Amaroq Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 If you've talked to me for any significant amount of time, you probably know that I have a roommate who used to be a fledgling Objectivist, who has become vehemently anti-Objectivist, and even anti-philosophy in his quest to obliterate Objectivism. Maybe I've gone a bit overboard with the above statement, but with things he writes in his blog (which I only decided to actually peruse a few days ago), it's hard for me not to take insult. http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/11/to_the...nd_all_military http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/11/philos..._above_religion http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/11/lazy_and_stupid http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/10/does_s...ning_more_truth http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/10/philosophy_is_easy http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/10/where_...hies_break_down http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/9/on_altruism http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/7/violence_as_i_see_it http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/6/the_man_who_values_money I've cherry-picked the most offensive articles I could find and arranged them by general time period in which they were posted. Most of these articles directly attack and insult me, though they don't name me any more explicitly than "my friend". and one or two name me in more subtle ways. (The Lazy and Stupid one mentions someone who only knows PHP and considers himself a good programmer, in obvious reference to myself.) But even without counting that they are attacks against me, most of them are apparently vehement attacks against Objectivism, or against philosophy, obviously because Objectivism is a philosophy. I'd post comments on every article I mentioned to at least clear up mistakes he made, but I grow weary of debating someone who so stubbornly refuses to listen to reason. I also have come to feel that the more I debate him, the more harm I'm actually doing. He appears to be focusing on either mistakes I made in my defenses of Objectivism, or on simply twisting my arguments, using everything I say as fuel for his fire. He's told me that he must consider me evil for the fact that I would kill 100 people in self-defense. Now I believe I must consider him evil for these things he's written. Just wanted to vent about this and get it off my shoulders. What do you guys think of those "articles"? I'm curious about any responses you may have. I'd also just loooove to see his comments sections swarmed with more learned Objectivists than myself, cutting his obviously fallacious arguments to shreds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iudicious Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 If you've talked to me for any significant amount of time, you probably know that I have a roommate who used to be a fledgling Objectivist, who has become vehemently anti-Objectivist, and even anti-philosophy in his quest to obliterate Objectivism. Maybe I've gone a bit overboard with the above statement, but with things he writes in his blog (which I only decided to actually peruse a few days ago), it's hard for me not to take insult. http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/11/to_the...nd_all_military http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/11/philos..._above_religion http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/11/lazy_and_stupid http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/10/does_s...ning_more_truth http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/10/philosophy_is_easy http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/10/where_...hies_break_down http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/9/on_altruism http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/7/violence_as_i_see_it http://www.thejach.com/view/2009/6/the_man_who_values_money I've cherry-picked the most offensive articles I could find and arranged them by general time period in which they were posted. Most of these articles directly attack and insult me, though they don't name me any more explicitly than "my friend". and one or two name me in more subtle ways. (The Lazy and Stupid one mentions someone who only knows PHP and considers himself a good programmer, in obvious reference to myself.) But even without counting that they are attacks against me, most of them are apparently vehement attacks against Objectivism, or against philosophy, obviously because Objectivism is a philosophy. I'd post comments on every article I mentioned to at least clear up mistakes he made, but I grow weary of debating someone who so stubbornly refuses to listen to reason. I also have come to feel that the more I debate him, the more harm I'm actually doing. He appears to be focusing on either mistakes I made in my defenses of Objectivism, or on simply twisting my arguments, using everything I say as fuel for his fire. He's told me that he must consider me evil for the fact that I would kill 100 people in self-defense. Now I believe I must consider him evil for these things he's written. Just wanted to vent about this and get it off my shoulders. What do you guys think of those "articles"? I'm curious about any responses you may have. I'd also just loooove to see his comments sections swarmed with more learned Objectivists than myself, cutting his obviously fallacious arguments to shreds. I wouldn't consider him evil. I'd consider him stupid. That's the only thing you can consider a person who actively refuses to think and sneers at those who do. That is, if you consider him at all - which you shouldn't. No one else here should bother with him either. Swarming his posts doesn't make him look bad, or rather, it doesn't make him alone look bad. It makes us all look bad, like immature children. Doing what you seem to suggest would make Objectivists look silly and childish, which is no way to make other people who don't refuse to think take Objectivism seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zip Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Why are you still living with this dolt? Do you have the means to move out and find another roommate? I'd be gone as quickly as possible without any warning to him. His complete and utter lack of respect for you deserves like in kind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SapereAude Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Why are you still living with this dolt? Do you have the means to move out and find