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

    Reblogged:Friday Hodgepodge

    Gus Van Horn blog
    By Gus Van Horn blog,
    Four Things
    And when to break them. (Image by geralt, via Pixabay (license)). 1. From the Paris Review come three writing rules to disregard, by Benjamin Dryer of Random House. Perhaps because I never put much stock in any of these, I was amused by the following famous counterexample by Winston Churchill:
    In addition to Never end a sentence with a preposition, Dryer dispatches rules on split infinitives and starting sentences with and or but.

    2. A new version of the Firefox browser will start blocking automatically playing audio and video. I can't greet the news any better than the following, from a comment from Hacker News (and agree that they didn't go far enough):
    Because autoplaying media I am not interested in is ubiquitous, I bought a head jack switch years ago simply because it made it easier to mute my computer at writing time during the wee hours, for when I forgot to disable audio the day before.

    3. Here's a funny sign of the times: a font designed to help college students pad essays with a page length requirement.

    4. Venture capitalist and computer programmer Paul Graham, in the process of explaining why his adaptive spam filtering technique would drive up costs for spammers:
    After reading this -- which is worthwhile because it is a great example of someone explaining a difficult problem in a straightforward manner -- it amazes me that anyone still sends spam. Of course, it amazed me a couple of decades ago when my inboxes would get flooded with it. They don't now, though, and I suspect Graham's work was a big part of why. Indeed, I see spam in one of my inboxes about once every few months.

    -- CAVLink to Original

    The Trolley Problem

    epistemologue
    By epistemologue,
    If you are placed in the hypothetical "trolley problem", where a train is barreling toward a group of people tied to the tracks, and you happen across a lever with which you could divert the train onto another track on which only one person is tied to the tracks – do not pull the lever. Do not take an action in which you direct a train toward a person to cause their death, because intentionally taking an action to kill an innocent person is murder, and murder is morally wrong. If the train simply continues on its prior course without any intervention and a tragedy happens, there is no moral responsibility for the person who happened to be at the lever; tracing the chain of causality back from the tragedy, there is no point at which you can point to the person at the lever causing what followed: they made a choice, but they took no action to cause this tragedy, and they are not morally responsible for what happened. An example of this kind of "moral jurisdiction" is in Atlas Shrugged, in the scene where Ferris talks to Galt:    

    The Case for Open Objectivism

    Azrael Rand
    By Azrael Rand,
    Hi, Originally posted this article on my minds page earlier today: https://www.minds.com/AzraelRand If you're interested, I also have a rebuttal to Stefan Molyneux's UPB: https://www.minds.com/AzraelRand/blog/an-objective-critique-of-stefan-molyneux-s-universally-prefe-891837573402587136

    Reblogged:Thank You, Dr. Williams

    Gus Van Horn blog
    By Gus Van Horn blog,
    It is good to see someone prominent answer -- albeit indirectly -- the frequent assertion by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez that she is morally right. Walter Williams reflects on what Frederic Bastiat, a French economist who greatly admired America, might think of our country today. Williams first notes Bastiat's clear thinking on the matter of detecting legalized theft:
    Williams then notes how far we have fallen:
    We are in bad shape now, in terms of how common plunder is. But this pales in comparison to the "Green New Deal" this congresswoman recently proposed. The Boston Herald tries to puts a number on what that would entail:
    It is true that this would leave us destitute, but many observers argue that any smaller move in that direction would look acceptable by comparison, and that this may be the point.

    But theft is wrong be it of a penny or a fortune, no matter who does it. The Green New Deal is a wake-up call, but not of the kind the self-proclaimed socialist says it is. Our country has become so accustomed to legalized theft that we will spend the foreseeable future discussing how much of it we will have to endure -- until and unless we challenge the all-too-often unquestioned assumption that it is okay for the government to steal from private citizens.

    -- CAVLink to Original

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