Some beginner questions about morality and human nature

Questions about Objectivism
21

Human, you seem to see things as they are, without considering an optimistic vision of the way things could be. While I commend you for your grasp of the predicament facing Western Civilization, your emphasis on the multitudes of collectivist irrationality, my best counter-argument is that until the worst outcome is manifest, the best within each of us must continue the struggle to achieve the best outcome, by whatever definition you hold as the standard of the “best overcome.”

On 1/20/2020 at 3:14 PM, Human said:

…But my point is, if people are not yet able to connect the philosophical dots, then when? We live in an age of free information.  Today, the global middle-class is a majority for the first time in history.  We have made improvements in standard of living by orders of magnitude.  Nevermind that we’re re-engineering human biology and 3D printing homes and large-scale infrastructures.  The difference between the primitive past and present is palpable, to say the least. 

And so it is true. We make the best use of our freedom to exchange information, to innovate or engineer, and to create our own enterprises.  I recommend to you to try to disregard the masses and their collectivist agenda. When conditions allow, argue the best case for reason to those who know only how to follow. Perhaps they may find new leaders one day. You may never “convert” some people, but if one individual begins to doubt his/her beliefs, you might make them aware of the fact that there are alternatives to mainstream myopia.

On 1/20/2020 at 3:14 PM, Human said:

And so how do we celebrate these great achievements of the men of the mind? Oxfam releases a video condemning billionaires as a sign of failure.  I mean, there are plenty of depressing polls and surveys on public social attitudes that capture this point more resolutely.

Objectivism celebrates the great achievements of capitalism, and other movements advocating personal prosperity, constructive purpose, and entrepreneurial success are gaining popularity. Using our freedom of communication, you could create a video exposing the absurdity of the socialist agenda.

On 1/20/2020 at 3:14 PM, Human said:

… What else does one need to demonstrate? Or, as I said before, this is just a regular cycle of history we go through.

This is a very important question: A regular cycle of history, or a Second Dark Age??? So many modern nation-states have experienced the pains of reforming runaway socialist economic systems. If we learn anything from it, I’m fairly confident that the USA will not have to endure the worst privations that have resulted in the failure of other economic systems. If they’re unaware of the causes, they will only continue to treat the symptoms. It sure would be a shame, and it’ll be wild ride to the bottom. Either way, the men of the mind may go on strike for a period, but eventually a few of them will emerge, and the arch of history marches on.

1 Like
22

On ‎1‎/‎20‎/‎2020 at 5:42 PM, Human said:

And if the argument is utilitarian/consequentialist, then can we conceive of a situation- no matter how bizarre or improbable- where sacrificing someone else for our own benefit would be worth it?

Philosophers use “utilitarian” and “consequentialism” in some very specific ways which are not congruous with Objectivism.  The similarities are that indeed for an objective reality based morality it MUST be evaluative on a factual basis only and must take into account all of reality including the nature and life of the actor (including a very deep and complex psychology) and causality long range… i.e. it IS about the consequences, but ALL of them.

There is NO supernatural, extra-reality, collectivist, religious, intrinsic, or any other non “rational egoism” type of consideration… and you would be correct to understand this… but it is far from a simple accounting of superficials… flourishing for a normal human being requires not only physical but also psychological flourishing.

“Sacrificing someone else for our own benefit would be worth it?”  …  would be worth it if it were possible for it to be to one’s actual benefit…  taking sacrificing to mean violating their rights, initiating harm, not protecting your rights or preventing harm… if you are a normal human being I think you would be as successful - psychologically speaking - as you would be trying to “sacrifice” your target using a suicide vest.  Psychotics and sociopaths (real ones… not the referent of the anti-concept lefties bandy about for people they disagree with) might be different… but objective morality is for human beings, who by their nature would not benefit long range (certainly not psychologically) from living a life of predation.  In fact, any short cut in reality weakens the perpetrator, undercuts his ability to deal with reality and undermines his self-esteem.

23

On 1/20/2020 at 2:19 PM, Human said:

the end (success/ambition) justifies the means (severing my personal relationship).

How would severing a personal relationship cause business success? Is this like a mafia thing? Or maybe a “cancel culture” situation? Like if you shake hands with Trump at a football game, you might not get hired by certain Hollywood movie producers?

24

On 1/20/2020 at 2:57 PM, Human said:

America is going through something unique, that I think other smaller, more homogeneous democracies have not fully confronted yet.  But it also seems to be a story, a lesson about the limitations of human nature. Dont get me wrong.  I don’t say this with any gratification.  I just find it alarming, and somewhat of a warning sign, that so many people are both unconvinced of the virtues of the Enlightenment and actively campaigning against it.  Perhaps we have overestimated the coefficient of rationality for the majority.  Perhaps rationality works for certain people under very specific conditions and we have lazily extrapolated and generalized that to the whole, without taking other variables into account (values, culture, etc.). I just think we should have a more balanced view of the reality of human nature.

Granted, humans have limitations. As you say, “values, culture, etc.” have an influence. Doesn’t that mean that competence at changing value culture etc. is very valuable, assuming you want a change for the better. You are pretty well written, seems like you have an advantage in that area already and it gives a clear direction and hope for success. But for some reason, there is this underlying assessment that the trends are too strong to change.

If you and and all people that could change trends believed that, trends will rule us instead of us ruling them. So at this point it is a choice: “I can change things” or “I can’t change things”. One’s consciousness completely changes based on which paradigm is chosen. They can’t coexist, it is one or the other.

25

On 1/19/2020 at 2:48 PM, MisterSwig said:

Do you think less carefully about what orthodox Objectivists with PhDs say?

Those are the people you need to be the most careful about, in practice.

26

On 1/20/2020 at 4:57 PM, Human said:

Its like there is an inverse law which states that the better the conditions of humanity become, the more discontent they must be.

Put the social media down for your own benefit.  Seriously.  Mouse Utopia experiments