Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


thenelli01 last won the day on August 11 2014

thenelli01 had the most liked content!


About thenelli01

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • Sexual orientation
    No Answer
  • Copyright
  • Biography/Intro
    21 years old. I like to learn and think, work out (lift weights, run, etc), read, play sports.
  • Experience with Objectivism
    [7-3-13] I gained interest in philosophy during my first year at college. This motivated me to go to the library and I began reading the works of Plato, Socrates, Marx, Kant, Nietzsche, and C.S. Lewis to name a few and found myself at odds with all of them. Incidentally, I picked up The Virtue of Selfishness without knowing anything of Ayn Rand. This was back in February 2012. Since then I have read ITOE and Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal in addition to VOS. There is still much to learn, which is the primary reason I am on this forum. My other interests are economics, psychology, and physics.

Recent Profile Visitors

7299 profile views
  1. What’s the best one you’ve read? A little off topic but I’m curious 🙂
  2.  thenelli01

    Books on Iran and terrorism

    Hey, can anyone please recommend books on Iran’s role in the middle eastern conflicts and terrorism (taliban, etc)? thanks!
  3. Hi, I’m trying to get a better understanding of how currencies, monetary systems, banking all works - was wondering if anyone had any books that might be a good fit? preferrably audio books, I don’t have much time to read right now but paper books are OK too.
  4.  thenelli01

    Grieving the loss of God

    Can it be grief of a loss in the sense of “loss of the investment of believing in the concept of God” - which includes the time devoted to and action taken by result of such belief, as well as the emotional investment. This could include prayers said every night, time spent at church, time following the teachings of God/not following your other passions, which were perhaps restricted by God’s teachings... e.g. think of the 60 year old disabled man that never had sex because he never married and recently realized God never existed. He didn’t lose anything in the sense that God never existed and you can’t lose a non-value, but he did lose his investment, which were the years spent (and experiences never realized) abstaining from sex, derived from the idea that following God's teachings will result in him going to heaven. Similar situation is when you find out your partner is cheating on you as was described above. You never lost anything in the sense that the relationship you thought existed never did. But you did lose the investment that you put into it - the time, money, possible relationships you could have made if you hadn't spent it with him/her, hopes/dreams for the future, etc. Yes, you did gain a better sense of reality in both cases, but you did lose the investment, which could understandably cause grief, no?
  5. Hi, I'm having a bit of trouble spiritually. I was in a relationship with someone who was narcissistic, which I'm learning about now post-leaving through education. I wasn't looking for a relationship when we met 4 years ago but it kind of just happened. Anyways, without going too much into specifics - he cheated on me for the whole 4 years straight, used me for money, wasn't productive etc. I constantly worked to try to fix the issues, but eventually I realized how bad the deceit was (I knew he was cheating, I just didn't know the extent, or I admittedly evaded/hoped he would change). FYI - any cheating/lying is bad regardless of degree, I'm not suggesting otherwise, whether it is a text or a physical encounter as this contradicted the understanding of our relationship. I admit my part in this by staying and not leaving at the first sign of deceit... I was constantly being told "I was the one he was gonna marry", "it's just bad habits that he was working to solve" and then just a constant pity party where he constantly had this "If I just get over this hump, everything will be great" mentality... but the overcoming of the hump never came. It was a way of life. I was constantly stressed, preoccupied with his cheating/problems that I couldn't ever focus on my life and my goals. I finally had the strength to leave (we moved to Cali primarily to pursue his career dreams and just for the adventure) and moved back home. Now, 4 months later... I'm kind of in a bad spot mentally. I feel a bit of confusion about what happened... I'm having nightmares almost every night about cheating and such. It constantly preoccupies my mind. I'm struggling to open up to other people and form meaningful connections. Rationally I know that the proper response is "It's over, accept it. Move on with your life, take them as lessons" but it's not that easy. There is still a bunch of hurt and confusion and just pain in that I let myself get so treated so badly/low. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to move forward (besides seeing a therapist)? I took him out of my life completely last week... I try to stay positive - I have good and bad days. But, I really want to move on and have a meaningful, happy life and friendships, but I can't seem to do it. Some days I don't even want to leave the house or talk to anyone, mostly because when I do I'm constantly dealing with other people's issues/shortcomings that it just adds additional stress. When I do go out, I make it by way of principle to try to stay optimistic and positive to the people around me and not talk about what is bothering me or anything personal really. The hard part is also that I'm gay and no one really knows this so I only have 1 friend I can talk to about it - who introduced me to the topic of narcissism. Also, I don't really like talking badly about people, even if they deserve it, second handedly (i.e. gossip, etc.) so that is another difficulty trying to get over. Can someone please help me out?
  6.  thenelli01

    Who was Ayn Rand's gay friend?