another roommate? I'd be gone as quickly as possible without any warning to him. His complete and utter lack of respect for you deserves like in kind. I agree with Zip. Get out, or if you are the primary signer on the lease kick him out. Why argue with someone who doesn't want to be salvaged? At this point in my life I only argue with people who I like, who are of reasonable intelligence who hold flawed and contradictory premises. This person sounds like a childish jerk who disdains knowledge for the fact that it is knowledge. Cut all contacts with this destructive creature asap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SapereAude Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 I just read some more of his drivel. In his assualt on the military where he glibly explains why all the men & women who have been soldiers are "cowards" he often references pop culture movies to somehow drive home his point. Why are the men who fought in the past for our freedoms cowards? Why- because Sarah Conner said this in Terminator 2! Why are the men & women currently serving in the US military beneath contempt? Why- because Batman said that in The Dark Knight! Seriously, you only degrade yourself by responding to him. He's a chimp flinging poo from behind a cage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zip Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 I didn't want to chime in on the soldier bashing thing but it never hurts to remind a waste of skin like this that the only reason he has the freedom to write his drivel is because of the "cowards" that went to war to ensure that he kept those rights. Sounds cliché I know, but it probably doesn't sound that way to the starving hordes in North Korea, or any of the other multitude of people who have known and still know the hand and heart of tyranny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEgoist Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Why are the men & women currently serving in the US military beneath contempt? Why- because Batman said that in The Dark Knight! Seriously, you only degrade yourself by responding to him. He's a chimp flinging poo from behind a cage. Wait, Batman said it? MUST OBEY MY MASTER. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SapereAude Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Wait, Batman said it? MUST OBEY MY MASTER. Yes, and not the nipple-y Clooney Batman or the dopey Keaton Batman The gravel-y voiced Bale Batman said it so, you know... let's find out what other great truths we can negate with this wisdom... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZSorenson Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 I've read the post 'on altruism'. It doesn't make sense! I don't think he ever offers any reason why altruism is good other than 'the more you think about things, that's the conclusion you come to'. He also seems to work against his own argument as he ventures into existentialism. I know you probably feel this way, but I'm offering a voice of support to your frustration. As for why someone could end up feeling this way - Existence exists!!! I will explain the relevance. I have been struggling with a very religious friend who considers not believing something just because you can't see it an intellectual cop-out. A laziness, an excuse for not searching, not reaching out with emotions and feelings that aren't as clear and trustworthy as reason - effectively. Ultimately, her reasons for having faith are the result of her desire to have her desires define reality. And at that point, her whole argument collapses. My crude way of answering her is by saying "If you rely on faith to guide your view of the truth, you are ultimately putting words into God's mouth." Why? What is the standard that allows me to say this? Existence exists!! Representing the fundamental alternative, existence vs. non-existence, the axiom of existence gives irrefutable definition to knowledge. Faith is never knowledge. Knowledge is something specific. When people abandon reason and give up on philosophy, it is because they have failed to see this. They can't distinguish between faith and knowledge. They assume that meaning and value must be the product of faith, that knowledge is their enemy. They incorrectly choose to destroy themselves in an attempt to preserve the concepts of meaning and value which they correctly understand to define themselves. It boils down to a failure to properly distinguish between knowledge and faith. And again, this error can be corrected with the Axiom of Existence for starters. No matter how confused you are about reality and your place in it, the difference between existence and non-existence is undeniable. And in that context the meaning and value of existence is self-evident. Your friend goes on about the Sun going 'poof' someday, and speculates as to whether 'humanity' matters. He figures that some might be right that we'll evolve and go out and make an influence on the universe. See the evidence of his problem. He assumes that our values must be imposed on the universe for them to have value. Perhaps he originated this in Objectivism - it's good to impose our values on objective reality. However, he makes the mistake of assuming that there is some intrinsic value in the universe, that it somehow answers to something, and therefore we must be meaningful 'to the universe' in order to be meaningful. This is the source of his altruism. He can't find meaning in himself until he is meaningful to 'something'. He skips over the truth that by alone existing, he can find value in his life. by being conscious he can appreciate and find meaning in that value. By failing to properly understand the Axiom of Existence, he ends up searching for meaning 'out there' where it cannot be found. As long as he thinks meaning is 'out there' he must rely on faith to find it. Until he realizes meaning is 'right here', he'll be confused and lost, and angry. The greatest irony is his spiteful criticism of those who consider altruism evil. He claims not to know of any non-fictional people that are altruists that want to sacrifice everyone with ability to those without, who want to spitefully create communism. The irony is that his philosophical vacuum is exactly the environment that breeds these people. I would stop here, but there is one more juicy point I have to make from that one post alone. He talks about how game theory suggests the universal benefit of altruism. I love how people are quick to ignore the rationally selfish benefits of benevolence and - not to mention - free trade and law. I hate the intellectual