Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

To live for myself.

Rate this topic


israel

Recommended Posts

The search function doesn't seem to be working for me, and i figured this would be the best place to post this.

To what extent to most of you prescribe to the idea of living for oneself.

Essentially, how selfish should someone be?

I can absolutely understand not devoting my life to the advantage of someone else, as that would be foolish.

But would you go so far as to refuse to do things that are of no benefit to yourself?

What about just being nice?

I'm not stereotyping here, I just thought I'd see what your opinions on this matter are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But would you go so far as to refuse to do things that are of no benefit to yourself?

No

What about just being nice?

Well, I think the trick lies in figuring out in what contexts, and with what frame of mind, "just being nice" is of benefit to oneself. The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Israel, There is no a contradiction between being "nice" and keeping one's own life as the ultimate goal of one's actions.

Think of people to whom one is more than nice: your friends. Is this against one's interests? Obviously not: since they are your friends, by choice. You have chosen them as friends because they share some of your values.

Next, you might have people around you -- say some colleagues -- who are decent folk, even though you cannot really call them friends. If it is your judgement that they are decent people, then a certain amount of pleasant to-and-fro is simply a way of expressing it.

Finally, there are people you do not quite like. How about being nice to them? It might make sense to be polite to such people, to facilitate whatever social interaction you happen to find yourself in -- again a self-centered motive.

Problems don't arise from being nice; they comes when one is nice out of a sense of duty.

There are probably real-life examples around you that you can look at to see the three variations:

  • A person who has a "me against everyone else" attitude, with life as a battle, with all sorts of scheming going on in their heads, and nobody they can truly call friend; and,
  • A person who is a door-mat for all and sundry, giving up his onw values to make others happy, out of a sense of duty; and,
  • A person who seems concerned mostly with his life and his values (whether they are his work, family, car, house, etc.), yet who is actually happy to help people out from time to time mostly in small friendly ways (but sometimes more, depending on their value to him), but seldom seems to do it from a sense of duty. (Often, this third type will be an explicitly philosophical altruist, and yet one does not get a sense of duty from observing him help people. there is no risk of confusing him with Mother Teresa)

Look around you and see if you can observe people who are close to these typs of patterns. That will help you concretize the ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EDIT: Disregard this statement here, I need to read some Rand before I continure posting like this.

"Kevin, this question IS related to objectivism but it is not ABOUT objectivism. Perhaps you missed my meaning, but I was asking this question ethically, as in:

What is your personal take on the matter?

I was only asking because I was reading about selfishness on a lexicon, and I'd come to understand that:

Do you ask what moral obligation I owe to my fellow men? None—except the obligation I owe to myself, to material objects and to all of existence: rationality.

So couldn't this be left up to the person in question?

I meant it as a discussion piece, not as a question about objectivism, or an attack on objectivist views."

Edited by israel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I understand all that. I am simply making the point that if you would read Rand's writings first, the answers you seek would be fully and completely answered and you wouldn't need to keep asking all these questions that Rand has already firmly answered.

Edited by KevinDW78
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Asking questions to real people allows for adjusting, calibration, etc. It also allows for a differently expressed but congruous perspective which may get the point across better than Rand did, simply because it's tailored to the question.

It's not really an answer to say "Rand said it somewhere; go find it." Now, it's a whole different thing to say "Rand said it here. Go check out this book and read this essay." Of course you're not obligated to answer at all.

But wouldn't you rather deal with an ignorant but genuine question than that "prove God doesn't exist" guy in your philosophy class? heh heh...

That said, I agree that israel oughta read, say, Rand's book The Virtue of Selfishness. Or The Fountainhead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But wouldn't you rather deal with an ignorant but genuine question than that "prove God doesn't exist" guy in your philosophy class? heh heh...

Neither lol. I come here for respite and to associsate with others who share my values - not have to exhaust more time and effort explaining them :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was only asking because I was reading about selfishness on a lexicon

I think it's good to udnerstand that the Lexicon is NOT a good place to understand Objectivism. There is no "sound bite" Objectivism. Context is important, and the lexicon provides none of that. It is however, a great place to get references for the reading that puts any excerpt into context. My suggestion is don't ask us. Go to the source and read it for yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's good to udnerstand that the Lexicon is NOT a good place to understand Objectivism. There is no "sound bite" Objectivism. Context is important, and the lexicon provides none of that. It is however, a great place to get references for the reading that puts any excerpt into context. My suggestion is don't ask us. Go to the source and read it for yourself.

Well I don't currently own any Objectivist literature, so I was just using what was viable at the time. That being said, I completely agree with the statement pertaining to questions about objectivism. If I have a solid foundation of understand from which to project my questions, my questions themselves will be further specified to situations that need human input. (I hope that sentence made sense. :P )

Basically read some Rand.

