Rate Thread
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Ayn Rand
#51
ETOTE Wrote:....................
..................One thing I am at odds with is the whole self-interest thing.

I think many people don't like how frankly she points this out. Most people people don't like to admit that almost everything we do has some level of self-interest at play, it's just naturally part of being human. There are exceptions obviously and ironically, I think serving in the military for example would be one case of going against that natural self-interest, to be selfless and self-sacrificing. It's even more ironic as the (U.S.) military is basically almost a pure socialist society put into practice.

I went in the service at 18 "to do my part" for my country. It wasn't that I believed in war as a solution to anything. It was that I believed I could help and that because I love my country I owed it my service. I could have taken the easy route and stayed home, lived a good party life thru 4 years of college thanks to my parents providing the money for that. The fact is that I didn't. All I've gotten directly in return for my service is some assistance paying for college, some shitty healthcare due to VA bureaucracy, and some stuff on my resume that got me a nice paying job with hours that i love.

What I gained Indirectly from those 4 years outweighs all I ever imagined possible. i could write a book about it.
Reply

#52
MikeW Wrote:If you are of the opinion that reality is an objective set of mechanical behaviors that can be studied and therefore known logically by an individual; If you're of the opinion that individuals exist (that is, are entities independent of their environment) and that the self-interest of the individual is morally paramount, having precedence over other individuals or groups--then Rand's philosophy is for you.

I'm of the opinion that reality is a complex multi-dimensional event with levels that are unknown and unknowable; and I'm of the opinion that the individual does not exist except as a narrative point of view and, therefore, has no preeminence or moral prerogative. Thus, Rand's philosophy, to me, is rather narrow, shallow and of little interest.

I'm not going to put on existential calistenic boxing gloves or duel with freudian parapsychological laserguns about this.

I'm just a guy who lives life the way it's supposed to be lived, enjoyed and shared. I'm not living this life in order to appease or fit into any collective anthill mentality. It doesn't matter to me how anyone defines reality because I'm too busy living in it and (if I can say so) doing a pretty decent job of it for myself and the people I love and the people I interact with.

I am glad you brought up moral prerogatives and what is morally paramount. To me they are irrelevant. Why? Because morality is the code of conduct of the masses and it changes as the masses change. I live by a my own code of person ethics that hold me to higher standards than any morality ever thrown in my face. So with that said, screw morality.
Reply

#53
HumbleTangerine Wrote:She wants absolute freedom, and absolute freedom can only come at the expense of the collective.
Yet many of our individual freedoms depend precisely on collective arrangements. Take the most elementary things like your ability to exercise your freedom of choice to go anywhere in your city. Just simply moving around safely is sustained by the social institutions of the police and the law (which are there to guarantee that nobody is going to attack you, and if somebody attempts to do that, a complex system of laws is designed to punish the attacker and provide you compensation for the damages), not to even mention the public transport system or the complex normative rules of traffic everybody has to collectively follow in order to sustain a smoothly running transport system to get people from point A to point B.

In the same way the social institutions of the welfare state are not just there to promote collective well-being (whatever this means) but also to free people from exploitation and various kinds of risk, therefore enabling them to exercise their freedom to live like they choose. Unemployment benefits are a good example here. One can easily imagine how the removal of the benefits would not result in increased individual freedom but it would rather deprive the unemployed of even the minimal means to provide for themselves in times of economic turmoil. A world without social welfare systems does not free people but solidifies the class hierarchy and condemns the majority of people into permanent poverty.

All of this is to say that the opposition between individual freedom and collective well-being is a false one. Social institutions do not have to deprive you of your freedom but they can enable you to exercise it. We do not have to choose whether we prefer individual freedom over the collective. The question is rather: How do we arrange the society so that everyone has an equal chance to live their lives as they choose?

EDIT: Fixed some typos. I should go to sleep already ._.
Reply

#54
It is impossible to live in a vacuum, to live only as you see fit and pretend to wash your hands of the effects your way of life has on others. That itself in an illusion. Those are my personal thoughts.

I'll leave it at that and walk away, as I don't want to end up in a heated debate on the Internet.
Reply

#55
ETOTE Wrote:She was nuts, but had some good, clear and defined ideas regarding politics an economics.
I don't agree with everything she thought or said, but I do agree with some of her principles.

One thing I am at odds with is the whole self-interest thing.

I think many people don't like how frankly she points this out. Most people people don't like to admit that almost everything we do has some level of self-interest at play, it's just naturally part of being human. There are exceptions obviously and ironically, I think serving in the military for example would be one case of going against that natural self-interest, to be selfless and self-sacrificing. It's even more ironic as the (U.S.) military is basically almost a pure socialist society put into practice.