shallowness of the "working together means a skyscraper, working alone means many sandcastles" argument. But what's crucial in his writings is when he calls himself a rational altruist. He says he would die for 100 people, but never sacrifice a loved one for 100 people. There are certainly those who would happily sacrifice him for 100. And his loved one. And everyone else. He is the mystic to Atilla. The wonderful irony is that he makes this claim whereby he is willing to sacrifice himself for common good, but not others. Hence, his altruism isn't of the 'evil fictional communist' variety. Yet, as this thread's title shows, all his 'rational altruism' shows a lot of contempt and hostility towards those unwilling to sacrifice themselves as well. He'll sacrifice himself, but he won't sacrifice us for the common good - he'll just spew contempt and hostility until we do so on our own. So, I agree, insulting. But also ironic, irrational, hostile, deceptive, hopeless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Individual Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Wait, Batman said it? MUST OBEY MY MASTER. Actually, it was the Joker. He said it to Harvey Dent when Dent was hospitalized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kainscalia Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 If you hold the key to the lease, I would find a replacement and start telling him to find himself another, non-Objectivist household. If he will not, tell him (if you have the means) that you will move, and he will be saddled with the place. After all, if he doesn't believe in rational self-interest, then he should derive no benefit of living with someone who does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amaroq Posted December 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2009 Wow, Zsorenson. I think you may have seen much deeper into his soul than I ever have. All this time, I've been under the suspicion that he might just want me to believe in the things he believes (altruism and unconditional nonviolence) out of a selfish desire to take advantage of me. Given how much sense rational selfishness makes to me, I couldn't fathom a person like this having a seriously non-selfish motivation. It's strange to consider that, he might honest-to-god believe what he's saying. Besides the facts that I can't understand his rejection of egoism, and his inability to consider things from his own perspective rather than the universe's, he seems like a really intelligent person to me. And that's what I don't get, that intelligent people come to hate Rand's ideas so much. I've known for a while that he views things from the universe's perspective, but I didn't think it had such deep implications. Also, he is the primary signer of our lease. But I also don't believe in just up and leaving without giving my roommate an advanced notice. When I have someplace more desirable to go, he'll know at least a few months ahead of time that I'm leaving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skap35 Posted December 13, 2009 Report Share Posted December 13, 2009 His website seems to be partially down. I can get to the main page but not any of the articles. Based on the headlines on the main page, it sounds like his blog is just a giant monument to how "intelligent" he thinks he is. He thinks he's so smart because english was easy for him to learn? Oh I'm so smart because I speak French and Latin as well. He also seems to think he's morally superior to most other people because he thinks sex should only be used for reproduction and not for pleasure. Question: is he some kind of really big loser who never had a girlfriend? I find that people with that attitude about sex tend to be the type that have trouble finding women... I completely feel your pain though! I was stuck with a total douchebag roommate and, being a poor college student, I didn't have much choice but to just deal with it. At least this guy isn't damaging your property though. My roommate, knowing that I had several servers running in my room, would purposely turn off the circuit breaker before he left for the day. Another funny fact about the guy: his major goal in life was "to become a cameraman who works on the major hollywood movies. Then I can move out to California and be able to go to the 'sophisticated' parties that they have out there and pick up 'high class' girls." That's the kind of fantasy a 12 year old would have! Just like your idiot roommate, mine also thought he was very intelligent and would constantly try to lecture me about why I was a "loser" because I studied all the time and he went to parties. It's a horrible position to be stuck in, but I know exactly what you're going through. Just get out as soon as you can! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amaroq Posted December 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2009 (edited) Ah yes, the server is having problems currently. My site is actually hosted on the same server, under his account. Nothing of mine's gone down though, so it's some functionality he's making use of that I'm not. Probably mod_rewrite. If you can guess the naming convention for the script and GET variables he was using, you can probably still access the articles. (IE, guess something like index.php?article=on_altruism.) Or just try again later to see if the server's fixed yet. Also, neither me nor him have had girlfriends. xD I've had many online relationships, but he's never been interested in them. One thing I find interesting in his article about sex is that he specifically allows for sex for himself in two situations. Though both situations still require that you are planning to reproduce. One, if a girl was disease-free and wasn't gonna use any protection and wasn't gonna require him to care for the child if she became pregnant. Then his "genes would score!" It'd be the only logical thing to do. But the really interesting one is that he upholds sex in a relationship, the purpose for that being that it would strengthen the relationship. Though still requires that the couple plans on reproducing. I strongly suspect this is due to the fact that he deeply loves someone who doesn't return the feeling. "Sex is useless, unless with the girl I love" basically. But I can't see into his mind, so I can't know if it's that simple. Either way, if sex for pleasure is useless, what use is it to have a relationship for happiness? It's not a long stretch to apply his logic to invalidate his main reason for allowing for sex at all. Edited December 13, 2009 by Amaroq Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.