Brian

Sorry if I am digressing or if anything related to my question has been presented but I am in a hurry. I understand it that Rand did not like much of anything outside of classical? I know she didn't like Rock. Are we to assume/did she give reasons for assuming that these other types of music are immoral, or that it is a subjective personal preference?

Alexandra York. I heard her novel Crosspoints: a novel of choice is really good. is there anything to be said about her?

Matt says: " I have no doubt that one day I will do what I have hoped for, which I to become a real life John Galt, or better." Matt, you seem to imply that you are striving to be like John Galt, and not yourself. Is this what you are meaning to say?

Areactor: Sadly, that is how I used to act. Was it easy for you to notice that they were dogmatic? I find it quite easy for me to notice such things, but maybe it is because I know how they function quite well, being experienced with it and all. Edit: And I can imagine that they wouldn't even know that they are harming themselves. At one point, I didn't even realize that I had been acting dogmatically for years and years.

I come here to debate with rational individuals. If I ask a question, I expect an answer from an Objectivist, not from a non-Objectivist whose answers would not help. If I wanted an opinion from a non-Objectvist I would seek one out personally. If a non-Objectivist wants an Objectivist opinion he need not resort to an Objectivist forum to find his answers. He should seek one out personally are go to another forum. Thank you. That is all.

How does rationalism differ from dogmatism, specifically? Concerning dogmatism: Let's say a person believes one can only be moral by being exactly like John Galt, because he is the ideal. And let's say this person acts like John Galt in order to be moral but he is not being true to himself. Is this person a dogmatist? This is, basically, what I was referring to. Under these conditions it is very easy to spot someone like this. But maybe I am wrong as to what a dogmatist is -- or perhaps you could be. We need to define our terms.

Monart may, and possibly should, have the legal right to call his song what he wishes, but not the moral right. I don't think anyone should call their peice of music the Concerto of Deliverance. In everyone's minds it is a great masterpiece that we cannot hear but it selfcontained in Rand's novel. We each see it as something beautiful in our own way. And I think it should remain that way. It's something too precious to have someone try and bring it to reality.

I do not have Dyslexia but you could gain some inspiration from the author Terry GoodKind who is writing the Sword of Truth fantasy series. He is dyslexic and he is a phenonemal writer. He is even very influenced by Ayn Rand! Just thought you could benefit from his writings and gain some inspiration from his accomplishments. Regards, --Brian

1. Is it possible for a person to be both a dogmatist and a rationalist pertaining to Objectivism? 2. Also, I do not see what the big deal is about claiming that there are dogmatists on this forum. Altho, I can understand that it may be necessary to prove my claim since after you asked who they were I responded "I don't know!" There are many people on this forum. Young people that are fairly new with Objectivism, ex-marxists that are still trying to figure things out, etc. If it helps, I do not recognize any of the moderators or frequent posters as any of these things. Asking us to go back and search for the dogmatists we are talking about is like asking us to go back into town and find the person that we met at the cafe. If you spend a lot of time on this forum you are probably more aware of people that are not Objectivists more than I am aware of it. Even I used to be a dogmatist on this forum.

If you were to list yours, you'd have to look them up first? How can you claim to have mental illness if you do not know what they are? Not everyone has them. And a lack of self-confidence isn't a mental illness, I don't think. But I'm sure it's a symptom of some.

Oh, I see. Well, I would have made the same claim that Pericles made anyway, so no harm done. Of course this forum is a great way to attract some amazing individuals, but one must understand that this forum can attract anyone, including dogmatists. Just like there are Communists that come here admitting it right away and people that attack Objectivists. It's not surprising. We all want to preserve and defend this forum, but another reason why I brought up the subject of dogmatism is because they wear a guise - and they may not even realize they are being dogmatic. I didn't figure it out for myself until recently.

I once thought I had schizo-affective bipolar disorder but I didn't have the swings between mania and depression often enough. All of the rest of the symptoms were surprisingly there though. Matteomastrom, did you have delusions, paranoia, and depression? And how did you specifically overcome it? I have only overcome my depression so far. If you'd like to e-mail me personally rather than spill this information on the forum, go ahead.

Yes, I know, that is how I lived most of my life. But not anymore, except for a few brief moments until I realize my errors. I remember trying to be like Roark: he was alienated and happy. What was my first reaction? To try and make myself alienated in order to be happy. Seemingly stupid errors, but nonetheless, you will be surprised as to how common they really are.