Volunteer firefighters.
Volunteer palliative care givers.
Volunteer police auxiliary.

I personally feel Ayn Rand promotes a bizarre form of McDonald's Psychology.

Bill and I got involved with assisting a 91 year old man who had been home invaded and beaten three times in 2 weeks some years ago. That on top of the volunteer work we do. We were all over the news and on TV and I wrote an article about it that ended up in the newspaper. The article was specific in addressing how we can, each of us, make a difference. To explain it more I'd have to provide the article here which would give my real name away etc and per the terms of use, I won't and can't do that.
Reply

#56
ggugcuuau Wrote:All true but the US system is pretty much broken and clogged full of bad apples so it's hardly a good example of a well run mixed economy, but that can be said for every country to some degree. There's also too much unregulated money in politics... why bother doing your job when you can just get back handed money to pretend you're doing it.

Meh screw it, I vote either Geniocracy or Anarchy! Nerd-smileyGreenchainsaw
Don't we nerds practically already rule the world? I mean once we get that robot army up and running we'll have a Geniocracy in no time:biggrin:
Reply

#57
memechose Wrote:I'm not going to put on existential calistenic boxing gloves or duel with freudian parapsychological laserguns about this.

I'm just a guy who lives life the way it's supposed to be lived, enjoyed and shared. I'm not living this life in order to appease or fit into any collective anthill mentality. It doesn't matter to me how anyone defines reality because I'm too busy living in it and (if I can say so) doing a pretty decent job of it for myself and the people I love and the people I interact with.

I am glad you brought up moral prerogatives and what is morally paramount. To me they are irrelevant. Why? Because morality is the code of conduct of the masses and it changes as the masses change. I live by a my own code of person ethics that hold me to higher standards than any morality ever thrown in my face. So with that said, screw morality.

Mercy! Morality is a code of conduct for the masses? Well, it can be, such as a societies' enshrined equal rights for example. It's also highly individual , as you described by saying, 'I live by a my own code of person ethics that hold me to higher standards than any morality ever thrown in my face.' That's your moral codes. *winks warmly*

Here, like so: Meriam Webster:
': beliefs about what is right behavior and what is wrong behavior

: the degree to which something is right and good : the moral goodness or badness of something'
Reply

#58
meninlove Wrote:Volunteer firefighters.
Volunteer palliative care givers.
Volunteer police auxiliary.

I personally feel Ayn Rand promotes a bizarre form of McDonald's Psychology.

Bill and I got involved with assisting a 91 year old man who had been home invaded and beaten three times in 2 weeks some years ago. That on top of the volunteer work we do. We were all over the news and on TV and I wrote an article about it that ended up in the newspaper. The article was specific in addressing how we can, each of us, make a difference. To explain it more I'd have to provide the article here which would give my real name away etc and per the terms of use, I won't and can't do that.

[COLOR="Blue"]The word volunteer says it all. You and Bill did right with the old man. I see with my own eyes how one person can make a good (or bad) difference in one, fifty, or a thousand lives. It's not something anyone does expecting anything in return. We just do it because it's RIGHT and we know it deep inside ourselves. Right?

[/COLOR]
Reply

#59
meninlove Wrote:Mercy! Morality is a code of conduct for the masses? Well, it can be, such as a societies' enshrined equal rights for example. It's also highly individual , as you described by saying, 'I live by a my own code of person ethics that hold me to higher standards than any morality ever thrown in my face.' That's your moral codes. *winks warmly*

Here, like so: Meriam Webster:
': beliefs about what is right behavior and what is wrong behavior

: the degree to which something is right and good : the moral goodness or badness of something'

[COLOR="Blue"]Yah.... But just hearing someone use the word 'morality' makes me sneer. Fundamentalists have given morality real bad credibility and they are the ones in the US tossing the word at anyone who's not fundamentalist enough for them. That's why I use the word ethics and I still say screw morality.
[/COLOR]
Reply

#60
Borg69 Wrote:Do you think that perhaps these people are still self interest, but on a higher stakes level than most people are willing to wager on? It's like gambling... you stand to win, and win big, BUT... you risk a LOT trying for that big win and could potentially stand to lose (most) everything. I think most people who sign up for the military are wagering on us NOT going to war and possibly dying, and just hoping for the $$$, education, experience, and retirement.

I dunno... just a thought.

While there are obvious exceptions and there are some people who join for the benefits...the risks far outweigh the benefits and since we've been in a perpetual state of war time or at least conflict for the better part of almost 15-20 years now, I think most have more genuine reasons to join other than money.
Reply



Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Ayn Rand Chase 5 2,586 10-14-2013, 08:56 PM
Last Post: Pix

Forum Jump:


Recently Browsing
3 Guest(s)

© 2002-2024 GaySpeak.com