Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Introducing Don Galt

Rate this topic


Guest DonGalt

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...

Personally, I saw no reason that he should have been banned. As far as I could see he did not break any rules that you had set forth.

I will add to that only this: I came to this site, searched this site out actually, in an attempt to engage in lively rational idea sharing. Now keep in mind I'm older than most of you, and I have been ingesting Objectivist Philosophy for as long as some of you have been alive, but I am sad to see board after board filled with 20 something Randbots who quote her with as much fervor that I see many a fundie whip out the "good book".

Instead of arguing one's own point, using one's own reason, I like Don Galt see "refer to The Virtue of Selfishness..refer to this to that, but basically to Rand" as a slap in the face to Rand's very basest argument.

It was nice for me to see someone else who truly got the same joke I did, who saw such acts as directly opposed to the exact philosophy that Rand expoused.

Now, having said that, I think a lot of you are sharp, and I like some of the threads, but I would have really enjoyed a more well rounded discussion as was seen here in this thread.

Personally, I think Rand herself would do a giant grave flopping if she saw the way you guys are diefying her. But hey that's me, and I suppose it's not the party line, so let the bannings begin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes somebody is so totally and obviously wrong that the best thing to do is to refer them to books, which they claim to have read, where it is said best. I don't recall seeing anybody here behaving dogmatically, as DonGalt claimed. (In fact, I've been impressed by that, because I see it all over the place. This site has been a nice exception.)

DonGalt is a troll, plain and simple. He came in slinging insults and making sarcastic comments, but never giving facts to support his allegations. (I'm familiar with the issues he discussed, and he's just plain dead wrong on the majority of what he said.) He strikes me as a guy with a big chip on his shoulder. Why else would somebody spend so much time talking to people who he claims to think are intellectually dishonest?

I'm glad he was banned. I'm just sorry it took so long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt stated the issue very well. I'd just like to add a couple of points.

It may not be obvious to people who've joined the board more recently exactly what DonGalt's behavior consisted of. His views were thoroughly argued against and dismissed, but most of that is spread throughout several threads, and some of the more thorough arguments in this thread were lost during a server crash. Then, after he was asked to stop making the same repetitive posts, he came back on September 12th and started flooding the board with the same kinds of posts in well over a dozen threads in less than an hour, apparently for the sole purpose of harrassing the other board members. In other words, he was trolling (which he even acknowledges himself in this thread). If you click on his name to see his profile, then click on "see all posts by this member," you can see that for yourself.

While it may be arguable whether any of his individual actions were against the explicitly stated board rules, it is clear that overall his behavior broke the rules required by common sense and courtesy for any rational discussion, including on an internet forum. We should not have to spell out those basic requirements explicitly.

Bottom line, the purpose of this forum is not to provide a soapbox for the (purposely obnoxious) rantings of those with whom we disagree. If you disagree, fine, but you can discuss it in a rational way.

You're welcome to participate in any of the threads in which you're interested, elsaspet, but if your sole purpose here is to groundlessly accuse anyone who happens to mention Rand's name of dogmatism, then you probably will be banned eventually. (You've already gotten off on the wrong foot with your "Randbots" comment, for which you haven't provided any actual evidence.) But otherwise, you're free to stick around and use the forum for its intended purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
If you haven't, I highly suggest that you do because it would give you an indication of exactly why Objectivists denounce Libertarianism.
I share your sentiments about Libertarians who do not have a respectable or coherent foundation for their supposed love of "liberty".

More importantly, have you read Leonard Peikoff's essay, Fact and Value, which can be found on the ARI website? That essay is a good indication of exactly why there is an "ARI/TOS" split. What TOS advocates is very much subjectivist, and completely different than the fundamentals of "ARI" Objectivism
.

Have you read these essays:

Facts, Values and Moral Sanctions: An Open Letter To Objectivists

http://www.vix.com/objectivism/Writing/Rob...lSanctions.html

Understanding Peikoff

http://www.vix.com/objectivism/Writing/Rob...ingPeikoff.html

Rand Vs. Peikoff

http://www.vix.com/objectivism/Writing/Rob...dVsPeikoff.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HOWEVER, if you are dealing with a person who explicity denounces rationality and claims that they receive their correctness from divine inspiration or the consensus of society, AND you continue to try to argue with this person, you are giving moral sanction to their ideas. Do you understand the difference
?

Have Libertarians claimed that, "they receive their correctness from divine inspiration or the consensus of society"? In my case I hardly ever debate theists because they have surely renounced reason. I agree with what you say here but how can this be squared with the fact that Ayn Book Store sells tapes of debates between Peikoff and Socialist? There are even debates between Objectivist and anti-human animal rights activists. I mean a Socialist is most often quite resigned to his ideology, which is of course divorced form reason. I would rather chitchat with a Libertarian like David Boaz than with a Socialist like Marx. Who is more rational? Is it the ARI members are a bunch of hypocrites? Or have they repented of their "evil" ways.

http://www.aynrandbookstore2.com/store/pro...aitem=2&mitem=9

http://www.aynrandbookstore2.com/store/pro...aitem=7&mitem=9

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DonGalt utter the following nonsense:

You cannot be an objectivist without being an anarchist. Government is incompatible with objectivism.
Ayn Rand the founder of Objectivism says:

If physical force is to be barred from social relationships, men need an institution charged with the task of protecting their rights under an objective code of rules. This is the task of a government - of a proper government - its basic task, its only moral justification and the reason why men do need a government. A government is the means of placing the retaliatory use of physical force under objective control - i.e., under objectively defined laws.

-- Ayn Rand, "The Nature of Government," The Virtue of Selfishness

Ayn Rand said that a society without a government would be a criminals paradise so to speak. How are we to take you seriously when you utter such perverse things.

The reason for this should be obvious: Governent is an entity designed to force men to live lives of sacrifice for others. That's all government does. Hell, who was the evil in Atlas Shrugged? The government! Rand's error is in thinking that be shrinking the government you'd have one that just protected people's rights

Oh! So now you want to change Objectivism to suit you whims?

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...