At the risk of being malevolent…
I just have to say, you know Objectivism is winning when it’s opponents are reduced to this.
At the risk of being malevolent…
I just have to say, you know Objectivism is winning when it’s opponents are reduced to this.
And *reduced* is the operative term.
The mental state of that blogger, having performed every sort of contradiction of stolen concepts, direction changes and flat out refusal to read what has been written must resemble the following:
I love emoticons.
-R.C.
Wow, that may be the most dense person I have ever read…so insistent, and yet so devoid of understanding. He simply does not understand the first thing about philosophy.
In fact, it’s so bad it makes me wonder if it is a deliberate parody by someone in agreement with Objectivism, in the same way that the Fellowship Baptist Creation Science Fair site (http://objective.jesussave.us/creationsciencefair.html) is a parody of Christians by some atheists.
The mental state of that blogger, having performed every sort of contradiction of stolen concepts, direction changes and flat out refusal to read what has been written must resemble the following:
I disagree. According to him, the wall and his head don’t exist. Therefore, it can only resemble a man lost in space and time, staring at nothing, drooling, pissing in his pants and just lying there somewhere with his body stretched all across some floor, never moving a muscle or indicating that he’s alive, except for releasing occasional moans which are actually heard in the real world. But that kind of emoticon can’t be made, so I agree that :dough: is the best approximation.
I am the “objectivist admin” responsible for his consternation, and he is posting here with the handle of Kant, I or something like that.
How does everyone like “the brick of reality?”
I am the “objectivist admin” responsible for his consternation, and he is posting here with the handle of Kant, I or something like that.
No, “I.Kant” I saw a post somewhere around here where he asked them the same question “Norri” asked us about finding free copies of “The New Intellectual”
I believe they are one in the same person, or at least Comrades.
They are the same person. ComradeRed is Norri and Norri was asking for copies of the new intellecual’s table of contents so that he could create this travesty:
http://www.capitalistparadise.uni.cc/
If I.Kant is asking the same questions, I would conclude that he is the same person or at least a close associate.
On a side note, does anyone else find it hilarious that Immanuel Kant’s name, when his first name is initialized, bears a striking resemblance to “I cannot?”
If I.Kant is asking the same questions, I would conclude that he is the same person or at least a close associate.
I.Kant is ComradeRed. He even has a link to a thread on this site on his blog where he bashes Objectivists. On another message board he claimed reading AS was a “waste of [his] time” but then about a week later he posted a message on here looking for free text of it on the internet.
He has made claims on capitalistparadise that
"He didn’t actually know what Objectivism was but it didn’t stop him from inventing an ideology called “ex contrari Objectivism”. After plagiarising a few articles by a 60 year old Marxist, he now thinks he is an expert on the subject.
Even more odd was that, about a week after professing to be totally ignorant of Objectivism, he claimed to have read both the Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged (in addition to all of Aristotle’s books and the Wealth of Nations). "
Those words are from Invictus, who is the main admin at capitalistparadise.
The point is, ComradeRed is an open liar on many levels.
I am the “objectivist admin” responsible for …
What is it exactly that you are the “objectivist admin” of?
What is it exactly that you are the “objectivist admin” of?
http://s7.invisionfree.com/capitalistparadise/
Come have a look if you like.
http://s7.invisionfree.com/capitalistparadise/
Come have a look if you like.
I just did. Not interested, thank you. I generally stay away from places that reflect or link to the likes of pseudo-Objectivists such as Kelley’s TOC, and SOLO.
I just did. Not interested, thank you. I generally stay away from places that reflect or link to the likes of pseudo-Objectivists such as Kelley’s TOC, and SOLO.
Where do we do that?
I wasn’t aware of any such link… I take the peikoff side of that argument, myself.
Edit: Wait, I think I see what you mean. I will have to edit those posts to show that I do not endorse the Kelly side. Thanks for catching that.
Edit edit: I think that got it. If I missed any, let me know.
Where do we do that?
Well, the forum on the site I went to was “Philosophy,” and I looked at a posting by “Inspector,” the one who invited me to look at the forum. In that post Inspector referenced and quoted extensively from a web site (which I, perhaps mistakenly, assumed was his own because of the extensive references), and that site linked to both Kelley and Solo. That was enough for me not to bother to check any further on the veracity of the representation of philosophical ideas in their conformance with Ayn Rand’s Objectivism.
I’m right here, you know.
I personally read all of those quotes, and none of them depart from Ayn Rand’s Objectivism in any way that I can discern.
It’s not my website, no.
I wasn’t aware of any such link… I take the peikoff side of that argument, myself.
Edit: Wait, I think I see what you mean. I will have to edit those posts to show that I do not endorse the Kelly side. Thanks for catching that.
Edit edit: I think that got it. If I missed any, let me know.
I am not sure which postings you mean, but I just explained in a posting to Ursus what I was referring to.
I do not have the interest or the time to search out the forum in detail, so perhaps you can just tell me directly: Is the site owner, or any of the administrators, vocal supporters of Kelley or any of the bizarre “neo-objectivist” groups that keep forming?
I am not sure which postings you mean, but I just explained in a posting to Ursus what I was referring to.
I do not have the interest or the time to search out the forum in detail, so perhaps you can just tell me directly: Is the site owner, or any of the administrators, vocal supporters of Kelley or any of the bizarre “neo-objectivist” groups that keep forming?
I’ll tell you right off no. If I thought for a second that was the case I would never look at it again.
Is the site owner, or any of the administrators, vocal supporters of Kelley or any of the bizarre “neo-objectivist” groups that keep forming?
Definitely not. Well, the owner can speak for himself, but I have never seen him do such. I certainly am not. I am an advocate of the idea, “judge… and prepare to be judged.”
I’m right here, you know.
What do you mean by this comment?
I personally read all of those quotes, and none of them depart from Ayn Rand’s Objectivism in any way that I can discern.
I do not have time to read the extensive commentary, but aside from the disreputable links I took a look at the “Online Articles” in the “Reading List” section. If that is who and what they consider to represent Objectivism then that is enough for me not to look any further.