parts. Everyone is a Democrat and religious. Anyone read any good books lately? Right now I am reading von Mises' "Omnipotent Government"- good stuff. Lata, Wilderness

    Hello

    lbridges
    By lbridges,
    I've lurked about here for a short time and been reading threads I found interesting. Thought perhaps I might eventually contribute in some useful fashion, and so have registered. My educational background is in physics and math, and my working experience has been in physics, engineering, and management. I enjoy philosophical discussions but practically speaking have no formal training - still learning the language so to speak. For that reason I hope you will make some allowances, and I promise not to be upset with criticism addressing lack of rigor. Lee

    What is the proper way to establish a government?

    Godless Capitalist
    By Godless Capitalist,
    As far as I know Rand never addressed the proper way to establish a government. She discusses the nature of government, but not how it would be formed. She does approvingly quote the Declaration of Independence saying that “governments derive their ... powers from the consent of the governed” This seems to imply that some form of democracy is needed. The problem I see with democracy is that if the voters do not think and vote rationally then the government will not be rational either. Would it be morally acceptable for a minority of the people to seize power by force and establish a government that worked according to objectivist principles? The majority might not support such a government, but since it would protect the rights of everyone it would seem to be a legitimate government. An imperfect but somewhat useful example is Turkey, where the military has stepped in to prevent religious parties from winning office and establishing a theocracy, even though that might be what the majority of voters want. In that case the value of democracy is outweighed by the desire to avoid a theocracy that would violate rights. (Note that I am not endorsing Turkish govt policy in general.)

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