Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

booneshrugged

Regulars
  • Posts

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Country
    Not Specified
  • Occupation
    Newspaperman

booneshrugged's Achievements

Novice

Novice (2/7)

0

Reputation

  1. Tom: While I don't like the fact that she will raise the children in a religious context, it does not change my sense of happiness or goals. I can still live an efficacious life in any case. Also, I know that children raised in a religious environment can still use their volition to choose their own philosophy. I must balance my responsibilities as a parent with her right to teach her children according to her philosophy. Ultimately, I cannot and will not force her to parent a certain way even pertaining to my kids — that would be a disvalue. Is it tough? Absolutely. But the result of living a rational, objective life with the freedom that implies is worth the price. And, while I don't hold this as some pie-in-sky hope, it's possible I can influence my wife to accept Objectivism. I know there is no danger of my accepting Christianity. What's unique about my situation is that, while the conflict has been painful, I am now talking to my wife with an intellectual depth we've never known. Like many couples, we had always left philosophy on the back burner and never really shared our inner thoughts about these things. Now, although it is a debate, it's an invigorating experience because of the total intellectual honesty that's present. If you had told me 15 years ago, I would spend hours discussing metaphysics and epistemology with my wife, I would have scoffed: "Episte-what?" Then, I would have squawked: "Never." Good premises to all.
  2. Although not my all-time favorite (still thinking about that), one excellent movie to check out is "The Edge (1997)," starring Anthony Hopkins and Alec Baldwin. Hopkins plays a self-made billionaire stranded in the Alaskan wilderness with a shallow, smarmy photographer (in other words, Alec Baldwin acting like himself). To survive, Hopkins integrates his vast storehouse of book knowledge with a will to triumph and ultimately defeats the elements and a nasty bear with a taste for blood. Baldwin — the very essence of a second-hander goes along for the ride, whines about Hopkins success and riches and generally gets in the way. Very well-acted and filmed. The last line may be a bit hard to understand but I won't give it away. It's a great example of how a man should use reason to integrate theoretical knowledge (abstracts) into life-saving, rational skills and actions (concretes). How's that for an Epistemolgical Movie Award? (The Eppies?) Other favorites: Chocolat, Shawshank..I'm interested in seeing some of the older movies mentioned so thanks for the recommendations.
  3. FELIPE wrote: “I am curious as to when and how you guys first began to explicitly think that God didn't exist. Personally, I actually can't remember ever believing in the existence of God, but I do remember for a short time thinking that His existence was possible.” My post may be longer and maybe even broader but still on topic: This thread has a special relevance to me because I publicly renounced Christianity on Feb. 24 and began openly living as an Objectivist (metaphorically, I describe it as Coming Out of the Mystic Closet). Raised in a moderately religious home in East Tennessee, I had always (unfortunately) accepted whatever philosophy was presented within my comfort zone (i.e. family, girlfriend, friends). My philosophy could be pitifully described as "Go with the Flow." I always believed that God existed because — in my immaturity — I didn’t want to accept that eternal life wasn’t possible otherwise. After marrying at the ridiculously young age of 19, I embraced my wife's belief in fundamentalist Christianity via the Southern Baptist Convention. (Sidebar: One regret I have from my college days is my refusal to read "Atlas Shrugged." A fellow student suggested it. I spurned it because I "didn't have time." I've often wondered how much better my life would have been had I read it and concretized it. Even as I "grew" in my faith, I always harbored unconscious and conscious rational doubts about Christianity but actively repressed those doubts because they threatened what I believed to be my sense of security and well-being. After all, who wants to go to "hell" if they are convinced such a place exists? I believe many "Bible-believing" Christians are trapped in this same spiritual conundrum. Plus, I was so co-dependent on my wife for my self-esteem; I automatized the belief that questioning Christianity would end the marriage (talk about a second-hander!) Around 1995, I began to serve as a part-time minister, partly because I liked the adulation and acceptance such a position brings in a community but also as a perverse way to deal with my doubts (which were growing). My rationale then was: "If I delve deeper into Christianity through the ministry, maybe I'll lose my doubts." Instead, I found myself surrounded by other ministers who were, quite frankly, as ignorant bout these matters as I was, inwardly neurotic yet spiritually "together" to the outside world. Fortunately, in 2001, I found two beautifully bound books by Ayn Rand in a small library in Sweetwater, Tenn.