Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

triple7allstar

Regulars
  • Posts

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted

triple7allstar's Achievements

Novice

Novice (2/7)

0

Reputation

  1. Great info - thanks Not quite. This presupposes that Christianity is fictional (which it very well might be). Also, Christians believe that "God's Will" is not "anything goes" or "anybody's guess", but has been revealed through the Bible. Just thought I would help to clarify.
  2. So then, I guess my question now focuses on whether or not you believe God can be percieved? I would guess that the average objectivist would say to someone that says, "I've 'perceived' God" that they are out of their mind.
  3. You are absolutely correct - my apologies. How do you know? I'm not saying I disagree with you, but, again, saying that something doesn't exist because you can't percieve it only proves that you don't perceive it, not that the thing doesn't exist. This is a logical fallacy. My guess is there are things about this world (and possibly beyond) that we have yet to perceive.
  4. You know, I thought I should clarify my statement prior to posting it. Haha. Yes, God could show us evidence of His existence through toast. My point was that it is not fair to single out one example (of a lady that might either be "out of it" mentally or simply "pulling a fast one" to make some money) as the only example. My point was that there are more credible examples than toast - haha. But, thank you for the clarification as well.
  5. Thanks for the clarification. I was just curious if there were some Objectivists that might syncronize their objectivist thinking with theism. Guess not. Reason being (like I stated above) is that I've found a lot of Christians that tend to think in ways that are similar to Objectivism, but rooted Biblically. (meaning, "this is good because the evidence about human nature and the rest of reality show that this futhers your life, just like God set it up from the beginning") It was just a thought
  6. As I mentioned earlier in this post, my reason for posting in this forum is that I've been doing research to gain an insight into the different ways that people think. From what I know of Christianity, I would say that there are a large number of Christians that would say, "this is good because the evidence about human nature and the rest of reality show that this futhers your life, just like God set it up from the beginning" Not to say that there are not those, Christians, that might say, "this is good because I feel so/I will it/God wills it" (no further agrument). But my experience with Christians has led me to beleive that there are a larger number of them that believe in Christianity in a way that sounds very "objectivist", ie, basing their belief system on what they see, the "work" they see God doing in their life and in the lives of others around them, nature, the word, etc (minus the whole "objectivism is purely atheistic part - haha). This was partly the source of some of my confusion.
  7. Ok. Is it atheistic in nature? Cause to me - it seems like it could be very much in line with Christian thinking about the world.
  8. That last statement seems a bit base don't you think? Christians believe that evidence of God is everywhere, yes, but not in toast. A good example would be in Nature, the Bible, people etc. Most Christians I know would laugh at the toast example. That being said, wouldn't you agree that saying that God is imaginary, just because you can't see Him is a bit serving for your POV? This is an absolute statement. This is also an absolute statement. The question, "is it wrong to kill?" must be answered contextually - absolute statement. Just some food for thought I guess
  9. Is "Contextual" a part of objectivism? Can one be Contextual and believe in an all powerful God? The way you have defined a contextual's thoughts about truth seem to mirror the way a theist would think about truth? Is this true?
  10. It does help. Could one say that their objectivism is really subjectivism, however, because it is directly related to their personal experience? Or do objectivists beleive that their philosophy is derived from outside of themselves - based on the laws (scientific, economic, etc) of the universe. Is the goal of objectivism happiness? Contentment?
  11. Subjectivism huh - that makes sense actually - haha I think you are understanding me, I guess I'm just so used to thinking in terms of there being an overarching moral code imposed by a 3rd party (government / church). I'm trying to find the source for doing what most people would consider right and not doing what most people would consider wrong. It sounds like, I treat others the way I would like them to treat me because it benefits me, which I understand. But, the peice I don't understand is, why would we punish "criminals" if a nation were governed by an objectivist standpoint? Does my confusion make sense? Like, let's say I really feel no sense of remorse for any "wrong" action I might take (murder, rape, arson, etc) is it still wrong for me to do those things under the objectivist way of thinking? Is it wrong because it hurts the motives of society? Or is it wrong because it's just wrong and everyone agrees that those things are wrong?
  12. Ok - this is starting to congeal for me a little better. Now, how about this situation. What if you had a group of people, all of whom had no aversions to committing murder. Would it thereby be "ok" for them to murder one another. I'm assuming that it would not violate any moral code if each of them had a "pre-existing" contract with their society (made up entirely of murderers). Thanks everyone for your responses and for postulating with me.
  13. So ultimately, is it up to me to determine what is right and wrong? I assume that truth is relative in objectivism. I appreciate the fact that no-one has just written me off yet btw.
  14. So, out of curiousity, does Rand say anything regarding why we are to try to be good people? Or are we? It seems that everything that I've heard thus far does make sense rationally, except for the reasoning behind being good. Why be good, why not be bad - when it comes to objectivism? I'm truly curious - I hope that my questions and comments don't come accross as attacking or classless.
×
×
  • Create New...