    I can't help to wonder what your motivation is for seeking this information. Are you gay? Is your self-worth dependent on whether or not Ayn Rand accepted a person's homosexuality enough, to the extent of maintaining a friendship? I only ask, not because I care whether or not that you are gay, I don't. I care about you using Ayn Rand as the standard in which you judge your own self-worth. If this is not the case, and you are just curious about the topic, please ignore. IF it is the case, I suggest you rethink your reasoning.
  7. Hello, Anyone that watched care to offer any analysis of the first debate?
  8.  thenelli01

    What is the Objectivist Answer to Police Brutality?

    Does the CDC make the distinction between just killings and unjust killings or take into consideration the context of the cop killings?
  9.  thenelli01

    Peter Singer's Argument for "Animal Liberation"

    But, why is the fact that reason kicks in relevant if it isn't a baby still isn't far enough in the development stage where "rights" arise? I.e. Potential is not the actual. Edit: And I just read your edit -- Lol at the goats :-|.. I think you sort of answered my question.
  10.  thenelli01

    Peter Singer's Argument for "Animal Liberation"

    A fetus is a human biologically -- i.e. it is the offspring of two humans -- shares DNA and everything. I don't know why you keep saying a fetus is not a human (unless you mean "Man"). A baby doesn't have the capacity to be rational in the context that gives rise to rights. It has the potential to be able to reason as adult humans do, but until then they are around the level of some higher animals. I don't see the difference between having rational capacity on a VERY low level, but having the potential to develop to the rational capacity of an adult human (baby) vs. having the potential to develop to the rational capacity of an adult human (fetus). What does it matter if a baby has some degree of rational capacity if it isn't actually the degree of adult humans if it isn't for potential? Unless you are arguing that babies do have the same rational capacity as adult humans or at the least the level in which notions of "rights" arise, it seems both are on a progressive timeline towards rational capacity with babies only being a bit further.
  11.  thenelli01

    Peter Singer's Argument for "Animal Liberation"

    Or, I was thinking you were referring to the question in the OP.
  12.  thenelli01

    Peter Singer's Argument for "Animal Liberation"

    Well, that is the part you should answer, because if potential matters in the case of babies (-- i.e. the capacity has the potential to develop into human adult reasoning capabilities--- the capabilities that matter in the context and discussion of rights), then it seems to be a contradiction to say a fetus doesn't have rights because it is a potential, not an actual. But, if the potential isn't what matters in the case of babies, then it seems some of the higher animals, which have reasoning capabilities equal to or greater than babies, should be treated as the same status as babies.
  13.  thenelli01

    Peter Singer's Argument for "Animal Liberation"

    Huh, that is not the reverse of my question.
  14.  thenelli01

    Peter Singer's Argument for "Animal Liberation"

    Can you really attribute this idea to Ayn Rand? But size of the vessel of a baby is the same size, or smaller, as some of the higher animals. The vessel size of a baby and an adult isn't the same size. To make the analogy more accurate, the size of the baby's vessel is the same (or smaller) as some higher animals with raw clay on the side. As they get older and their brain develops, their rational capacity increases (i.e. the raw clay is added to increase the size of the vessel). So, why aren't some of the higher animals treated as the same status as babies, morally and politically?
  15.  thenelli01

    Peter Singer's Argument for "Animal Liberation"

    Can you explain this a little bit more, seems contradictory. Doesn't the fetus have the potential to become a rational human being, just as a baby does? The only difference is that an infant is further along the progressive timeline. Can you explain the distinction more thoroughly, please? I don't think the argument for choice in abortion lies in a rights issue -- but, I do think Objectivists tend to go this route. I am just curious how to answer this.