Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Jackethan

  1. I am gay, and Ayn Rand's opinions on the morality of homosexuality don't affect my self esteem too much. Either she learned to accept that being gay is not immoral and was right, or she didn't and she was wrong. My curiosity is academic. It's a frequently asked question from non-Oists and students, and I've heard many conflicting answers on the subject so I'd like to collect evidence and see if I can get to an accurate answer. Objectivism has taught me how to think, not what to think. Thanks for the concern.
  2. Doctor, do you have a citation on the Binswanger account? I'm interested in evidence of her specific views as well as any friends she had who were gay. I seem to remember the specific friend's homosexuality was known to her and she maintained the friendship. Kerry O'Quinn may be the one. Thanks for the info so far guys.
  3. Hi all, been a while. I remember in a discussion about the ethics of homosexuality and Ayn Rand's views on it many years ago on this forum I encountered someone who claimed that Ayn Rand had changed her views on homosexuality later in her life and that one of her close friends was openly gay. I could be remembering wrongly, but I distinctly remember seeing the man's name. If anyone knows the identity of the man or any information about this I would appreciate it.
  4. Honestly I think it should be between you and your doctor to decide of Propecia is right for you. A lot of people here are making a lot of assumptions about DHT, Just because it is an androgen doesn't mean that reducing it is "reducing what makes you a man" or anything of that kind. It's just a chemical. Many people's hormones are probably out of whack due to poor diet these days anyway.
  5. Any name from pretty much 1AD onward is going to be based on the altruistic mythologies of Judeo-Christians. This includes most names from all of the areas of Byzantine influence. These are the names which are most common today that don't sound 'weird' to modern ears. A few characters in the bible were actually badasses, such as Samson. If you're interested different names from those I suggest looking at Greek and Roman names. However most of those represent ideals or mythology from those religions. Alexander, for instance, is Greek for 'protector' (I believe). However, I doubt you will come u
  6. JASKN: This means the presidential election is going to focus on this issue. People are going to vote based on who wants to shut down Obamacare, meaning a GOP candidate might have a chance of winning. Whether that's a boon to the country is up to your personal opinion, personally I think it would be good if one did. And there is also the more bittersweet news that the harder the state clamps down on freedom the more individualistic people will 'wake up' and rebel.
  7. I don't think sexual fantasies fall very much under morality. I don't think you can judge your own thoughts as moral or immoral, since they are simply thoughts, not actions. Whether fantasizing about another woman is a smart idea depends on you. Are you fantasizing about her for physicality, because she's different from your wife and you crave that variety? Or are you in love with this other woman? If the first, then calm down, you're normal and human. If the second, then you may need a marriage counselor and a good talk with your wife. Fantasies are as valuable as their effects on your lif
  8. Heya Superman123, another gay Oist here. Same to the OP, hello! Welcome to the forum. In response to your recent point, Superman: In a free market system all minorities would be in the same boat. However, there's an important part of Ayn Rand's view of -how- a free market system becomes adopted. Ayn Rand believed that in order for the government to change fundamentally to become more capitalist the general attitude of individuals' personal views on morality and politics would have to change. If a dictator ran in and suddenly abolished taxes, regulations, social programs, and left the perfec
  9. I'd like to correct a semantic error. I don't think Sentient is the word we want to use for distinction in this case. I made this mistake in an argument about animal rights once already. Sentient according to Merriam-Webster Online: 1: responsive to or conscious of sense impressions 2: aware (checked: having or showing realization, perception, or knowledge 3: finely sensitive in perception or feeling Sentience only means the ability to feel, not self awareness or consciousness as we define them. You put together a really good case for receiving a legitimate financial compensat
  10. In any normal argument in logic there are premises and a single conclusion. The conclusion is said to be supported by those premises. The parts of an argument can only be declarative sentences, for example "something is", "Something else is", "Therefore this other thing is" All arguments in logic are structured this way. Each premise and the conclusion is a statement of fact, whether true or not, opinion or not, it is structured as a factual sentence. In moral arguments the conclusion is always a command. One or more of the premises in the argument is a moral principle which the speaker bel
  11. For the sake of argument, Sapere, let's analyze. (I'm not trying to debate here I'm being dialectic.) If you replace animal with...a doll. Your dead daughter's doll that you're attached to, it gives you a tangible reminder of your dead daughter, your only connection to her left in the world. Your neighbor steals it, rips it apart, and burns it. Let's put a similar monetary value to the doll as a dog, maybe it had gemstone eyes so it was worth $100 to $1000 dollars. To keep up the analogy, maybe you spent years buying expensive cleaning stuff monthly to make sure the doll was in pristine
  12. I think it's important to remember that Animal Planet and Nat Geo both play up the situations you encounter on shows like Animal Cops. These channels, the ASPCA, PETA, and the enviro movement itself really wants you to believe that we're all cruel or negligent caretakers for animals. It is important for them that you believe it so that you'll continue to watch their networks, and support animal rights organizations. Also something important to note about those shows as I have seen them, it is rarely a successful happy person who has three dogs chained to spiked posts with no food and water
