Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Dune

Regulars
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Dune

  1. If businesses leaders don't think rationally, their companies will not last. I don't know how a company could cause destruction to property and hope someone will carry the cost after the owner dies besides outright fraud and denying any damage is done. Point is, if my property is affected and damaged, then that is a rights violation.

    Well I guess hes not really talking about a company spilling some oil on your lawn. I'd say hes asking about larger impact scenarios, like mining, de-forestation, fishing out fisheries etc.

  2. Hi Madrayken,

    Like you I have recently been looking into Objectivism more deeply and have asked similar questions. I am particularly interested in how free markets will deal with the environment and sustainability.

    While investigating some forms of eco/green capitalism I found the following "natural capitalism" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Capitalism:_Creating_the_Next_Industrial_Revolution

    In Natural Capitalism the authors describe the global economy as being dependent on natural resources and ecosystem services that nature provides. Natural Capitalism is a critique of traditional "Industrial Capitalism", saying that the traditional system of capitalism "does not fully conform to its own accounting principles. It liquidates its capital and calls it income. It neglects to assign any value to the largest stocks of capital it employs- the natural resources and living systems, as well as the social and cultural systems that are the basis of human capital.

    What I liked about his approach was he does not seem to advocate taxes or legislation as a solution. He is simply and elegantly advocating a change in the way we assign value to capital.

    I realize this is not an answer to our question, but it seems like an interesting direction.

  3. Actually we are following our nature. Our nature is that we are rational animals and our rationality is the way we survive. Achieving our values and surviving is possible only by rational means in the absence of force.

    First, not all animals use force (herbivores). And second, we do still use force against other animals (as most of them do). But if we expect our rights to be respected, then we must respect the rights of other men.

    isnt our true nature to follow the rules of evolution first and foremost? why does being rational seperate us from the most important rules of nature/reality that created us?

    Let's say i classified plants as animals, they are both non-rational beings within nature. that means herbivores are killing.

    Sure we can use force against animals.

    Sure we need to respect the rights of other men by not using force. this doesnt answer the underlying question.

  4. there is generally a common theme to all conspiracy theories, the government ( or illumintai or whoever ) are taking away individual rights to increase personal power.

    perhaps people who are drawn to conspiracy theories are actually looking to answer deeper questions about freedom, rights and society.

    maybe it is more accessible ( a pop culture form ) of philosophy.

    at the same time, there is often evidence supporting the theories. There is often obvious lies from the government. If you can admit they can lie, then the door is open.

  5. In evolution, survival and reproduction ( by any means ) are the only things that matter. Man is a product of evolution and continues to live within the same environment/nature.

    Why then, should man suddenly throw away the basic rules of nature, and say using force against others is wrong?

    He may have "will" which now separates him from animals, but why does it fundamentally change his values? Why doesn't survival, reproduction and the use of force against others remain the ideal purpose of man's life?

×
×
  • Create New...