So I guess someone should close this thread? Or does somebody here wanna casually counter my points regardlessly?

I'd be more than willing to entertain your thoughts!

(:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I don't currently own any Objectivist literature, so I was just using what was viable at the time. That being said, I completely agree with the statement pertaining to questions about objectivism. If I have a solid foundation of understand from which to project my questions, my questions themselves will be further specified to situations that need human input. (I hope that sentence made sense. :P )

Basically read some Rand.

I keep noticing everyone telling you to read her books, and your acknowledgement of the fact that you need to.

Stop talking about it, and do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep noticing everyone telling you to read her books, and your acknowledgement of the fact that you need to.

Stop talking about it, and do it.

Give me a car and I'll go to Barnes and Nobel right now.

Unfortunately the world does not revolve around the wants OR needs of us all. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT - the whole "standing on one foot" story makes for a nice start:

http://www.aynrandlexicon.com/arideas/intro_ob.html

Funny you should mention it.

This thread, and some other like it, got me thinking perhaps we need an "Objectivism FAQ" posted somewhere. But What brief presentation can one make? The "standing on a foot" one might just be enough,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neither lol. I come here for respite and to associsate with others who share my values - not have to exhaust more time and effort explaining them :P

Well, you don't have to answer them; you can ignore their posts, exhausting none of your time or effort. Even though "israel" should read Miss Rand's work, so he can get the philosophy straight from the source, I can sympathize with someone who asks questions which answers seem obvious to knowledgeable Objectivists. Because Miss Rand wrote with such an emphasis on abstract concepts, so that people could see the principles and not just a sampling of concretes, and because people typically have difficulty applying abstractions to concretes, it's understandable that novices would need additional explanation.

Remember, even though these ideas are consistent with reality, they are radical ideas. Most of man's history has run on ideas antithetical to Objectivism, and most people get their ideas from the culture around them, and our culture is plenty irrational. People demonstrating a genuine interest in examining these radical ideas, which a typically represent a serious threat to the comfort zone they've carved out for themselves, deserve a little leeway in sorting things out. If someone gets sick of explaining the errors in God or collectivism or taxation or abortion for the umpteenth time, the best thing is to leave it to those willing to spend time on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is exactly what it is. While I've gained a further grasp of a free market under objectivism, and while it is extremely appealing to me, it completely demolishes the standards I've been raised with.

I pride myself on being open minded and willing to accept new ideas, but if somethings strange, than somethings strange.

A=A

lol

(:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could try a library or buy used books at very reasonable prices on Amazon.com. You can read Anthem online for free. http://www.pagebypagebooks.com/Ayn_Rand/Anthem/ If you know any Objectivists (or if you can find a club in your area or at a local university) you may be able to borrow books from other members. Just some suggestions for you.

EDIT: And how could I have forgotten...if you sign up at aynrand.org (ARI website) they will send you a free copy of an Ayn Rand Sampler book. I was also sent a CD of her lecture, Philosophy: Who Needs It, although I'm not sure if they're doing that anymore. Registered members also have access to free lectures and videos on that site. Registration is free.

Edited by K-Mac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could try a library or buy used books at very reasonable prices on Amazon.com. You can read Anthem online for free. http://www.pagebypagebooks.com/Ayn_Rand/Anthem/ If you know any Objectivists (or if you can find a club in your area or at a local university) you may be able to borrow books from other members. Just some suggestions for you.

I absolutely need to find some clubs or something in my area. I live in Orange County, and being a high school student, it is so ridiculously hard to find anyone of intellectual merit.

I'm not being pretentious here, but its hard not to consider your peers dumb, when they chose to vote for a new president based on the color of their skin or the genitals between their legs or (even worse) shit they hear on the goddamn Colbert Report.

I'm not even kidding.

I will adjourn to the locals forum!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is exactly what it is. While I've gained a further grasp of a free market under objectivism, and while it is extremely appealing to me, it completely demolishes the standards I've been raised with.

I pride myself on being open minded and willing to accept new ideas, but if somethings strange, than somethings strange.

I was in a very similar boat as you.

I was raised in a non-religious Jewish household (although my family follows some of the more popular customs). I went to Jewish schools from kindergarden to high school.

Little under a year ago, a friend introduced me to Ayn Rand and insisted I read The Fountainhead. The rest is history.

One day I'm a theistic secular Jew, preaching the virtues of religion (although I was personally too lazy to adhere to the rules) with negligable understanding of politics and philosophy.

The next day I'm an atheist and a passionate student of Objectivism.

