Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Roark4Prez2112

  • Rank

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  1. Roark4Prez2112


    I have been thinking about sexual fetishes, in terms of their ethical status. Are they moral or immoral? Why or why not? Clearly, what gives pleasure without infringing on anyone's rights is morally acceptable. But is there something wrong with the sense of life of those who like strange sexual fetishes? Are they evading reality in trying to distort the standard sexual practice? "Bukake," a group sexual activity involving self-stimulation in a social context, has recently come to my attention [via my unfortunately often immoral cohabitant at college]. My opinion is that this kind of vile abuse
  2. I would like to opine about the film Kill Bill, the namesake of this thread, even though the discussion has gone off topic somewhat. This is the most immoral film I have seen since Tarantino's last abortion of morality, Pulp Fiction. The sense of life need not be mentioned - it repulses me, and any lover of reality. Endless bloodshed, evil people killing evil people - what is there for an objectivist to love here? What does it say about values and morals? And how is it Romantic? The concept of "revenge" is only properly used by moral people or nations, such as America is justified in using
  3. While MinorityOfOne is correct in pointing out that video games have goals, it must be stated that only certain video games are moral. Many evasive games exist, which distort reality and create nightmarish visions of evil. However, there are luckily many morally uplifting games to play. I would mention the Tom Clancy games, such as Splinter Cell and Ghost Recon, where one plays as an anti-terrorism operative. Defeating disgusting terrorism and glorifying America is clearly right and rational, and it makes these games excellent experiences based upon proper philosophies. Other excellent games i
  4. TOC has some of the worst op-eds I've ever seen. Not even in terms of content - their content always just seems like watered down ARI to me - but in terms of writing style. They sound like they're written by middle schoolers (unsurprising considering that the intellect of such evaders as TOC's writers must be on such a level). I think this unprofessionalism is a large part of its decline. Also, most Objectivists want to be associated with the organization that Ayn Rand herself sanctioned (inasmuch as she designated Peikoff as her philosophical successor). Just out of curiousity, does anyone
  5. I take offense to this statement. Beethoven's utterly huge, purely benevolent music should be appreciated by all humans as being superlative. And as far as I'm concerned, you're not a true O'ist if you can't see that. Clearly, your sense of life isn't anywhere near benevolent enough to fully understand the unadulterated glory of things like the Waldstein Sonata and the Eroica Symphony (Symphony no. 3 to anyone who hasn't studied their Beethoven as much as they should) In conclusion, any attempt to deny Beethoven's total greatness is naught but evasion.
  6. They don't have emoticons for that. .....AND this isn't a laughing matter.
  7. Not only would we be justified in bombing North Korea, but we should also bomb South Korea as well for being appeasers. It's because of them and philosophers like Kant that evil exists today. So i agree with Greedy Capitalist, but think he's not going to be solving the entire problem. We shouldn't be dropping a low-yield nuke on just North Korea. We should be dropping a couple of high-yield nukes on the entire peninsula and rid ourselves of the problems that have been escalating since the Korean War. And backlash be damned! It's not America's fault that North Korea continued to be a thre
  • Create New...