Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Gender

Previous Fields

  • Sexual orientation
  • Relationship status
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Country
  • Copyright
  • School or University
  • Occupation
    Regrettably employed; working toward self-sufficiency.

Kane's Achievements


Novice (2/7)



  1. Just to draw your attention to another Christian apologist making his estimations of Ayn Rand, here is a 5-part series that may need your critical attention. Mr. Jones is a gentle fundamentalist evangelical, but really doesn't understand Rand's philosophy, let alone represent it accurately. I cry foul. Who will join in the necessary rebuttals to this apologist?
  2. The OP has 88 posts, so he may not be trolling. In any case, I agree that Rand was bristlingly clear about when people can accept help. Besides, wouldn't it be immoral of her to not accept the help when by not doing so she would be acting in such a manner as to not preserve her life (i.e., her highest value)?
  3. I would think a Ph.D would have more intellectual horsepower than to describe the plight of the American population, and then admit that he and his church emptied their coffers to overseas countries. Ph.D: There's so much starvation and economic destitution in the USofA. Me: Yeah, it's really too bad. Were you thinking of doing something about it? Ph.D: Yeah, I was planning on giving all our church's surplus food and money to people in India! Me: Er, right. And those that are starving in your backyard? Nothing? Ph.D: Oh. Hadn't thought of that. MORON! If you're going to be an altruist, then at least have enough peripheral vision to see what's happening around you, not what's going on somewhere you're not involved.
  4. Blair was out of his league. Hitchens is far beyond the usual pedanticism of convinced Catholics. And even if Hitchens thinks altruism is the way to go, we certainly wouldn't be worse off taking up his position on the issue of God and religion. One step at a time, as the saying goes.
  5. Yeah, but so what? Just means the good stuff is in more abundance for those of us who know better.
  6. Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn Trilogy by Tad Williams Narcissus and Goldmund by Hermann Hesse The Man Who Was Thursday by G.K. Chesterton Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky David Copperfield by Charles Dickens Foucault's Pendulum by Umberto Eco There are so many more... I just love good books. I don't hold Ayn Rand to the top of my list because I don't really feel enamoured of her writing style a lot of the time. She was certainly a much better writer than most, but I don't place her narratives in the category of "The Masters". Nevertheless, I very much enjoy the philosophical refinement I gain from her novels. She is, overall, I think, the best at solidifying a philosophical system in a fiction.
  7. I just read the first chapter. I have a sudden craving for pablum. Well, if this is the stuff certain evangelical Christians are going to be learning and taking for an education, I suppose I don't have to feel guilty for thinking I'm intellectually superior to them. That book should be redistributed as toilet paper.
  8. LOL! I have to say this (and I mean it in the nicest possible way): Nerd! Haha! It's okay. I still play Dungeons and Dragons, so I get the nerdiness.
  9. Has anyone here come across the blog Ayn Rand Contra Human Nature, by Greg Nyquist? It would be quite interesting to see some of you rip apart his articles. In his latest article, which is fairly well written, I noticed right away his tendency to hasty generalization. This makes me wonder what other illegitimacies he's popularizing. What are your thoughts about his blog?
  10. Peter, I can't believe how unyieldingly similar our stories are (even the part about Goodkind. Though admittedly, due to some other shackles at the time, did not lead me on to Rand)! Wow. It was a pleasure to read your entry, and I very much look forward reading more of what you have to write. Take care, Kane
  11. Hello! Lots of excellent thinkers here. Enjoy!
  12. Your seeming desperation is easily detectable by women, even if you're the most gentlemanly, considerate man on campus. There's nothing wrong with your desire to engage in such a normal, human activity. But wanting to have sex simply because you feel your age matters to the issue, simply because you need it to bolster your self-esteem (it seems), is not a valid reason for having sex. Most easily stated, sex is a celebration between two people who have made a unique and irrefutable connection with each other. One-night stands are (presumably) easy, and lead to nothing that masturbation can't accomplish. There's wisdom, however, in having shared values, common goals, united visions, and deep, enduring friendship with your partner before having sex. Sex cannot necessarily make love. But love can certainly lead to sex. You're not Jephtha's daughter (Judges 11, Bible); you don't need to bemoan your virginity. Accept it as beautiful -- because it is! And save it until you have occasion to be with someone who is truly special, truly a gift to your life. Don't pawn that off on your notion of being young. Those are my two cents.
  13. I think Hypocrates may have been right when he stated that "brevity is the soul of wit." Mind you his subsequent rambling in the same speech belies his expressed wisdom. In any case, here is what I think you could write if you didn't want to go along with the wisdom of the other members: Dear So-and-So, There's a saying: "Never argue with stupid people. They'll only beat you down with experience." It is for this reason that I admit you are more experienced than I am, and I cannot argue my perspectives with you anymore. With that in mind, fuck off and forget we ever knew each other. Sincerely, Imogen Too punchy? It's just a suggestion.
  14. I suppose it could be asked, "What benefit does our friendship have for you?" That puts the ball in their court to answer to what they see as valuable in the friendship and, in turn, gives you the opportunity to contrast that silently with what you already know your values are. Then, when you have them clearly stating their (obviously) misinformed sense of reality, you could politely inform them that your values are so radically different that you cannot help but be in conflict with them. And, since nobody wants constant conflict, you could simply suggest that it would be better to stay apart. Sometimes it is better to find your solution in separation if by being together you are constantly in conflict.
  • Create New...