Post Your Favorite Objectivism Online Forum Quote(s)

Miscellaneous Topics
1

Okay, I know that starting a third “post your favorite” topic isn’t very original. I was thinking the other day of some of the creative (and funny) things I’ve read on this forum and I thought it might be interesting if people shared what they read and thought was either profound or funny. My contribution focuses on the funny side and two people who come immediately to mind when I think of creative funny terms or quotes are DavidOdden and JMeganSnow.

From the thread; Why is O’ism Against Environmentalism:

On behalf of everybody who had to endure the weather this week, let me say thanks a horking load :rolleyes:

He said “horking”!! Haha!!

From the thread; A man who is too smart to articulate himself:

There are a number of shortcuts to defenestration, if you’re interested. Unearned collective insults are a good way, for example implying that Objectivism is a religion and that Objectivists are irrational can lead to gratis flying lessons.

I have to look for some of the Dragon Lady’s posts… to be continued.

2

I’ll have to invoke the OddMeister, as well:

Where I differ from SN’s view, I think, is that the things that seem to be neutral are ones where you simply do not know enough to be able to say whether it’s good or bad. For example I don’t know if an explosion on Raxicoricofallapatorius is good or bad for me.

Although those on Clom might sit up and take notice…

3

Any little oddity this man says. :rolleyes:

4

Okay, I run the risk of being totally lame by quoting myself. But those are the ones I remember the best. And besides, if I don’t laugh at my own jokes, why the hell should you?

I’m fond of this one:

There are many actions one can take. One can acquire things, as your looter has chosen to do. One can also run, stab things, jump, roll one’s eyes, wave one’s arms in a haphazard fashion, repeat the word “astronaut” to onself, and so forth. By what standard has your looter chosen, over all possible actions, the acquisition of things as his ultimate purpose?

After he settles on the action of acquiring, your looter had to decide what to acquire. There are many things one can acquire. Will he acquire whatever happens to be in his immediate vicinity, or does he have a specific thing or things he seeks to acquire? If he has a specific thing in mind, such as money, how did he come to choose it over all other things, such as grapefruits, ptarmigans, Lilliputians, the remains of 17th-century neurosurgeons, or videos of every John Tesh song being performed in interpretive dance by his neighbor’s brother-in-law?

Then there’s my favorite. This was an exchange I had with a troll who clearly wasn’t a big fan of mine:

I doubt this clown will be back. In response to this post:

I sent the following reply:

I didn’t know a salutation merited italics. Perhaps this is a novel writing theory of which I am unaware?

As to your reading of our rules, I’m glad to see that not only did you read them, you understood them. And I’m glad that not only did you understand them, you respected our property and honored them.

Congratulations. Two people reading a post is certainly a milestone on this forum. You’re raising the bar. Would you like me to pull the post out of the trash can and send it to you so you can frame it? Maybe those two people would like you to give them an autographed copy?

Oh, I’m sorry, you missed again. Thanks for playing, though.

The “utter lack of knowledge” to which you refer was actually that poster quoting someone else. How you impute whatever lack of knowledge the original quoter had to the poster would interest me. Whether it would interest you, however, is a different story, as it would require logic and communication.

Your last sentence intrigues me. Never mind for a moment that I fell out of my seat laughing at your attempt at a threat. Why would you want to get around a banned IP address to post on a site on which you really don’t care to post at all?

I won’t talk to you much anymore because I know you’re an attention slut who feeds off of conflict with others to give you the illusion of importance. Sorry, amigo, but neither I nor anyone else on this site will be the Viagra for your flaccid self-image. So save us the time and energy of ignoring you and take your sideshow elsewhere.

Matt

If I’m a clown for tooting my own horn, fine. But you can’t tell me that exchange isn’t classic. :slight_smile:

5

Okay, I run the risk of being totally lame by quoting myself. But those are the ones I remember the best. And besides, if I don’t laugh at my own jokes, why the hell should you?

That’s pretty selfish, Groovenstein, and you know what we think about selfishness around here.

If I’m a clown for tooting my own horn, fine. But you can’t tell me that exchange isn’t classic. :slight_smile:

You’re right, that’s a pretty sharp come back. The only thing I wonder about is were there any 17th century neuro-surgeons?

6

Thomas Movias provided a great analogy on volition, which I think is worth repeating here:

Let me see if I can put this issue in more perspective regarding consciousness, volition, brains, synapses, and neuro-biochemistry.

Consciousness and volition (for man) are at the very base of the above hierarchical listing. And because one begins with this axiomatic knowledge of consciousness and volition, one cannot get beneath these epistemologically. No matter how much one learns about how the brain works one is learning this by volitionally using one’s consciousness to identify what one is studying.

In terms of a skyscraper analogy, consciousness and volition are on the first floor, whereas brains are on the tenth floor, synapses are on the fifteenth floor, and neuro-biochemistry is on the twentieth floor. If you try to use your knowledge of the twentieth floor, neuro-biochemistry, to obliterate the first floor, consciousness and volition, then you are effectively destroying the proper hierarchy of knowledge.

MisterSwig has some funny quotes. His Pippi Longstockings letter to a pastor had me rolling on the floor.

Click on the red arrow to see the full posting.

Allow me to explain . . .

On Easter Sunday, while I was reading First Samuel, I suddenly had a

revelation from God. Jesus spoke to me from within my heart, and He

explained that Pippi Longstocking is not a fictional character, but in

fact she was a real little girl with bright red hair who lived by

herself in a house called Villa Villekulla in Sweden. And just like in

those famous children’s books and movies, the real life Pippi also

possessed superhuman strength and could perform miracles. For example,

she could lift her huge horse, Old Man, above her head, and she once

caused a car to fly through the air by flapping her arms and singing

the magical words, "Up and away! Up and away! Hope and a hey and a

hope shanah!"

Needless to say, I was skeptical at first. Ever since childhood I

believed that only Jesus could perform such wonders. But then, Pastor

Rick, something truly remarkable happened: the Lord came down from

Heaven and filled my soul with the light of faith and wisdom. At that

moment I realized that Jesus Christ is not the Father’s only child.

You see, the Lord also has a daughter!

Now that’s funny!

7

All of Swig’s posts on Biblical stories are hilarious as well…

http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.php?showtopic=8582

8

This isn’t in the same vein as the other posts thusfar, but since it is on this website, it does qualify. It’s from the Random Quotes section on the homepage:

[socialists and anarchists] are the stench today in the nostrils of all honest men and women. They are a poison; and I would have them go and colonize and live out their theories and eat one another up; for they produce nothing and they subsist as suckers on what honest men, frugal and industrious, produce.–John D. Rockfeller

While certainly true, this isn’t entirely accurate. Rockefeller was actually referring to the “Muckrackers” - the anti-capitalist journalists and intellectuals who spent their time denouncing Rockefeller and his fellow tycoons. The Paul Krugmans, Noam Chomskys, and Jon Stewarts of their day. People like Ida Tarbell, John Reed, and Upton Sinclair.

As a show of credibility I actually used to have this very quote in my old OO.net handle, ggdwill. I put it up there almost immediately after I came across it in Ron Chernow’s Rockefeller biography “Titan”.

9

It would be interesting to have an attorney familiar with admiralty law weigh anchor on this topic!