Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

chuff

Regulars
  • Posts

    109
  • Joined

  • Last visited

4 Followers

About chuff

  • Birthday 08/28/1990

Profile Information

  • Location
    America
  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Sexual orientation
    Straight
  • Relationship status
    In a relationship
  • Chat Nick
    chuff
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Maryland
  • Country
    United States
  • Experience with Objectivism
    I first read The Virtue of Selfishness, then OPAR, in early high school.
  • Copyright
    Public Domain
  • Real Name
    Chris
  • School or University
    Maryland
  • Occupation
    Law

Recent Profile Visitors

3811 profile views

chuff's Achievements

Member

Member (4/7)

1

Reputation

  1. It seems like several of us have come back after being more active in the past. I'd be interested to kick up some activity here.
  2. Just once! Would love to work my way through The Fountainhead. Wanted a refresher on the philosophical works first, including the collections of periodicals, which I recently acquired.
  3. Hi Doug, You should be able to log in at discord.com
  4. I'll definitely be joining later today! Very interested in storing a library of content about Objectivism. The Internet is unkind to old links as it ages. Diana Hsieh's podcast Philosophy in Action is now vapor, 300 episodes--gone.
  5. chuff

    Moore v. Harper

    At the risk of oversimplifying, it appears this decision acknowledges the legal principle that the States have final authority over their own election laws (as they do over any other state laws that do not conflict with the U.S. Constitution, as well as over the interpretations of their own constitutions).
  6. I would steer clear of the 'oppressor' language, both because it has other political connotations, and because there is no real power dynamic in either of the situations OP raises. Sacrificing others to oneself seems like the best description. (Thanks @Doug Morris) Maybe there are even other ways of seeing these kinds of actions as wrong?: > The woman is not paying attention to the task at hand, she is making others dependent on her, she is blocking their freedom of movement unnecessarily, she is placing the lower value of applying makeup above the higher value of getting where she's going, she is endangering herself and the rights of others by stopping her car on an open motorway... (there may also be things leading up to this situation that were irrational/unethical: Why is she doing her makeup in the car?)
  7. Sadly this group appears to be defunct. Is Fred reachable on this site or on another social media site perhaps?
  8. In the area too. A bit late on this, but there does appear to be a local forum for DC now.
  9. @Candida I would like to meet and make a claim on his extensive library, it's still available. Happy to come and meet you for pick up. (I'm in DC area). Sent you a direct message.
  10. Glad to see the forum is still here. Haven't kept up much with where the movement has gone in the intervening time. Moved abroad and back and got a law degree. Hello again, everybody.
  11. Ever since No-Build came along, been playing Fortnite with friends these days: lingui5t
  12. Hey-- long time no talk. We used to play Halo together on Xbox Live around 2011-12. You told me about the Electric Universe and we had a lot of great chats about Rand. Send me a message sometime.

    1. chuff

      chuff

      Thefirstoftheirreturn. That was you, right? Hit me up bro

  13. Sorry to double-post. An interesting article by Elan Journo related to the recent diplomatic history of the USA and North Korea has the reader concluding that withdrawing foreign aid is a huge step in the right direction, especially to unsavory characters. Indeed, it looks like the ARI's criticism (and Rand's own, actually) of the UN involves primarily its acceptance of anyone and moral failings in not standing up or any kind of principle and conceding to bullying behaviors, essentially begging would-be aggressors not to do so and offering to pay them not to. The response that seems more appropriate to such is to simply work to remove the offenders from the relationship, withdraw one's support, or even one's membership in an organization that accepts such behavior. Such a context makes withdrawal from the UN an attractive option for America's interests.
  14. For instance: on the question of whether our government has the "right" to depose foreign governments, and presumably the right also to subsequently install those we consider sympathetic to us (viz. Allende, Mossadegh, historical examples abound), is there a cogent way to approach this question within the Objectivist framework? My first thought is that an Objectivist-based argument would have us deliberating over whether it is in the "national interest" or not, which is nothing more than the composition of the individual interests of American individuals...? How is that measured, and where does that get us? My second is that it may instead sound like this: the American government, since it can do nothing other than that which is prescribed as proper, should just voice opposition or support but commit nothing apart from our verbal sanction (in either sense of the word, respectively) except in the case that Americans' lives, liberty, or property are in peril or threatened. (I understand that the lack of privately owned land renders this somewhat less straightforward a question in terms of property being invaded). I am confused about the proper method to even go about answering these sorts of questions (intergovernmental relations), much less the answers themselves!
  15. I'm interested to hear more about the limits on government as it pertains to interactions with other states. Have any members read The Ominous Parallels? Does Peikoff address international relations in it, even in a non-normative context?
×
×
  • Create New...