Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dingbat

  1. Hahaha, that's quite an argument. The "they are usually dirty, smelly, and otherwise repulsive" argument. Well, yes of course, if they are such I will have to agree.
  2. The content of one's will changes, but it can change because there is a host of that will that is in control of it in the first place. (That is, in control to the degree that one is able to control it.) There is always a host that experiences these things.
  3. I'll just direct you to a forum discussion I've participated in about drugs and how I think people mistake Rand's opinion as Objectivist dogma found here: http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.php?showtopic=16092&st=0 Rand didn't do drugs so I wouldn't use what she says as a standard. I also wouldn't talk so much about doing harm since Rand smoked cigarettes. I'm also not saying people should do drugs. It's very important to have the right mindset to handle such vivid, even life-changing, experiences. Their ability to remove psycho-epistemological barriers can be so intense that you will experience things you did not know you had the potential to, for example. This can be very shocking for some people.
  4. I define it as the removing of psycho-epistemological barriers that afflict our sentience. Ideally, the conscious and subconscious should work hand in hand in our exploration and participation of reality. But, how we even communicate or what information we allow to pass between the conscious and subconscious is defined by a set of rules called the psycho-epistemology. I believe these set of rules are established quite arbitrarily when we are still very young through various experiences. Now, in this day in age of humanity with all it's irrational pressures, no doubt most people are primed from the beginning to be very repressive about their degree of sentience. Rand, as a philosopher, does a very impressively genius job of explaining what is, especially in terms of our mental/spiritual faculties. I think, however, one can figure out, using Objectivist concepts of the consciousness, subconsciousness, and psycho-epistemology especially, how to remove these barriers through practices like honest self-reflection, therapy, getting high, or even meditation. All of these techniques of unlocking our full spectrum of sentience I call transcendence.
  5. I think transcendence is a useful concept because I think it is the way of proper integration. Integration happens in the conscious mind, which is the spirit as you observe, but the conscious mind is not always in a state of being ready for complete integration of reality. I think it is because somehow we've limited our psycho-epistemology probably due to irrational beliefs or past traumas.
  6. "A Brief Biography of Ayn Rand." The Ayn Rand Institute. http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_ayn_rand_aynrand_biography. Feb 18, 2011. It's true, "Earth," in some sense, is kind of limiting. I'm sure we can envision a future exploring the stars. But, I'm sure we can understand the sense of life of that statement regardless.
  7. You can say that the self is the volitional consciousness. One is able to engage in meditation to clear the mind because the self wills it. After the meditation, you will return to the self.
  8. Having something of so much value you are willing to die for isn't necessarily anti-man.
  9. I think it's because of FDR's cooperation with the Soviet Union during the war thus sanctioning the spread of communism globally. I think Rand was opposed to the draft which FDR upheld.
  10. You know, maybe if abortions weren't so taboo back in the days, we probably wouldn't have republicans.
  11. orpheus, I've barely begun to look into concepts of spiritual transcendence so my knowledge of it is limited. Within the Objectivist framework, I believe it is essentially opening up one's psycho-epistemological barriers to allow a unison between the the conscious and sub-conscious creating a sort of system or engine. In terms of Rand's views, well she had a very particular form of spirituality: the spirituality of the trader. From aynrandlexicon.com search Trader Principle and you'll find: It seems the transcendence of an Objectivist is still one attached to the pleasures and rewards of the Earth, which is an interesting departure from the Platonist mysticism of previous eras. Likewise, there's a Youtube floating around with an interview of Ayn Rand where she explains the view that our life here on Earth is the eternal life sought out by other religious systems. Again, this view of spirituality attached to this world, this Earth, and our present state of humanity.
  12. I think Ayn Rand's admiration for the greatness of man was her religion.
  13. Admittedly, this is easier said than done. I think the difficulty depends on the degree of one's "reality-disintegrated" by past traumas or irrational conditionings. Although, frustration is an interesting emotion. It's so off-putting, yet I'm sure we all can agree that there is something to be learned in moments of frustration. So, there is that interesting tension between being frustrated and wanted to avoid learning anything, yet knowing that these are opportune moments to learn.
  14. I think we are confusing Rand's aesthetic preferences as being a part of Objectivism when it is not. She states right in the Introduction of The Romantic Manifesto that "this manifesto is not issued in the name of an organization or movement. I speak only for myself." She uses her philosophy to explain why she enjoys the sense of life of Romanticism, but again that is only her preference.
  15. Oh wow, I love these. The images work very well. Sure you don't do photography? You seem to have an eye.
  16. Defence of its citizens? I don't think it's implicit in the philosophy of tyranny to stay put in one place. Attila the Huns prosper by conquering and looting the productive. The more we leave "societies of force" alone is essentially giving them more time for them to plan the perfect attack on us. 9/11 is an example.
  17. I mean in the long-long-run. Trade between nations recognizing individual rights is more profitable then trade with tyrannical countries. Thus, the best long-term solution is to impose universal individual liberties.
  18. Maybe having a baby is her way of justifying her parasitical existence.
  19. She's not an Objectivist. Doing no work to support herself and having a baby on top of that is ridiculous. The welfare system she participates in is what destroys the productive spirit. To be productive is to live, to participate in reality as a human being in the full sense of the word. As I mentioned before, even primitive nomadic tribes people live a life more moral than hers.
  20. I wonder though, given the context of the world situation where all the world's nations with significant military forces are propped up by this artificial form of currency, that maybe world leaders decide to go along with it anyways as a national defense measure to ensure that the military continues to be supplied. If the currency of, say the US, was instantly devalued, think about what impact that would have on their ability to supply their military, administration, and economy. Would other nations less friendly to individual rights, like China or Russia, muscle in? Kind of a strange predicament our world has gotten into if this is true.
  21. What if it is simply more profitable to liberate nations in the long-run?
  22. Dingbat


    Helps if you have something of value worth focusing for in life otherwise you should focus on finding that value.
  • Create New...