Objectivism 101

Ah-ha . . . now it all makes sense to me.

Joe,

Your exposition of Rand was lucid.

From a biological point of view "right to life" makes little sense either at the individual or the group level. It seems obvious that "rights" are nothing more than negotiated treaties for mutual benefit. Because humans, like other primates seem to be tribal (i.e. have self identities which are a function of group identity) such treaties tend to operate at a group level. The "brotherhood of man" and "human rights" may be simply nebulous utopian ideals.

Joefromthezoo is full of ****....his goal is a carbon copy of Zionist dogma.....+you have no model of human nature, no definition for truth, no regard for ethics or your worthless lives, you are truly pathetic, and that's being polite.

Anybody got a can of bug spray?

All we really need to do is round up the Jews and this thread would at least have potential, but atm, it's full of Goy haters.

Joefromthezoo claims to be from Chicago, but he stinks of New York.

JJ and DH in David's taxi resisting mental cleansing.

True. "Human rights" outside of human society are meaningless. An isolated human has no need of rights. Whether rights are derived from society or from the individual, on the other hand, remains an open question.

For those who argue that rights are inherent, the question remains: where do those rights come from? For some, the answer is obvious: they come from god. That, however, is an intellectual dead end, as Rand recognized. Rand sought to avoid that deistic cul de sac by arguing that rights are derived from the inherent nature of humans according to the "law of identity," i.e. "A = A." As I pointed out before, however, this law is anything but law-like when it comes to human nature. Furthermore, despite her protestations to the contrary, Rand didn't solve the "is/ought" problem by relying on the law of identity. Now, to be sure, I think that the "is/ought" problem isn't insurmountable, but it certainly can't be surmounted by arguing that "people are self-interested, so that's the way they ought to be." That doesn't avoid the "is/ought" problem, that simply restates it.

"Identity" is the problem. Multiple group allegience implies multiple "selves" along a dynamic egocentric - altruistic dimension.
This for me is why "morality" is de facto situational even if there are negotiated ethical principles (like speed limits) which serve to regulate "society" statistically. (I will refrain from reference to our bete noir of fuzzy sets )

Objectivist epistemology states that states of mind, such as happiness, are not primary, rather they are the consequence of specific facts of existence.

So in order for me to be happy, there must be a certain state of affairs in reality, which would cause my happiness.

This is not true, because one can believe in God for example, and achieve happiness, even though this belief may not be grounded in "the facts of reality"

This faithful individual may have thrown reason aside, but they are nonetheless happy in their life.

If the whole of humanity believed in God, and they believed that Gods existence was an objective fact, then everyone would have achieved happiness.

I found this thread rather boring, in the beginning--but that was before the dog and pony show got cranked up.

Let's see, Fresco, Joe, Wandel, Phoenix, EB (probably me, as well)--all "Goy-hating" Jews from New York. Who'd a thunk ? ! ? ! ?

Man oh Manischewitz . . . you can't make **** like this up . . . and it's all free entertainment ! ! !

Well, i just read the whole damned thing.

I left some people out of the list of vile, baby-raping Zionist Jewish devils, though . . . i should at least add JPB and Amigo (take that, Beaner ! ! !).

I'd add Mexica, too, but i'm not sure if she is just supposed to be a Mexican dishwasher, or is also to be considered a vile Zionist.

I accuse Joe of having too much fun.

Now that's a better picture !

Fun? I'll have you know that I have been asigned (whatever that means) to this message board -- and perhaps others! (even I don't know -- that's just how devious I am!) -- with the goal of disrupting genuine truthseekers and advocating the plague of subjective ethics aka might makes right aka George Bush is hero. Yes, that's right, GEORGE BUSH IS HERO!!!! Say it loud and say it proud!

So no, this isn't fun. It's hard work.

I'm sorry Joe . . . how thoughtless and insensitive of me . . . you're a saint . . . a feckin' saint ! ! !

I'm glad somebody finally recognized that.

Good job Jews, looks like JJ's given you the ass.
Have any of you actually bothered to check whether Jews own and control the US mass media....it only takes a google and some critical thinking....whoops, strike that, I forgot that you guys actually stand up for the output of the mass media, like good little obedient Joo's.

Awwww, that's a shame. Was it something I said?

Hey DavidIg,

Those Mossad boys have been asking questions at DPI in Myers Road Indooroopilly. Keep your mirror on those rear seat passengers !

DavidIg : Good job Jews, looks like JJ's given you the ass.

No David, I'm still here waiting to see if one of these head bangers that live in the twilight zone, can articulate right from wrong.

They don't realize that groups don't physically exist, so to rely on any external control, as their imaginary friend, to establish right from wrong, only makes them only a neo-Jew (same con different century). They need to get their head out of the twilight zone and live in the reality zone, because it only makes them a head banging criminal (because they don't know right from wrong).