  13. Paid for stuff you never got at a restaurant? Mighty generous of you.
  14. Perhaps your sentence is just worded wrong, but as is, I would not say any man's primary function is penetration nor any woman's being penetrated. I don't think it's a good idea to define 'oughts' by biological function or morphology. A penis is a reproductive organ, but reproduction isn't an essential to being human. Defining masculinity and femininity based on 'penetrator' and 'penetratee' divorces the concepts from reason. I guess my point to you is, yes if a man gets surgery to be a woman he will be a man forever. It changes nothing about him metaphysically, and I never argued it did
  15. Some individuals in those professions yes, which again turns this into a case by case judgement basis of morality at best. It is not the habit or principle of modern medicine to administer these surgeries on a whim. I'm not sure I understood the first sentence, but I think I agree. Just sexual urges do not a moral case make, since morality is about choices and not urges. My problem is that defining homosexuality as strictly no-choice, and then forming moral judgement on the basis that scientists tell us that it isn't a choice, doesn't sit right for me rationally. Tabula rasa, anti-dete
  16. Again, you've gone into the legal realm and not the moral realm. I will never argue that it is wrong for a proprietor of an establishment to discriminate his customers as he sees fit. I cannot help but think you are equivocating 'male.' If a person is born a man, they continue to be a man biologically their entire life regardless of plastic surgery. The pronoun 'his' or 'her' is part of a social convention, language. Language is essentially a means of communicating to other people, and the pronouns his or her are not for strict scientific identification of sex, they are social constru
  17. Again, just being in the women's restroom does not make you a peeper. Just like being in the men's restroom doesn't make you a peeper. The idea that a man in a woman's restroom can only be up to no good is an ancient social meme. As for indecent exposure, I must disagree, it is un-objective, or at the very least it is an incorrect law. Nudity is not a crime. Other people cannot be 'subjected' to nudity, just as they cannot be 'subjected' to your smoking in public, or your vomiting in public. There are many things one sees in public that one might rather not. To legislate against them simply
  18. What will a man in the women's room be charged with? Indecent exposure? I thought it was well established that such laws are not objective. If the man is charged with peeping, then firm evidence for the fact that he was actually peeping needs to be established. It's not like women keep the stall doors open for a chat while their skirts are down.
  19. "Why would someone choose this?" That's precisely the issue. Because you don't understand why they would, you are assigning a blanket moral statement that it is wrong for anyone to do. This is far different from, say, a Muslim woman choosing to undergo circumcision to bring herself closer to God. There are documented instances of people having a sex change and enjoying a stable healthy life afterward. The fact that the surgery is invasive, permanent, and that some people may not be quite as happy as they thought afterward does not negate the fact that some people -are- quite happy, so at most
  20. So far TG opponents here are ignoring freedom of choice. What if a person simply wishes to become the opposite sex? If technology exists to make that mostly possible, what moral condemnation can rightly be brought? If a woman who has undergone transformative surgery to become a man wishes to use the men's restroom, why stop her? Will the men all be tainted by her presence? The idea of gender specific bathrooms is an Augustinian social convention anyway. She's not there to be a pervert, she's not tapping her foot beneath stalls, she's just using the bathroom most congruous with her outward a
  21. I can't think in silence. Probably an effect of being part of the digital generation. In silence I tend to want to do something physical. When I have a flood of sound or sensation that I don't have to focus on entirely I usually get my best thinking done. Mostly in the shower, in the car when no one is talking and when music is playing. My mom was into new age when I was a kid so I was taught to meditate often. She used to listen to nature sounds or classical. For me, I set my pandora to my dubstep station and let the 'river' flow.
  22. I tried a though experiment replacing the OP with a physician and Joe with a patient but it doesn't pan out. Mostly because your action would not directly or indirectly cause Joe's meltdown (if that's what you hypothesize would happen). If, in the worst case scenario, Joe flips it, it would be caused by the psychic trauma from the past, his own personal methods of dealing with it, and his failure to conquer these overreactions. Not to rationalize on a grand scale, but if his psyche is so fragile, what's to say something else won't set him off in the future? Obviously I don't mean, "Well if the
  23. If you're referring to Dinosauria, they were not reptiles. As to your questions, I don't want to answer them each individually. You seem to be focused on the details of evolution and not the process. Darwin proved that the process of evolution occurs and how it occurs. The theory of this process is validated by scientific discoveries in the field. The specific details of how individual species evolved certain traits may or may not be known to scientists, but the point of evolution is they are explainable under the process of natural selection. Daniel Boros, you don't seem to be arguing in f
  • Create New...