Reportink'

Introductions and Personal Notes
1

Greeting,

Let me introduce myself a bit here.

I am Downpraise, I live in Holland and study Technical Engineering.

Some weeks ago I bought the movie “Ayn Rand - A Sense Of Life”, which made me research objectivism some more, what brought me to this place.

I was active on some other boards as well, where I met lots of like-minded people (objectivists among others). One of them urged me to read Atlas Shrugged, which I did some years ago. The book didn’t grip me as much as it does now, but I always liked talking to objectivists or people with objectivist views. So I gues I willl like it here.

My main interests are music and philosophy.

I do not consider myself an objectivist, for I would like to learn more about it (and other philosophies as well for that matter) and I still need to read some other works of Ayn Rand.

There are still some things unclear about my view of objectivism, I still have the feeling it contradicts itself somewhere or something. :stuck_out_tongue:

Feel free to ask anything, if you wish.

-Downpraise

P.s.: I haven’t perfected my English yet, so I hope it won’t be, or cause, any problems :thumbsup:

2

There are still some things unclear about my view of Objectivism, I still have the feeling it contradicts itself somewhere or something. :thumbsup:

Welcome to the forum.

Try to figure out some key reasons for that feeling. Once you have translated the feeling into a question, feel free to ask it here.

3

Nice to meet you, and welcome to the forum!

Please remember to capitalize the O in Objectivism when referring specifically to the philosophy of Ayn Rand . . . objectivism: small “o” refers to an epistemological theory.

4

Thank you for the welcome.

Try to figure out some key reasons for that feeling. Once you have translated the feeling into a question, feel free to ask it here.

I will try. My main feeling is that Objectivism holds lots of thruths, but isn’t perfected yet. As soon as I can discribe this imperfections, I will. :lol:

5

My main feeling is that Objectivism holds lots of thruths, but isn’t perfected yet. As soon as I can discribe this imperfections, I will.

Feelings are signals. Sometimes the signals are accurate and sometimes they are not. When you have thought about supposed imperfections of Objectivism, also be sure to think about what you mean by “perfection.”

In English, I know of two basic meanings. One meaning is the Christian-influenced meaning: Without sin, error, or flaw.

The other meaning is one influenced by Latin pagans in the ancient world: Complete. In this sense a baby is “perfect” if it has all the physical and mental equipment it needs to succeed in life. That baby is still “perfect” even if it has permanently blemished skin, for example.

Objectivism is a complete philosophy in the same way that Plato’s, Aristotle’s, and Kant’s philosophies are complete. In each case, the philosopher had basic questions he wanted to answer – and he did. Thus, their philosophies are complete. These philosophies answer – rightly or wrongly – all the basic questions that everyone, everywhere, at all times of history must ask in order to develop a guide for living. Kant’s philosophy, such as it is, is also “complete” in another way: He is dead and there is nothing more that he can add to it. Of course, others can add to it with their own ideas, but then it is no longer Kant’s philosophy.

Likewise, Objectivism is the philosophy Ayn Rand created. I can adopt it and then (if I were smart enough) extend what I have learned from Ayn Rand into new areas – for example, going beyond her theory of concepts to try to create a theory of theories. I would not call that extension “Objectivism,” because that term names the philosophy that Ayn Rand created.

Learning a philosophy – created by someone else or by oneself – requires decades of work. Decide which issues are most important in your life, and start. This forum is a good place for asking questions.

Welcome to the forum.