Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

LovesLife

Regulars
  • Posts

    176
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    LovesLife got a reaction from Superman123 in How can someone of a second-rate mind live by Objectivism?   
    I disagree that you need to know the essentials of the entire philosophy before you can live by it. Understanding and living by the Objectivist virtues of rationality, productiveness, pride, independence, integrity, honesty and justice -- and understanding the values of reason (and that emotions are not a means of cognition), purpose and self-esteem is probably enough for most people.


    Everyone already has a philosophy; even those with "second-rate minds" (a faulty concept, BTW) can't avoid it. Humans learn in bits and pieces; by experience; by trial and error. There's no need to memorize any tenets. Having someone, such as a teacher or a parent, who understands Objectivism can be enough. These are lessons (and learning opportunities) that come up thousands of times in a person's life. For example, most people already know that honesty is a virtue -- and they get value from that knowledge, even if they don't understand exactly why it's true.

    The main thing they're missing is having someone help connect the dots between Objectivist virtues; to help them see things like the source and nature of pride, self-esteem and happiness.
  2. Like
    LovesLife got a reaction from aequalsa in How can someone of a second-rate mind live by Objectivism?   
    I disagree that you need to know the essentials of the entire philosophy before you can live by it. Understanding and living by the Objectivist virtues of rationality, productiveness, pride, independence, integrity, honesty and justice -- and understanding the values of reason (and that emotions are not a means of cognition), purpose and self-esteem is probably enough for most people.


    Everyone already has a philosophy; even those with "second-rate minds" (a faulty concept, BTW) can't avoid it. Humans learn in bits and pieces; by experience; by trial and error. There's no need to memorize any tenets. Having someone, such as a teacher or a parent, who understands Objectivism can be enough. These are lessons (and learning opportunities) that come up thousands of times in a person's life. For example, most people already know that honesty is a virtue -- and they get value from that knowledge, even if they don't understand exactly why it's true.

    The main thing they're missing is having someone help connect the dots between Objectivist virtues; to help them see things like the source and nature of pride, self-esteem and happiness.
  3. Like
    LovesLife got a reaction from Dairdo in Objectivism and homosexuality dont mix   
    I'm an Objectivist. One of my sons is gay. I don't view him as being immoral, first because it was never a choice for him. Morality is based on the chosen, not some arbitrary attribute. Second, even if he did choose his sexual preferences, as long as no one is forced or coerced, it's a free choice, and as such if it makes him happy, then it's still moral.

    Having said that, I think some Objectivists don't care for homosexuality, and may even by repulsed by it. I don't think that's immoral, either, as long as they don't end up using force as a result of that view. In fact, in my son's case, he finds women to be sexually repulsive. So what? Really.
  4. Like
    LovesLife got a reaction from 0096 2251 2110 8105 in Starvation   
    This gets into the whole "ethics of emergencies" thing.

    Basically the answer is yes, steal if you have to in order to survive -- but there are many, many things that one should be able to do before getting to that point.

    In addition, it's a mistake to base your moral code on situations like this. Morality is there to help us with day-to-day living. The unusual corner cases (most of which seem to focus around death in some form) are not the drivers.
  5. Like
    LovesLife reacted to softwareNerd in Morality of Linux   
    Many people associated with the open-source movement, and many who champion it are anti-capitalists.
    Open source itself is different from the various open-source movements and ideologies. There are people who release their code and open-source for rational reasons. These can be directly commercial reasons:like people who want to get widespread adoption for the first few versions; or people who release the code and are happy to have others use it and add to it, but make their money from consulting etc. based on that code; or, people who are adding to some project as a hobby; or people who are contributing because they support some cause (e.g. writing encryption software that Chinese can use to circumvent their government).

    There are many open-source developers who are also anti property-rights in principle.

    And, then, there is the simple fact that 90% of open source might as well be free because nobody would pay a dime for it.

    As for Linux, it is an indirect grand-child of government intervention. AT&T developed UNIX, but ended up giving it away for free because of government regulations. Cannot blame Linus for this, but without anti-trust regulation, LINUX would probably not have existed in its current form.
  6. Like
    LovesLife reacted to Tenderlysharp in Self-interest versus rights   
    She blindly puts herself at the mercy of an impersonal system that is failing. Her vote isn't going to guarantee anything if there is no money to vote toward herself.
  7. Like
    LovesLife got a reaction from Dante in More annoying questions   
    Those are forms of illegal initiation of force.


    As in any case of initiation of force, the government's role is to protect the rights of everyone involved. If parents are abusing their kids, they are committing a crime, and should be treated as criminals. It's not that the children would be taken away from their parents, it's that the parents would be taken away from their kids and restrained, by force if required.

    Another interesting question is how do you determine if something is child abuse or not. For example, is spanking child abuse? Clearly, a parent needs to be able to force their kids to do (or not do) certain things, in order to keep them safe as they grow up. So, the rules aren't the same as for the general public.


    Foster care is fine. Foster parents should voluntarily accept the role and the associated cost.
  8. Downvote
    LovesLife reacted to Boris Rarden in Charity work   
    Hello,

    I have started a donation website called Online-TipJar. I have created a tipjar for this forum:

    http://www.online-tipjar.com/tipjar/objectivism-online

    My primary focus at the moment is free software -- software that everybody uses but the creators of it are making no money on it (but they get better salary on their day jobs, because they are deemed to be better experts).

    I would be curious to know what you think about my site. Is Free Software Foundation (fsf.org) and GPL is consistent with Objectivist point of view ?

    I also embrace bicoin, since in my opinion it is the same as the gold standard.

    Thanks,
    Boris
×
×
  • Create New...