Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

overt

Regulars
  • Posts

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

overt last won the day on August 9 2012

overt had the most liked content!

About overt

  • Birthday 11/18/1983

Profile Information

  • Interests
    My own.
  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Sexual orientation
    Straight
  • Relationship status
    Married
  • Interested in meeting
    Mostly not.
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Country
    United States
  • Experience with Objectivism
    I am... one?

    ('Hot Fuzz' reference)
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted
  • School or University
    None
  • Occupation
    Literature

overt's Achievements

Junior Member

Junior Member (3/7)

4

Reputation

  1. Get more information on everyone involved. Unless you already have, then to hell with you.
  2. http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/metaphysical_vs_man-made.html
  3. Was this post brought about by something in particular?
  4. The hatred of the good for being the good is not a monopoly of traditional ideologies. There are plenty of so-called Objectivists or supposed sympathizers with Ayn Rand's ideas who enjoy plenty of sneering at Ayn Rand and her philosophy, especially if they can get away with doing it by sneering at Peikoff. Given my profile image it may go without saying, but I liked your quote, especially the part from The Man Who Laughs.
  5. Edit: Found a better picture and had to change the URL.
  6. I don't want a flame war. I want to know if you think Peikoff is a dogmatist and if you spend time bashing him.
  7. I disagree with everything you said on Objectivist Living in response to me. And when you start talking like you want to have a fist-fight, I'm not a chicken for telling you to calm down. When I made my initial post it was in response to someone who responded to you, I had barely read anything you said. I watched the video you posted, I read a few comments back and forth, and I pointed out something I dislike even more than a bad video vaguely insulting Peikoff. Your defensiveness is not proof of me 'trying to pick a fight'. You've come to a lot of brash conclusions because of a general statement I've made, falsely attributed me with being passive-aggressive, then continued to dodge and weave around anything I say. Also you demand that I go to an entirely different forum to even address you, because of supposedly deleted comments. Can't say there's much reason for me to keep this going.
  8. So you're saying you do those things I named, but you'll only tell me if you're certain you won't get banned from this forum? If that's the case, you're a cowardly bastard. Otherwise, I don't see how we have a problem. Either way, I don't think you should take this discussion in the direction you're taking it. "Tough guy"? "Knucklehead"? "We'll have it out"? What in the hell?.
  9. Why is being so great that no one can compete with you considered bad? Not that it could happen, but if it did, I would be amazed and extremely grateful for anything that company or individual could offer me.
  10. I think Ayn Rand explained this article's underlying problem very well: http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reg_ar_faith_and_force
  11. It's directed at anyone it fits. There are many people who bitch constantly about Peikoff as some sort of dogmatist, and flaunt how virtuous they are for not agreeing with him (even if this means abandoning rational principles). I'm not a coward. Let me know if that sounds like you and I'll be sure to let you know how much of a bastard you are.
  12. I agree. I also wish I could thumbs down everyone who thinks that their independence is defined by how much they stand against Peikoff.
  13. I pointed you in a direction where you could get clarification of the issue of 'a priori', since from what you've said you don't understand it and I think it would be helpful if you did. Regarding your other questions, I've already said what I had to say about the issue of rights as far as this conversation is concerned. I'm not going to keep repeating myself. There's a difference between, "Read Peikoff and agree or you're evil," and, "Read Peikoff, it would clarify things for you." I don't know where you're going with me discrediting authorities I appeal to regarding the moderator. Pretty baseless insult you've made there.
  14. Reread my post suggesting you read Peikoff's essay--it wasn't a suggestion to clarify the issue of rights. And it was a suggestion to read the essay, not read snippets. "I believe the actions are self-evident, and the moral principle and right are derived by observation of the actions. I'm not clear as to how this is fundamentally at odds with the Objectivist position..." I'm not sure how that isn't clear to you. Have you read OPAR?
×
×
  • Create New...