Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

CWEarl

Regulars
  • Posts

    69
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CWEarl

  1. I don't care for the Yin/Yang. It seems to me that it symbolizes pragmatism and compromise.
  2. This reminds me of culture jamming, which is at odds with Objectivism as it is a method wherein protesters loot the creations of others to suit their own ends.
  3. "I don't know." Then add: "Neither do you." Someone who asks such a question clearly has the motive to legitimize the fantasies of ancient goat herders through junk philosophy. Imagine - thinking that the cause of the universe is unknown, therefore the god of their choice must exist. Incredible.
  4. I recognize "natural" beauty (whatever that is - why is a beaver damn part of nature while a skyscraper is not?), but I am only really moved by human achievement. As such, I suspect New York City is the winner. I will be able to verify this when I visit NYC this December. I am impressed by the pictures of Hong Kong posted in this thread.
  5. Indeed. And something presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Why should the attributes of any particular god be of interest to me when there is no evidence for the existence of any god of any kind?
  6. It is not a contradiction if you consider it as risk vs. sacrifice. A high value may be worth protecting at the cost of risking one's own life. When we speak of something that is worth dying for, we are saying that we are willing to take that risk; we are not saying that we are simply willing to trade our lives for it. If I agree to allow someone to kill me so others may be granted freedom, I am sacrificing my life. If I fight for that freedom for myself, at the risk of losing my life in the fight, then I am fighting for a value worth dying for. If I succeed, I am free. If I fail, I am either still a prisoner or I am dead (and neither could be called living). Furthermore, if I consider a value worth dying for, it is because I don't consider existing in the absence of that value living.
  7. This sort of thing angers some theists as they consider belief the default and one only ceases to believe due to some traumatic event or out of anger.
  8. I was raised without religious influence of any kind. People sometimes ask me when I became an atheist. I tell them that I was born one and have been presented with no reason to change my mind.
  9. Indeed. I was vague, yes. That is basically what I mean. I trade with people of value. The rest are no concern of mine. They are and remain strangers as they have no worth. You've basically nailed it. I do recognize the loss, but consider it of little personal consequence. Meanwhile, I only wanted to state that self-destructive behavior of others is of no interest to me so long as it remains with the self. To paraphrase Howard Roark, if asked what I think of the users of illegal drugs, I'd say that I don't think of them. I am not concerned with potential traders, only with actual traders.
  10. So gifts are unethical in general? I doubt that is your claim... I did not mean to state otherwise. A rational person only gives something away out of self-interest. I didn't think it would be necessary to state such within this forum. I will be more careful.
  11. Certainly not. I wasn't trying to suggest there was objective value to the activity, only that I have no problem with others taking part in it - unless (of course) this activity interferes with my rights (ie: my property is stolen to fund heroin, there is a gun fight between dealers in the street, etc.).
  12. I've joined under the same name I use here.
  13. I admire liquor store owners because they bring in delicious spirits from all over the world so I can find them easily. Whether I use them as a soothing drink at the end of a productive day or an escape from reality in an ally somewhere is of no concern of theirs. Same goes with the seller of any drug. If the exchange of values is voluntary, I have no problem with it. Meanwhile, I couldn't care less about unproductive individuals - as long as I am not forced to deal with them.
  14. As far as I know, there is nothing unethical about giving something to someone else by any Objectivist standard as the exchange is voluntary. In this case the value to the artist is presumably having people listen to the music.
  15. I am stunned by the ability of some people to rationalize theft. What about the principle where that which is not traded voluntarily is stolen? Does this suddenly mean nothing because music is now reproduced in a format that is easy to copy?
  16. You may choose to drop out because you've decided to become a loser and give up your values because you suffer from the absurd notion that you punish others by doing so, but you have no right to demand that the other citizens of the U.S. pay for your keep. How dare you! While you loot and plunder. Brilliant. So you want to become a looter. Maybe you should read Atlas Shrugged again. You'll notice that the heroes in the novel did not become wards of the state. The latter, obviously. Actually, it makes you a moocher at any level. It makes you a moocher. Nothing more. You must be kidding. What you are is the evil they fought against. If you're serious, you disgust me.
  17. This statement hardly makes sense. This is disgusting. Do you not even value your own existence? Meanwhile, you'll want to identify the "problem" and define "big". Then you will want to demonstrate how controlling population would make this "problem" small. Plus, I'd like you to account for the loss of problem-solving minds that may not exist as a result of this disgusting set of regulations. Nonsense. Without such "greedy bastards" you might not even have the computer you have used to post this drivel.
  18. It's hard for me to relate to this as I blew through the book - reading nothing else and watching very little TV in the meantime. I have read it three times now. I actually started with Fountainhead (still my favorite). I found the dog-eared paperback in my girlfriend's book collection. I was vaguely aware of Rand`s reputation as an evil, greedy, capitalist but decided to see for myself what she was all about. I liked Fountainhead so much that I read AS immediately after. I found it a great actualization of that which I had suspected about reality. It makes me sad to think that people refuse to read it because it`s long. I don`t see the difference between reading a single 1200 page book and four 300-page books.
×
×
  • Create New...