Anonymous Randomynous Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Instead of trying to scavenge as many assets to ourselves as possible, and try to kill eachother at the same time.... ...can't we just be friends and share the money? ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanLane Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Apply that analogously to sex/rape. It's also the question every mugger asks right after he draws his gun. You can't be my friend, ever. 2046 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanLane Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Trolls are my favorite, so have to add: scavenging, especially by force, is the one thing that is explicitly denounced by Objectivism which every other major idealogy embraces. Also, sharing is impossible for th religious: they allow what they have to be taken or they burn for eternity. Sharing is impossible for the collectivists, they allow what they have to be taken or they are ruthlessly slaughtered by the state. Capitalists share all the time, benevolently, joyfully, without guilt, but _with_ the most important thing: an alternative. Who's side are you on, exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greebo Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Props to DanLane for pointing out the false dichotomy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softwareNerd Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 The OP obviously gets his/her information about Objectivism second-hand, and therefore thinks Objectivism advocates certain things which it actually condemns. A less troll-like phrasing would have solicited more comprehensive responses, but the combination of ignorance, certainty and whining insolence (unfortunately too evident all over, from Fox News to our best universities) is not conducive to discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greebo Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 It should be pointed out that the gathering of second hand concepts and accepting them as true without validation does not constitute thinking. Therefore the title of this thread should be changed by the OP to "I was not thinking" 2046 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayR Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 ...can't we just be friends and share the money? ! What money? I share things with friends all the time, and Ive never tried to kill anyone, I dont know what youre talking about. Whos money? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCSL Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Instead of trying to scavenge as many assets to ourselves as possible, and try to kill eachother at the same time.... ...can't we just be friends and share the money? ! It is sad that this is what many people think objectivism is. Objectivists are against force not for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SapereAude Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Instead of trying to scavenge as many assets to ourselves as possible, and try to kill eachother at the same time.... ...can't we just be friends and share the money? ! While the other posts in response to your statement were certainly valid I'm going to try a different approach and assume you want to be taken seriously. 1) Do you know the definition of "scavenge"? If so how does that apply to earned accumulation? 2) Who is killing whom? Who is exerting force? For what purpose? 3) Who are you, who are these people you want to befriend you and why should they? 4) What is this "money"? How did this value we call money come about? Who is sharing with whom and to what end? 5) Define "to share". Is sharing possible without choice? Is choice possible without ownership? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairnet Posted October 15, 2010 Report Share Posted October 15, 2010 Why should I? If you can't explain a standard of value that would relate your "is"s and your "oughts" then I don't care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.