Objections of Randian Objectivism

Yet I've noticed that many objectivists become dogmatic and shallow in their consideration of issues thus leading to some incredibly stupid statements. (I'm not refering to anyone in this thread).

Ray, if you found that many things to disagree with in a single post, we're not likely to find common ground. Suffice to say, I disagree.

I haven't had a chance to read Ayn Rand's works yet. I like many of the quotes I've heard of hers which is a positive sign. Judging from the descriptions I've heard, my own personal philosophy shares many parrallels with objectivism.

Yet I've noticed that many objectivists become dogmatic and shallow in their consideration of issues thus leading to some incredibly stupid statements. (I'm not refering to anyone in this thread).

I'm curious to what you think of this quote by her: "what ought is".
I personally disagree with that, but just curious as to what you think.

You're completely right on that note. I've visited a Randite website calling even Vegetarianism an "evil" philosophy

BTW what does your name mean?

theantibuddha - As I gave noted on a previous poat, Objectivism, like all other movements and philosophies, has its share of "true believers" hanger-oners and even nutjobs. That fact does not detract from the validity of many of Rand's views.

Vegetarianism kills more animals than an omnivorous diet. Strange but true So by vegetarian standards vegetarianism IS evil.

Did not know that, and I doubt it.

If you state vegetarianism as "evil" then you got to state omnivorism as equally "evil"

because in order to have an omnivorous meal you have to have vegetable, and meat which comes from animal.

Now, before you think I'm a vegan nutcrack(too late huh? ), I'm not a vegan but I know where they're coming from and I am trying to be one (or at least plan to).

Whatever, let's not generate this into a vegetarianism thread.

In harvesting vegetables many small critters like voles or field mice that live amongst the plants get killed. In eating meat, only the given animal dies and the animal's grazing does not harm any animals in the grazed area. It's just an amusing quirk of statistics (mostly driven by the fact that vermin are smaller and more numerous than cattle) that it turns out numerically more creatures die in the process of growing and harvesting vegetables than in growing and harvesting an animal.

Pfff, it's just racism anyway. Because we're members of the kingdom animalia we feel guilty about killing our own kind but are happy to kill members of plantae and fungi.

You're heading me off from thinking you're a vegan nutcrack by saying you're a vegan nutcrack?

Hmmm, I wonder what this thread is anyway, I've forgotten. <shrug>

Come to think about it, I wonder if Rand calls everything that disagrees with her "evil".

The problem is, that by treating Objectivism as a set of rules, not to be broken, the main precept of the philosophy, thinking for oneself, was sorely compromised.

Is that because you are a specie of one, as you say in another topic?

Well, I said I wished I was

Anyway. On to the actual topic, I'm sorry to say this but Ayn Rand is a raving loony. I read the excerpt from V.O.S. someone posted the link to earlier and she sounds like a moron.

Well, I said I wished I was

Anyway. On to the actual topic, I'm sorry to say this but Ayn Rand is a raving loony. I read the excerpt from V.O.S. someone posted the link to earlier and she sounds like a moron.

Come on we're not that bad. :wink:

Trust me, there are more Randites' website that's just pushing it.

Bad command or syntax error. Statement's grammar appears to be corrupted and meaning can not be recovered.

Forget it.