I mean to say that people ask "What Would John Galt Do?" in order to find answers for themselves. Meaning, if John Galt said to do it, and they were unsure of themselves, they would probably take his advice arbitrarily.

Betsy, an honest question now: If the goal is not to live an "ideal life" then what is the purpose of Rand depicting ideal heroes in her novels? She said man ought to be a heroic being. If you are heroic, you are ideal, yes? I am just flummoxed when one tries to live their life heroicly, for lack of better words. I don't think it'd be possible without some sort of comparative standard. --Brian

Why, there are quite a few that I have noticed but I would not mention their names because I do not want them to go after me about it. Besides, there are more people that have admitted being dogmatic, but aren't now, than there are actual dogmatists on this forum. Also, there are a many group of people who may not be dogmatists on this forum per se, but they see to have the symptom I did: asking the question "What Would John Galt Do?" --as if to say that they cannot decide themselves, because of lack of self-confidence. Just try glancing around the forum and judging for yourself. I would not lie about my thoughts - I encountered dogmatism as I saw it, and I did not bother remembering the people or what topic they were under. Also, I believe I would be more prone to recognizing them having dealt with it myself and can sense the various attitudes and ideas that go along with being dogmatic. And I didn't mean to imply that they were necessarily here, at this forum. My dad was dogmatic, as was his best friend, when I was very young which actually led to my dogmatism because he always talked about how great Rand was. What can you expect from a kid that hears that all of the time? If you have kids or are planning on it, teach your kids to love freedom, reason, and life before you introduce them to anything big like Rand. Don't let them take the route that I did: which was reading Rand mindlessly in 6th grade, merely because I thought I was doing good. Also, what value could you gain if you knew who was a dogmatist on this forum? Would you search them up just to find evidence that they exist? To, perhaps, show me that I am wrong? I'm just curious. Counting on your intellectual honesty, --Brian

Yes, thank you. I'm sure many people can gain a lot from your advice. The only thing I am uncertain of is: is living the ideal possible? and how does one know when they are living the ideal? --Brian

Yes, I agree with you Bowzer. In fact, if you didn't notice, I said I have over come my depression, at least for the most part. I can deal with feeling down for a couple days out of month compared to what it used to be. I am grateful for that much:) Also, now that I am happy I am more able to deal with my other problems. They are starting to die down, now that I am trying to control it, based on the means that you have just said.

I mean hopeless in the fact that she can't change him to want to make a new start. Eddie knows that he wouldn't be able to run his own Railroad company. So I guess question is: isn't it possible that his attitude can change and that he could eventually find the courage and self-motivation to do it? Things don't always have to stay the way they are.

Psychological problems do exist - it is a fact. But I think the issue is that people are hesitant at calling them 'mental illnesses', due to the fact of WHY these problems exist. I do believe they are there becuase of a lack of recognization on a person's part and that they can be overcome. I think that is what Dr. Hurd is mainly trying to say. Edit: I do have the problems that I stated above - I can't deny it, nor can anyone else. Call it psychological problems, mental illness, whatever you wish. I do not see a difference. All I know is that problems do exist, whatever the reason. Btw: Why do you say mental illness does not exist but that severe troubles/problems do? What is the difference?

Sure. I am a little hesitant, but I think I can handle it. I have never told anyone until recently that I even had problems. And, surprisingly, it took me all of my life up until I was 15 to realize that I even had them. I just figured that it was natural for all humans to have what I have -- how sheltered I was. (I believe you are asking me my symptoms to prove how I have them, yes? Here I go) A mild form of A.D.D. -- this would involve a lack of concentration and mind wandering from subject to subject and forgetfullness of things I am supposed to be doing. I'm sure all humans experience this, but my problem is worse, comparatively. My parents, when I was roughly 6, suggested that I had A.D.D. based on my behavoir. I always thought I had it somewhat, but just about a month ago my mom told me that she thought I had it, also. She said that when I was young I would never obey my parents after being told not to and even after being hit a couple of times -- that I would keep at it. She said I would hit people, such as my cousin, and go right back at it no matter what. My mother also said that she used to have to tie my arm to her arm when going outside because when something caught my attention, I would run off across the street or something without a care in the world. I do not believe this to be the worse case scenario, so that is why I put 'mild.' Paranoia - also in relation to anxiety -- this involves the belief that I think everyone knows everything about me, that I am being watched all of the time, and that I have anxiety attacks based on false, irrational ideas about dying at any moment for no apparent reason. If anyone here as come close to death, you know what it feels like. Except that for me, I will feel close to death although nothing is in fact wrong. Schizophrenia - in relation to the paranoia -- let it be said that there are many forms of schizophrenia, but this one is in relation to my paranoia about being watched and monitored all of the time. They are people, usually people that I know, or dead ones that I have never met, that watch me constantly. They usually observe from windows, behind trees, sitting in chairs, thru vents, black spaces or holes in ceiling tiles, etc. A mild form of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder - this involves the need to move the corresponding right side of my body if I move the left side, and vice versa. If I move my left arm, I must move my right arm in the same fashion. And this involves the need to twitch my right eye and stretch the right side of my neck -- although nothing has been applied to the left. I say it is mild because it does not involve dangerous ideas if I do not do them. For instance, my friend has the same thing, but he believes that his family will be harmed if he does not move the correspondomg side. That is a severe case. I don't have it, beacuse I don't have those ideas. Depression - which I have recently overcome, for the most part -- I believe this is obvious. It was at its peak when I was 15 and it lasted for 6 months - usually sleeping for 13 hours a day, not having the urge or motivation to do anything, and lack of comprehension. (For example, when I was depressed I couldn't understand the first page of Atlas Shrugged - but that has changed now, and I can understand the whole book completely, now that I am happy) Is this satisfactory for what you have wanted? --Brian

