Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Steve O

Regulars
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Steve O

  • Rank
    Newbie

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Canada
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Ontario
  • Relationship status
    Single
  • Sexual orientation
    Straight
  • Real Name
    Steve
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted
  • Biography/Intro
    I have recently read all of Ayn Rand's literature and philosophical materials, and was happy to find someone who thought similarly to myself. I am looking to talk to like-minded thinkers.
  • School or University
    High School Grad
  • Occupation
    Temporarily an Unemployed Bum

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Brampton
  1. Read Atlas Shrugged in my mid-thirties - done because I had decided to expand my literary library, and AS had a reputation as being a difficult read for most, which was all I needed to know to get me to try. Took about three weeks, as I locked into it, and went back to reread passages so often that I probably read it three times the first time I went through it. As far as knowing when objectivism was the philosophy for me, that would be going back as far as I can remember. AS hit me square between the eyes because it represented the philosophy I always had. It was nice to find that there was someone else that understood it, and could put it into words, something that I never could.
  2. Do drink occasionally, I admit. Do it to relax, mainly, although I drink more in large social gatherings to combat the social phobias that I have. This is due to not being strong enough yet to do things I want consistently sober. If my emotions were stronger, I would be able to handle things without the alcohol, as they should not be necessary. But right now, the crutch comes in handy, and I do look at it as a "treat" I guess (well put!).
  3. I have seen the question raised of when people first read Ayn Rand, but my question is a little different. Did you read the non-fiction works first to learn of the philosophy, and then read the fiction? Or was it the other way around? And more specifically, if you read Atlas Shrugged, The Fountainhead or Anthem first, was it with the knowledge that it was a philosophically based work, or was it with the intent of reading it as a novel as with any other work of fiction? I first read Atlas Shrugged four years ago (I am 40 now, so I was a late bloomer), and did so with no knowledge of objectivism, or that it was Ayn Rand's personal vision of how her philosophy would work in the world. I loved it, then read The Fountainhead and Anthem. I have since read any non-fiction works that I could get my library to bring in. I am a new member, and have been enjoying reading the postings for the last couple of weeks. I have been intrigued by Objectivism, although I am wary to say that "Objectivism is the philosophy for me". More in the line of "Objectivism is the philosophy which most closely describes the philosophy I have always had (even before I was aware of philosophy itself). Look forward to a lot of discussions in the future!
  4. Tim, I understand asking about the objectionist view, but I concur with others regarding getting out and reading the material, rather than getting your answers through the knowledge of others. Maybe it's because I am new to this forum, but a lot of detail has been discussed regarding "the objectionist viewpoint" from many different angles. The one thing that I didn't read in the other answers is that objectivism isn't a "movement" in the normal sense of the word. It is a belief centered around the individual. Catholics may have the pope as a leader from whom to follow and learn, but I have always respected Ayn Rand's position as an individual when it came to her beliefs, and have started to look into forums to see how others have interpreted her words. The problem with trying to determine who decides the objectionist viewpoint, is that you are asking who is the one person to speak on behalf of a collection of individuals. This is the problem, short of taking countless surveys on every conceivable issue out there (which is an obvious logistical nightmare), there is no single viewpoint on issues that can be taken, only a collection of opinions of free-thinking individuals. Myself personally, I hope that there never is a defining "voice of objectivism". Even Ayn Rand was open to discussions of all sorts, including those that disagreed with her. Her main criteria for discussion seemed to be an open, confident mind. She struck me as the type who would change her mind if a clear precise, logical argument was made towards a topic. The reason this seemed to never happen (or rarely, although I cannot remember reading an example of her changing her opinion) was based on the sheer overpowering logic and reasoning that she possessed, and not finding someone at her level. I am just starting to read the postings here, but look forward to many open discussions with free, intellegent minds, not a single voice telling me what to think or my opinions. If my opinion is wrong, I will learn. If someone disagrees with me and I can prove this to them, then they will learn. The only "collective" part of objectionism should be the desire to learn or teach, not dictate.
×
×
  • Create New...