Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Albionan

Regulars
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • Country
    United States
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Colorado
  • Relationship status
    Married
  • Real Name
    Robert Kidd
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted
  • Biography/Intro
    45 years old, woodcarver, seriously studied Ayn Rands philosophy for 5 years.
  • Experience with Objectivism
    I read Atlas shrugged about 5 years ago and it caused me to question all of my premises. Since then I have read almost all of her non-fiction books. I have made a serious study of her ideas and consider myself an Objectivist.
  • School or University
    Graduated from Colorado Mountain College
  • Occupation
    Kidd Woodworking

Albionan's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/7)

0

Reputation

  1. I have been reading through this thread and what I see on the part of those arguing for the existence of God is a whole lot of rewriting of reality. God could have done it this way or he would have to be this way or what if he is this, and all of it, every bit is completely arbitrary. Why should any of it be considered much less argued with? It is pointless to argue with people who hold the get out of reality free card which is faith.
  2. "Not especially. But it galls me that the religious frequently claim to be rational." I know what you mean. Many that I have talked to lump subjective reasoning and objective reasoning together and drop the context of validation. To them their belief is sufficient to make something a fact of reality. That is why they see no conflict between faith and reason. But it is pointless to try to argue with them. They can just pull out their get out of reality free card.
  3. I see what you are saying. It is speculation. But it's speculation based on extrapolation of an Observation of reality and not just my imagination. I guess the idea that the solar system is unique in harboring life among the trillions and trillions of stars seems to be a contradiction of the universality of things. It would be like there only ever being 1 raindrop or one leaf. I guess the proper attitude to have is "we will deal with it when we find it" but I enjoy thinking about such things.
  4. Hello I am new here. I have been a student of Objectivism for 5 years. I have read Ayn Rand's works and some of Leonard Piekoff's. To say I have read them is not right. They caused me to question all my premises and to validate them. When I first read Atlas shrugged I wanted to throw it in the fire. I read it again and thought about what she was saying and tried to find the contradictions in her ideas. I finally had to admit that I could not find any or at least the ones I found were minor. What brings me here tonight is a question of Metaphysics. I was responding to a post on another forum. The thread was on a scientific study that claimed that the conditions for life were so rare in the universe that they could not be duplicated and that The Earth was the only planet to harbor life. Now this is a subject that I have thought a great deal about. I came to the conclusion that there probably is life elsewhere in the Universe and I base that on Ayn Rand's definition of concepts and my observation that by the nature of the Universe there is never only one of any type of thing. For every concept such as planet, cloud or grain of sand there are more than one concrete and that since we can form a concept of "life bearing planet" from our observation of Earth there must be other examples out there. I was told to go read a book called "The Privileged Planet" which argued the same thing as the study and then report back and eat crow. I told the person that I didn't have the time to read the book but since he had could he answer my philosophical argument and he basically told me since I wasn't a scientist I should shut up. So I am coming here to ask if my philosophical argument has merit or am I just out there? I would appreciate your thoughts.
×
×
  • Create New...