I have mostly overcome the problem, but there are times when it will last a few days at a time, and I think that is a problem. Again, I've lived like this most of my life so I can imagine it takes a long time to getting used to. One of the consequences I face from having been dogmatic, is that I have always 'pictured' Objectivists being a certain way - and that was the way of being dogmatic, like I was. Now that I have opened my eyes and have seen how different many Objectivists can be, it is much different than from what I thought it was and harder to get used to. And I always see many Objectivists acting the way I did, and I just want to address how things ought to be. But, mainly, I'd like to talk to non-dogmatic Objectivists so I can have my problems fully resolved -- not just mostly. For instance: I have thought, at times, that if you were not exactly like John Galt, you were immoral. Then it hit me that I was not like him at all. So, that obviously led me to feel even worse. And it took me quite a while to figure out that that is not the way things are supposed to be. One is not supposed to ask "What would John Galt Do?" But "What Should I Do?" I think that if I can find an Objectivist that has a better 'sense-of-life' than being dogmatic, that I can be shown what living the happy moral life is really all about. --Brian

Disclaimer: I no longer claim to have these illnesses. I was 15 at the time, and misinterpreted common teenage problems for mental disease. -Brian I am a person that just seems to have a conglomeration of mental illnesses. Just as everyone here comes to the forums to find like-minded individuals interested in the philosophy of Ayn Rand, I am looking for those people but who are also knowledgeable on various mental illnesses or even experienced with having them, as well as people's views on the subject. Anyone? My mental illnesses include: A mild form of A.D.D. Paranoia - also in relation to anxiety Schizophrenia - in relation to the paranoia A mild form of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Depression - which I have recently overcome, for the most part I think I should be entered into the Guinness Book of World Records But, however, I do not have the most extreme case for every single illness. For those of you who have seen the simpsons episode where Mr. Burns has every single disease known to man but is virtually immortal because it is as if the diseases are all crowded trying to get through a door which leads to harming his body - then you can understand, although unrealistic, my situation. Best Premises, Brian

To me, it seems there are many people who are dogmatic in their aproach to Objectivism. How many of you wish you could meet Howard Roark and John Galt? How many here believe HR and JG are better than you are? Who here is looking to be exactly like them? I can just imagine John Galt walking into a room and I can see many Objectivists subordinating themselves to him. Also, I've noticed people with a lack of self-confidence are attracted to O'ism in order to gain confidence...but in actuality, it is the mere opposite. Kind of like when you are dogmatic in Objectivism you are imitating trying not to imitate anyone - which is really hard. And that is how I have lived most of life up until the the 16th year of it. Perhaps, if this topic lengthens, the details could be discussed. Although I am no longer barred within the chains of dogmatism, I still am hoping to have these issues cleared up - for myself and others. I have dealt with it in the past, and I am seeing people still dealing with it. Is anyone knowleadgable on this subject?

You may die knowingly to protect your loved one because a life without that person would be unbearable. But what if the person's life you have saved will be unbearable without you, now that you are gone? I cannot think of a situation where you would have to give up your life knowingly in order to save someone else. For instance, the grenade example. I would not jump on top of it in order to protect someone I value. I would rush up to it, kick it, grab my loved one and flee as fast as possible with my body in protection of theirs.