— "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged." I remembered hearing of "Atlas" in college and decided to read both. As you can imagine, I renewed the books several times. Finally, I had found a moral basis for all my repressed beliefs that would have been labeled "sinful" by my brethren. Here — in my hand — was a plan presented through fiction of a truly integrated, rational philosophy. Several personal (psycho-epistemological) factors prevented me from fully embracing the philosophy immediately — largely fear of change. However, my thirst for knowledge led to my eventually buying my own copies of "Atlas" and "Fountainhead." Within the last few years, I have read almost all of Miss Rand's fiction and non-fiction works including "Anthem," "We the Living," "The Virtue of Selfishness," Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal," et. al. Other books by Objectivists, like Peikoff's "OPAR" and Craig Biddle's "Loving Life," helped me eventually piece together the philosophy into an integrated whole. In fact, it was while reading OPAR that I finally admitted openly in my mind that I did not believe in god. It took longer to develop the courage and integrity to make this public. During this intellectual investigation, I told my wife nothing because I was still unsure of my intentions and I still feared the full implications of my blossoming beliefs. Metaphorically, I was Hank Rearden still clinging to incorrect premises while secretly seeing my Dagny (Objectivist studies) but not willing to part with my Lillian (religious dogma) for reasons I would not investigate. Eventually, my wife began to notice my lack of interest in religion. We both knew a heart-to-heart conversation was imminent. On Feb. 24, that conversation took place. I fully articulated what I knew to be true (Objectivism). I knew I could no longer fake reality and live as a Peter Keating. I shared my thoughts completely with my wife on all philosophical issues and, after several displays of real emotional pain, we agreed to continue to stay married for now while she sorts these things out. Since then, we have been talking about divorce and I know that's a different thread for the forum. While I'm not sure we can ever be reconciled unless she also rejects mysticism, we are committed to providing our two children with a tranquil, loving home until we decide the marriage's future. I think that she is has the potential of embracing a full commitment to reality and Objectivism because she does display some semblance of rationality at times. For example, she works diligently as a college math instructor, which forms some basis for a universe governed by reason. Now, I've defined my central purpose as: to live a rational, joyous life without contradictions, based on reason, self-esteem, pride and dedicated to pursuing the virtues/goals that flow from this purpose as well as pursuing productive work as a writer, teacher/speaker and therapist within this context. Towards that end, I'm thinking of leaving journalism, becoming a freelance writer/teacher and writing a book about the process of "deconversion" as it relates from fundamentalist Christianity into Objectivism (obviously drawing on my personal observations and anecdotal stories).
  4. It's certainly possible Peikoff has three books in the hopper. The information I provided yesterday may have been dated since it was dredged from my memory of a speech Peikoff gave about DIM at (possibly) the Ford Hall Forum. Until I review the speech for accuracy, my recollection was as follows: Peikoff said he merged the "one in the many" book concept into the DIM Hypothesis book project. I'll down a few Ginko Biloba's and see if my memory gets sharper on that..... If my recollection proves accurate, Peikoff would then be working on two books the DIM/"one in many" book and the physics collaboration with Harriman (which my DIM memory recalls him mentioning in that speech). I have some more DIM puns but I'll leave them at the forum door. Thanks. By the way, this is my second day as a forum member and I'm really enjoying the depth and diversity of discussions you offer...good work (even if I am [as a 34-year-old] outside of the majority age bracket). As a neophyte Objectivist, I am much younger in terms of philosophical development — thanks to the Southern Baptist Convention (and me for accepting their philosophy).
  5. If memory serves, Peikoff renamed the book from a working title of "the one in the many" to "The DIM Hypothesis." I believe he says this in a recorded online speech (perhaps the Ford Hall Forum).
  6. First of all, thanks to Moose for introducing this topic. As a new Objectivist, I have no problem rejecting my mystical, Southern Baptist past but my wife is still strongly religious and I've have had difficulty articulating answers to her sincere questions: "How can you know there isn't a god? ad infinitum. Thanks to the many well-reasoned posts, I have a better understanding of how to defend my atheism. My first inclination when asked about the existence of God is to simply say to the questioner: Proof it! That pretty much dries up debate. To our theist friend, Teqlump: Your state of mind appears to be like mine when I first read Atlas. To borrow a phrase from Christianity: Read on, brother! Galt's speech will answer many of your doubts and will likely identify while you feel "ashamed" — emotions aren't causeless. I can also recommend Loving Life by Craig Biddle to both Moose and Teqlump — it's sort of a condensed version of Peikoff's Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand.
×
×
  • Create New...