Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Egosum—

  1. Before we condemn homosexuality as being Nature, or of through Nurture, there are a few things I'd like to pre-discuss that also involve this topic. Homosexuality, I begin to think, can only be prescribed to those that can fall in love with the same sex. The sexual latter, can just be fixed with those who do not care when they are aroused. Heterosexuality can only be prescribed to those that can fall in love with the opposite sex, regardless of sexual exploration. ---- I doubt nature because there are contradictions in lineage. I am leaning towards nurture; I, must admit--I am beginning to find men attractive; but I have a girlfriend, and we share the same humor--a quality I regard of highest value. What are your thoughts on nature vs nurture?
  2. I listen to very fast, hard bass, techno music. If I were to take a speaker, put my ipod in the jack, and put inside a small box that is sound proof, so no one will be conscience of the sound, or what is inside it; the sound will still exist. Yes, means as vibrations in medium, end as loud, annoying techno music that drives my mother crazy; unperceptive, yet I am knowledgeable of a sound in the box, but I do not hear it. Perception is subjective, therefore can not affect the metaphysical, or what is Though, if you're saying that the music that we listen to ends as music because of our perceptions, ears, then you are right. It begins as vibrations? Yes. I don't know much, though, just experience from observation.
  3. Feminism is sexist. And yes, a woman can become a president, no one should stop her because of gender; however, thousands of years of viewing women as incapable will. that is reality.
  4. Deciding pre-law Bold is what I'm closer leaning more to: Major: Philosophy, English Minor: Classics, Arabic Language. Was possibly thinking combination: Philosophy + Classics + Arabic Language; Philosophy + English; I can't decide which would be more rigorous--the first or the second combination? Philosophy is a great investment for law, but so is English, and Classics; Arabic is a great investment for government--which I'm hoping to someday be involved in.
  5. I don't understand what color is metaphysically. "Object-as-Perceived" Color has an identity. Is color subjective? A great analogy would to explain to me through the eyes of a color blind in comparison to regular eyes? Is the yellow lamp yellow because we perceive it as yellow from the light frequencies, or does yellow exist without perception? Is color subjective, or is color blind just a disability so we can't see what real color it is? appreciate it.
  6. It feels like whenever there is a publication regarding the right and wrong of objectivism people attack it blindly. :| Many times when my high school teachers notice my reading book they say: "Oh, so you believe in Ayn Rand's philosophy of the weak not worthy of survival, and that donating, a concept held widely as good, evil?" I reply, "No, I believe in my philosophy, objectivism, not in Ayn Rand."
  7. Would loving your parents be unconditional? Is it because they are your parents? Or is it because you have loved them for so long already. (I know the possibility of truly not loving your parents because of some terrible circumstances as a child or later.) Or--is love the wrong word to use for your parents? I remember in OPAR Leonard quoted ayn rand: "there is no such thing as platonic love" Even though there are some type of people who find their relationships with kin romantic, but that isn't my question: Love is not unconditional, and is only meant in the romantic context, what would you say for your kin or friends? "I like them." I guess? And, If loving is acknowledging the loved as one of our greatest values, does that mean we like them more than our parents? Or does that mean we love them (romantically), or that we value them in all contexts? I'm confused. Someone help me clear that up.
  8. 1. Are people who hold government positions altruistic? 2. If environmental laws imposed by the government serve to benefit a million, but impose an industry, is it still rejected? 3. God doesn't have an identity because he is infinite, right? 4. What is the difference between a concept and an identity? x.) I bought some non-fiction books about Objectivism but they won't arrive for quite some time (a week). I just can't stop wanting to know more.
  9. Any books that aren't too expensive to get myself acquainted with objectivism? I can buy The philosophy of ayn rand for a good 4 bucks + 3 for shipping, but other books are too expensive for 20$+ any good ideas?
  10. If no one has the right to enslave, then no one has the right to free? Why do we have the right to freedom, but no one has the right to enslave? Slavery is called immoral by consensus, and is therefore collective. Aren't these "inalienable rights" just a consensus between a majority rather than self-evident?
  11. I would love to buy this book when it comes out. Will it be somewhat comprehensible to someone still in an outdated institution like high school? PM me whenever it might be sold online.
  12. I was reading a book criticizing Objectivism: Is Objectivism A Religion? by Dr. Albert Ellis He referred to one of Ayn Rand's quotes: "man's emotional mechanism is like an electronic computer, which his mind has to program--and the programming consists of the values his mind chooses (Rand, 1961a)." and for some odd reason assumed that rand was saying that-- I was thinking over it. Values--it seems he had a different concept or just forgot about that word in Ayn's quote. If my friend's happiness is more valuable to me than the taste of my friend's cooking, even if the food is disgusting, I will humor her. Anyone read this Dr. Albert Ellis' book? I'm only on page forty and I can see a few errors but overall it's a good read--the only book about Objectivism in our library at school/public library.
  13. So I've been interested in the whole mind and body interaction and such. I'm not that good at deciphering logic for now, as I've never been instructed philosophy but rather just read up on philosophy histories and explanation of certain ontological arguments, theories, logic, etc. Objectivism, if I remember summing up, holds that you can not experience death because death is the end of experience. If the mind experiences, and death is the end of experience, and our body can die, therefore the mind is part of the body. but does the mind experience (I do not know that much, remember!) I'm saying this because "if the mind experiences" implies that the mind can "stop experiencing" as well. which is death. So far my reasoning is logic, but I want to know if I'm right or there is something wrong with what I'm saying. I appreciate anyone who takes the time to reply kindly. (also possibly offering where I could find in-depth, but still understandable, concepts/definitions of dualists, materialists, and monists (or whatever they're called.)
  14. I assume the purpose of an Objectivist is to live on earth, not die and go to heaven or hell. But, Ayn Rand's characters in her novels--Atlas shrugged, The Fountainhead, The Anthem; They all seem so lonely and static, and that makes me feel irrational. Nonfictionally, it is impossible to be like Howard Roark. I don't believe I can be so melancholy. I also assume that Objectivists believe they do not in any way serve a purpose to others. Though, I somewhat believe we have to support each other emotionally and mentally, not in an altruistic concept. (A) Are Objectivsts, strict Objectivists, lonely? (B.) emotionally dysfunctional (on western society's standards).
  • Create New...