Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Capitalist Chris

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Capitalist Chris last won the day on March 15 2016

Capitalist Chris had the most liked content!

About Capitalist Chris

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Previous Fields

  • Country
  • State (US/Canadian)
  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • Copyright
    Public Domain
  • Experience with Objectivism
    Virtue of Selfishness
    Philosophy: Who Needs It
    The Fountainhead
    Atlas Shrugged
    ...still learning.
  • Occupation

Recent Profile Visitors

1981 profile views
  1. Thanks for sharing some of those quotes. I'll continue to pick away at it - not as the main book I'm reading, but something to pick up when I need a change of subject. I figure, at least, I can learn more about the transcendentalist thought, arguments and just general banter people may use in casual conversation.
  2. I think this is the category I probably would fall into. About 8-10 years ago, I had a bad habit of picking up books for my Kindle and never actually read them. This year I've been able to get into a good little routine of reading and I've been picking away at some of these books I've picked up - at what was a different time in my life. There was another book I read that I finished, which had a tone (or idea) running through it that ruined it for me. At least with Walden, I did do some Googling after reading the first bit and was able to look into transcendentalism. I assume it's that idea
  3. I've started into this book and not very far into it. From what little I have read, there's definitely a tone to it that I don't enjoy. I suppose it's probably the idea behind the book itself. Consumption bad, less is more, traditional lifestyle better than more modern. I just wanted to get an idea of what I'm getting into. I realize if it's not really working for me, I should just find another book. Sometimes it just takes me time to get into a book and if I ditched every book after a chapter or two, I'd probably finish very few books. Is there some good found in this book or will
  4. Thanks for the recommendations StrictlyLogical and Repairman. It has been recommended to me a few times now to go through Peikoff's History of Philosophy. I've heard nothing, but good things. Repairman, that books sounds like a really good one for me. A good overview of all that is out there. I don't need (or expect) to be an expert in everything, but I think it's valuable for me to have a decent understanding of what is out there. I also hear you with regards to physical books, especially when I was moving (they're heavy), it's one of the reasons I purchased a Kindle. I'll add the book t
  5. I've read a lot of Rand's work, that I've enjoyed, though I have some more books of hers to get through. The more I read, the more interested I've become in philosophy and have started to consume it independently on my own. I checked out some syllabuses at some University to see what the intro epistemology courses use as a text and I picked up a copy. I'm currently working my way through "Epistemology: A Contemporary Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge" by Audi. This book in general doesn't really talk about the philosophers behind the ideas. Instead of saying Hume said this... or Kan
  6. I was recently listening to a Freakonomics podcast called The Upside of Quitting. It's about an hour long, but if you're interested in listening you can garner the point in the first 10-20 minutes. Summing up the point, they look at quitting from the economic concept of "sunk cost". Essentially people invest money, time or whatever into something (a goal, a job, a project, etc), that can't be recovered and find themselves unable to quit something because of this - even when they probably should. I totally get it and it makes sense to me. I can think of several examples off the top of
  7. Sorry for the late reply. I totally spaced on it. Thanks for the link Reidy. I hear what you're saying happiness. It's a fear of mine that there's dominant narrative that is off base in philosophy departments. At least in Canada, I've yet to meet anyone who majored in philosophy that isn't far left politically. But I've also noticed this from people who went to university and didn't take hard science (aside from economics) - they all come out very left wing. I realize this is just an observation and I could be really off base. At least with regards to philosophy, I don't know if
  8. Well, I live in Calgary, Alberta. The continued education courses that run in the evenings are more geared toward career development; such as MBA, programming, etc. Philosophy isn't popular enough to deviate from the middle of a work day class.
  9. Hi everyone, I'm writing to get some advice or perspective on going back to school to learn philosophy, part time. In the past, I focused learning and reading with topics that were mainly political. It was a long journey and I eventually found Objectivism. I'm no expert, but it helped turn me onto philosophy and I've really enjoyed the process - especially over the last year and a half - as I've really spent more time reading. I've had the time to digest some of Rand's non-fiction, but I've also was able to read other aspects of philosophy (like checking out the reading at MIT open c
  10. I guess what I'm getting at with balancing act is the way people compare two cultures (also applies to countries). Take Israel and Palestine. Israel is a western democracy, a mixed economy, rule of law, rights, etc. Palestine is not any of these things. It's run by terrorists in the Strip. It executes people for being homosexuals. It's uncivilized. The balancing act is the put down of Israel and the elevation of Palestine. Often you'll hear Israel described as Nazis. That Israel is practicing ethnic cleansing. That Israel has an apartheid state. And at the same time Palestinians are
  11. Thanks for the comments everyone. Finding that magic word that encompasses all of what I'm looking for appears to be non-existent. Though I do agree multiculturalism is very close, but the problem with it is that most people already have a view of it. Normative moral relativism doesn't seem to catch the balancing act. I agree with what you're saying DiscoveryJoy. You've hit exactly on what I'm trying to identify. I heard Evan Sayet talk about it in a speech titled "How Modern Liberals Think" or something along those lines. I don't agree with everything the guy says, but he's the firs
  12. I've always associated this type of thinking as moral relativism or cultural relativism, but at least looking at these terms they don't seem to quite fit (though related). So you have someone that is a cultural relativist. They don't view any culture as particularly right or wrong, better or worse, than any other. But when they look at different cultures, they see obvious differences. Some cultures do better than others. Some result in higher standards of living and others are poorer. This also applies to countries. Some countries are wealthier and some are poorer. And this is where
  13. Absolutely, but I think we should look into it further. Fraud is being dishonest. What about it is being concealed? Well, it's a copy. No one wants a copy, but why don't we want a copy of money? The answer doesn't lie in the material or scarcity. For the sake of argument, let's assume that it's a perfect copy. The same paper, inks being used. The same processing and plates. It's a perfect copy and the same as the real thing, therefore it is the real thing. Yet, everyone recognizes that this is a tangible loss for cash. If we looked at insulin, we know that the body produces it and they can als
  14. I wanted to throw something into the discussion and maybe more articulated people can explain if I'm off in my thinking. The discussion seems to be growing into two sides: scarcity vs thoughts + action make property. I see the same point brought up from the scarcity side about copying not depriving someone of what they have. Ie: If I make a spear and you make a copy, well I still have a spear. But what about the concept of money? A 20 dollar bill is sort of like intellectual property. It's just a piece of paper, but it's what it represents and brings to the table. I realize that money today is
  15. Thanks for the replies. I guess the keyword was thinking about what you're doing versus just doing what you feel. I haven't come across predatory egoist in my readings of Rand, I'll just keep on reading. Hopefully I run into her discussion on it.
  • Create New...