I literally pulled a 180º on everything that had been ingrained into me throughout my childhood, and I must say, it's much nicer on this side.

Edited by Grant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I pride myself on being open minded and willing to accept new ideas...

Just don't let your mind be so "open" that your brains fall out. :) Seriously, It is not an "open" mind that one should have and take pride in, but an active mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
I absolutely need to find some clubs or something in my area. I live in Orange County, and being a high school student, it is so ridiculously hard to find anyone of intellectual merit.

I'm not being pretentious here, but its hard not to consider your peers dumb, when they chose to vote for a new president based on the color of their skin or the genitals between their legs or (even worse) shit they hear on the goddamn Colbert Report.

I'm not even kidding.

That is extremely true. I live in a rick hickety town of North Carolina, and its very depressing to talk to the youth of America.

But I find the biggest problem with teenagers is how ignorant they really are, or how close minded they are to new ideas. Or their complete incompetence.

I've talked to literally hundreds of people, and I only know two people who have the ability to think on a higher level.

God...we read Ayn Rand in my Sophmore year, and to hear the comments that I heard....you would've cried. I nearly did.

So many of these dum-prick girls would say that they didn't understand, they couldn't even understand how to distinct the 'we' between 'I' or comprehend what was happening. I don't know about you, but I always thought Anthem was like the baby step to philosophy.

I feel like a matyr for objectivism (even though I know how morally wrong a matyr can be), sometimes I will try and try to make some of my classmates understand. Sometimes it clicks, but they never truly grasp it. Some just listen because I can speak well, but never grasp the concepts. The majority think I'm the idiot.

I've been called an idiot, intense, a cynic, even crazy.

My favorite above far was the crazy.

I feel like I'm morally degrading myself by trying to make objectivism available to them, but at the same time I feel like its extremely important to at least give these kids the chance to see where I'm coming from and try to give them some sense of philosophy.

The kids aren't the worst though; its the teacher who've never even picked up a copy of The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged. Thats downright pathetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michelle:

I know how you feel. We read Anthem in summer of freshmen year (which is how I was introduced to Objectivism), and nobody had any clue what the message was trying to portray. I go to a Christian school, full of brainwashed students whose minds have been rotted by the "education" system.

That's why I come here a lot; it's a refreshing breath from that kind of thing. You should try out the chat room some time. There are sometimes pretty immature conversations by some of the members, but it's really good for the most part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like a matyr for objectivism (even though I know how morally wrong a matyr can be), sometimes I will try and try to make some of my classmates understand. Sometimes it clicks, but they never truly grasp it. Some just listen because I can speak well, but never grasp the concepts. The majority think I'm the idiot.

I feel like I'm morally degrading myself by trying to make objectivism available to them, but at the same time I feel like its extremely important to at least give these kids the chance to see where I'm coming from and try to give them some sense of philosophy.

In keeping with the subject of this thread, the more you focus on making a success of your life, the less you'll feel like a martyr. It's a tremendous feeling to know that other people are turning on to Objectivism, or even just rationality, but that feeling pales in comparison to what you feel by putting Objectivism into action in your own life.

A good way to prevent feeling morally degraded is to make a practice of discussing Objectivism only with those who are intellectually honest. For the dishonest ones, the ones who don't care to think, you'll just be beating your head against a wall, as you've probably experienced.

To offer a little moral ammunition, I've found that many intellectually dishonest people are not so at war with reality that they deny a successful life. When they see that someone lives the right way, that they're happy and able to deal with the problems that life throws at them, that everyday living just appears easier for them, they pick up on this and on some level they wonder how it is that you did this. They'll make a superficial concession to the efficacy of your values, even though they irrationally regard them as immoral or impractical. At that point, they are often willing to give the ideas you live by more credence. The moral of the story is, just living your own life the right way often pays dividends in the philosophy of others.

Edited by KurtColville
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To what extent to most of you prescribe to the idea of living for oneself.

Essentially, how selfish should someone be?

You should be absolutely, totally selfish. However, be careful of what it means to be selfish. It's not the same as being mean or stingy. It's acting in your rational self-interest. In other words, don't hurt yourself. If you look at it that way, the answer to your question should be obvious.

I can absolutely understand not devoting my life to the advantage of someone else, as that would be foolish.

But would you go so far as to refuse to do things that are of no benefit to yourself?

Yes. If something is of absolutely no benefit to you, then you are hurting yourself by doing it -- possibly simply by using your time.

However, note that things like charity can be in your rational self-interest. You can benefit in many ways by being generous.

What about just being nice?

Again, being selfish is not the same as being mean. In other words, yes, be nice! It's in your rational self-interest, as long as you don't go overboard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...