Phoroneus

Ahh also found that they were the 3rd largest Oil exporter and 7th largest producer, and has a population of only 5 million. That's a tremendous piece of the puzzle.

I appreciate the resources, but it's hardly confirmation bias to understand the cause of prosperity in the long run is a respect for individual rights and state regulation generally stiffles business activity. Unless those points are up for extensive debate on an Objectivist forum.

Hi everyone, any books would help. Preferably ones highlighting failures, but also successes so I can connect those to proper rights respecting action.

So was Jake wrong in the substance of his critiques? Andrew has gone to calling people mad for espousing Objectivism along with their stance against Iran, and projecting false arguments on people, yet Jake is who you single out?

Provided we enter a completely free society where the enhancement of man becomes a technological feasibility you'll probably see markets for human enhancement arise. Who doesn't want to be stronger, faster or live longer? Athletic ability in sports and Olympic events is still heavily prized and records keep getting broken, what "selected" Phelps to be a great swimmer other than himself? Such a genetic profile has not been essential to human survival and does not help us live longer or make us stronger in any meaningful (in terms of productive power and enhanced survival) sense. Bodybuilding is not a hobby in the 3rd world. Our ancestors were selected, not to be the greatest, most able sportsman in terms of athletic ability, they were selected by survival in its lowest form, a continual struggle against storms, starvation, and fights with one another, one could say this "fit" genetic compliment has caused us to "drift" to where we cannot survive a society that has abundant resources by causing heart attacks. This of course assumes that men actually rely on genetic compliment for survival rather than reason, in which case the said poorly selected can adjust his diet, using his reason. Genetic therapy will probably exist in the future to keep children from inheriting clearly deficient traits, like deafness or sickle cell and what not, and eventually you'll see enhancement rise to the level where we will give ourselves stronger bones, perhaps for military, or survival purposes we will give ourselves bones enhanced in a way that natural selection would never produce. Human degeneracy is less a factor of genetic drift, and more a factor of malnutrition, which you see commonly in unfree countries.

Personally, I must say that Objectivists are not born. Through most of my life until about the beginning of college I was a weak willed individual with no direction in life. I had no personal passions other than reading fantasy novels, playing video games and reading about planets. My morality consisted of adjusted mishmashing of the lives of video game/fantasy heroes and whatever I heard in school. My opinions from environmentalism to how self-esteem was built were based on the random sayings of the more intelligent (which unfortunately meant more deluded) classmates. I was a Buddhist, though I did my best to reject the mystical aspects of it, I had never believed in a god and my family never really imposed any sort of morality or ideology on me. I eventually realized how pointless Buddhism was. And I decided that I desired perfection in terms of physical appearance and mental performance. So I started weightlifting constantly, and began reading much more. One day I was walking through the aisle of a Barnes and Noble and saw a book that was pretty thick (which was my standard for choosing books I thought would make me smarter) and had an interesting cover, I asked my friend about it and he said it was some girls "bible" (a derisive joke, but I secretly admired the girl for her intelligence). Wouldn't you know it, that book was Atlas Shrugged, I liked to read books from an author in the order that they are written. So I bought the Fountainhead first (I thought Anthem and We The Living were too small to be worth it) and loved it, bought Atlas Shrugged and hungered for more, and consequently bought all Rand's non-fiction, then Dr. Peikoff's work, then Tara Smith's work, then read everything I could find online. Since then I have transformed myself into a person I like much better, the friend who said the derisive insult has since become a dedicated Objectivist as well. Of the friends I have introduced to Objectivism, they have come from differing political and religious backgrounds (though most were agnostic or atheist) and despite differing personality and preferences have come to take it as their primary philosophy. No one personality type is more suited for Objectivism than another, if anything Objectivism is the philosophy that gives you the tools to set yourself too it by giving you the genuine means to understanding reality and self enhancement in terms of spiritual development and self esteem. The choice is ultimately a fundamental one, like focusing your volition. No on can do it for you and nothing predisposes you for it, other than perhaps honesty and a distaste or hatred of evasion in your life.

I think I can handle this one. You don't provide a definition for self anymore than you provide a definition for a rock. What you provide for an existent is a description. If someone fails to define rock, you can hardly claim it doesn't exist until a definition satisfies you. That "you" are typing and "your" actions are "self" directed with your "consciousness" should provide you with an understanding that such a referent does exist. If it doesn't, I know of no evidence I or anyone else can use to satisfy you.

Not alone. Created 3 Objectivist friends. Or rather they created themselves after reading the material.

Oooooo I'm with you on that one.

I agree with Mr. Donohue, there can be no understanding between men who accept the Primacy of Existence and those who accept the Primacy of Consciousness. These are not men who want to learn anything from us, nor respect any of what we offer, they are interested only in using their resources as mouthpieces against Rand and Objectivism. You are trying to convince men who state explicitly that divine revelation is a valid method of acquiring knowledge. How can you convince such men, if they already start at the outset with such animus against us, that reason man's method of acquiring knowledge? With reason? I would also like to thank Mr. Donohue for his efforts as well.

If you're using an increase of GDP as a requirement for violating individual rights then the government could maximize its GDP today by grabbing everyones savings and immediately spending it in government projects. However the economy would crash in the next week or so. So a rise in GDP is a poor standard, and even if it were your standard perhaps you could give us a physical example of where this has been successfully applied, if it is such an advantage of socialism then why is their standard of living and economic power more poor than freer nations? Also what would keep a government with the power to violate individual rights from getting someone to redefine the concept "GDP" to suit their purposes? Attempting to control the economy at the expense of individual rights usually ends up in disaster, consider the idea of a minimum wage. When enacted the idea is that the government will create employment. But raising minimum wage doesn't create employment and never will, attempt to enact and employ it only ends up creating more unemployment. For a perfect example of this consider France with its 20% unemployment rate and the increase in unemployment whenever such a measure is enacted. Remember that it is socialist, though I'll be damned to find any advantage in it! And remember that everyone is an individual, a violation of individual rights is a violation of everyones rights, you aren't sacrificing a select delimited few when you violate that principle, you set a precedent for the government to violate everyones rights in turn depending on who has the governments favor or ear, remember politicians don't care about economics or rises in prosperity now that pragmatism is everywhere, and even when it wasn't mans idea of progress has differed greatly, many priests thought that the dark ages were a blessed time and that man has finally gotten back to godly living eschewing material concerns, now if ideas of progress are so different what guarantees your idea of progress will be the one that remains in vogue? When you give the government a gun to point at someone to give you money so you don't have to don't be surprised when they eventually point it at you. Because for every one of you who wants to increase "everyone elses" prosperity at the price of a select few, remember those under you who are more numerous and have more votes who will say "wait, what does total GDP matter if I don't have any money in my pocket, let's go after him, after all if he can violate someones individual rights through government why can't I violate his? he has no right to his money if I don't have any money myself!" What you have created in this case is a class of men who thrive on voting to violate rights, and an increasing number of politicians who are willing to violate more and more rights to satisfy this mob who wants to devour the prosperity today at the price of freedom and prosperity tomorrow.

I especially like the part where he does the Truther argument with himself, complete with runaway.

Thanks for the information and presentation. I will probably run off and buy that book as well.

Thank you for posting this! I'm a big fan of your work. Your post and ensuing discussion are very useful for intellectual training.

Canadians are a race?