Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

John David Antesberger III

Regulars
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About John David Antesberger III

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. I'm curious then as to why 1) Ayn Rand ever bothered to write FICTION and 2) Rand ever bothered to use Dagny Taggart (and all the rest of the cast) as a symbol, a metaphor for her philosophy. From what I understand she chose to write fiction SPECIFICALLY instead of non-fiction. It would probably do many on this site some good to review the Introduction from the 35th Anniversary Edition of Atlas Shrugged.
  2. On the contrary, I do not believe in God on faith alone. And yes it will sound like I make a huge claim that there is empirical proof of God's existence (note: I do not engender God). My stance is merely that there is either Nothing, or there is Something. If there was Nothing to start out with there wouldn't be Anything (i.e. the universe and the material contained within it). Therefore, there HAD to be Something at what we perceive as the beginning of Time and I find that Something (Existence itself) to be the concept of God. Consequentially, all that we observe around us and above us, from
  3. Just to put a few cents in on the subject of Rand's Atheism... I am a Traditional Catholic and openly and devoutly practice my faith. I take Communion, confess my sins, and believe that there is a God. Objectivism works for me well in addition to my religion. As a Catholic, my goal is to reach Heaven, of course, but to do that I must concern myself with my soul and the ways in which I can purify it. Everything a Catholic does is to strive the individual's soul towards Heaven. Now I understand that Rand stressed the importance of Absolute Reality in relation to her philosophy. However
  4. If we are O'ists how do we even discover the need to defend ourselves against MarcT? Dagny Taggart never defended Rearden Metal in a debate with Scudder; she didn't HAVE to! Ergo, none of us need to waste our efforts on something as trivial as arguing with MarcT the foundations of a philosophy that O'ists subjectively (meaning they express) and objectively (meaning they observe) observe the benefits of. If it works for us, why tell us different? If it works for us, even if we are a minority, then how EXACTLY is Objectivism redundant as he proposes? Quite frankly, I think MarcT's efforts ar
×
×
  • Create New...