Being an objectivist should feel like having superpowers


Recommended Posts

I am struck by this profound quote:

Romanticism is the conceptual school of art. It deals, not with the random trivia of the day, but with the timeless, fundamental, universal problems and values of human existence. It does not record or photograph; it creates and projects. It is concerned—in the words of Aristotle—not with things as they are, but with things as they might be and ought to be.

I am not speaking here specifically about Romantic literature, but the idea of "things as they might and ought to be". A category of ideas about "what is possible" rather than "things as currently observed". This part of the quote made me think deeply and lead me to some interesting conclusions.

Objectivism, by it's nature is a highly demanding philosophy, that if consistently practiced, should create people of extraordinary ability, similar to the process of creating a professional athlete.

Unlike other philosophies like Epicureanism, which values friends, leisure and stagnant pleasures, Objectivism values conscious activity, progress, and constant growth. It values a sort of radical outtake on life that completely disregards social conventions, mores, beliefs and constraints.

The obvious implication is that practicing Objectivists should stand out quite visibly from their peers.

By "superpowers" I don't mean in the supernatural, mystical sense, but ability far and above what most people consider "normal" or "average", even that which is envisioned by most people, but nevertheless possible.

For example, (and this man is not an Objectivist) taking up the demanding sport of running his entire life, this man has apparently developed the ability to run forever, without ever tiring. There are many outstanding examples of human beings in this world that defy our expectations of what is "normal" or "possible" in common, everyday parlance. Most of them have never even heard of Objectivism. I now wonder what this same type of person, equipped with the right philosophy could achieve.

I don't neccessarily think Objectivists should be good at everything, but in our specialized society, most Objectivists should be extraordinary at atleast one particular thing, akin to Malcom Gladwell's "10,000 hours" theory.

My point is, operating at a high level of performance consistently, both mentally and physically, as Objectivism demands, one should feel as if he can do things other people can't, see things they cannot, be what they cannot. The definition of power. Or in other words, "superpowers".

I won't even pretend to say I hold up to this standard, or practice Objectivism consistently, but I believe if this philosophy is taken to its fullest implications, the result should be quite radical and different than the current one I live now.

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 182
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

A world that can be and ought to be, based on Objectivist:

* Everybody respects rights; there are no crimes.

* Everybody is rational and selfish; everybody lives a productive life.

* Everybody pursues rational values; everybody is both wealthy and healthy; the world is 99.999% disease free.

* The economy is pure capitalism; with unprecented levels of extreme wealth and career opportunities.

* There is no such thing as war.

* There are no taxes; you get to keep everything you make.

* The human genetic potential is approached. This means it is normal to be what we would call a super genius and at the same time to be what we would call a super athlete. The average life span is (as a rough guess) between 120 and 160, in excellent health to the end.

* Education is so efficient that you learn in one year as much as you now (2014) learn in 10 years. And that's not taking into consideration that everybody is a super genius. Plus the education is useful (not Chinese mythology). Plus it's virtually zero price (with technology).

* Technology is so advanced that machines repair and maintain themselves like living things. For example if your computer doesn't work, let it rest for a day and it will heal itself like a living thing.

* You have replicators. You have gazillions of patterns to replicate. A replicator can make its own parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marcus wrote:

I am struck by this profound quote:

Romanticism is the conceptual school of art. It deals, not with the random trivia of the day, but with the timeless, fundamental, universal problems and values of human existence. It does not record or photograph; it creates and projects. It is concerned—in the words of Aristotle—not with things as they are, but with things as they might be and ought to be.

I am not speaking here specifically about Romantic literature, but the idea of "things as they might and ought to be". A category of ideas about "what is possible" rather than "things as currently observed". This part of the quote made me think deeply and lead me to some interesting conclusions.

Objectivism, by it's nature is a highly demanding philosophy, that if consistently practiced, should create people of extraordinary ability, similar to the process of creating a professional athlete.[

Unlike other philosophies like Epicureanism, which values friends, leisure and stagnant pleasures, Objectivism values conscious activity, progress, and constant growth. It values a sort of radical outtake on life that completely disregards social conventions, mores, beliefs and constraints.

The obvious implication is that practicing Objectivists should stand out quite visibly from their peers.

By "superpowers" I don't mean in the supernatural, mystical sense, but ability far and above what most people consider "normal" or "average", even that which is envisioned by most people, but nevertheless possible.

For example, (and this man is not an Objectivist) taking up the demanding sport of running his entire life, this man has apparently developed the ability to run forever, without ever tiring. There are many outstanding examples of human beings in this world that defy our expectations of what is "normal" or "possible" in common, everyday parlance. Most of them have never even heard of Objectivism. I now wonder what this same type of person, equipped with the right philosophy could achieve.

I don't necessarily think Objectivists should be good at everything, but in our specialized society, most Objectivists should be extraordinary at at least one particular thing, akin to Malcom Gladwell's "10,000 hours" theory.

My point is, operating at a high level of performance consistently, both mentally and physically, as Objectivism demands, one should feel as if he can do things other people can't, see things they cannot, be what they cannot. The definition of power. Or in other words, "superpowers".

I won't even pretend to say I hold up to this standard, or practice Objectivism consistently, but I believe if this philosophy is taken to its fullest implications, the result should be quite radical and different than the current one I live now.

Thoughts?

I can offer a few from the view of someone who is not an ideologically pure Objectivist, but yet lives by many of the objective moral principles advocated by Ayn Rand.

Objectivism is just an intellectual fantasy for weak impotent unproductive failures so long as they lack the ability to actually manifest "what should be" into "what is".

The only real Objectivists are the people who make the engine of the world RUN.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marcus wrote:

I am struck by this profound quote:

Romanticism is the conceptual school of art. It deals, not with the random trivia of the day, but with the timeless, fundamental, universal problems and values of human existence. It does not record or photograph; it creates and projects. It is concerned—in the words of Aristotle—not with things as they are, but with things as they might be and ought to be.
I am not speaking here specifically about Romantic literature, but the idea of "things as they might and ought to be". A category of ideas about "what is possible" rather than "things as currently observed". This part of the quote made me think deeply and lead me to some interesting conclusions.

Objectivism, by it's nature is a highly demanding philosophy, that if consistently practiced, should create people of extraordinary ability, similar to the process of creating a professional athlete.[

Unlike other philosophies like Epicureanism, which values friends, leisure and stagnant pleasures, Objectivism values conscious activity, progress, and constant growth. It values a sort of radical outtake on life that completely disregards social conventions, mores, beliefs and constraints.

The obvious implication is that practicing Objectivists should stand out quite visibly from their peers.

By "superpowers" I don't mean in the supernatural, mystical sense, but ability far and above what most people consider "normal" or "average", even that which is envisioned by most people, but nevertheless possible.

For example, (and this man is not an Objectivist) taking up the demanding sport of running his entire life, this man has apparently developed the ability to run forever, without ever tiring. There are many outstanding examples of human beings in this world that defy our expectations of what is "normal" or "possible" in common, everyday parlance. Most of them have never even heard of Objectivism. I now wonder what this same type of person, equipped with the right philosophy could achieve.

I don't necessarily think Objectivists should be good at everything, but in our specialized society, most Objectivists should be extraordinary at at least one particular thing, akin to Malcom Gladwell's "10,000 hours" theory.

My point is, operating at a high level of performance consistently, both mentally and physically, as Objectivism demands, one should feel as if he can do things other people can't, see things they cannot, be what they cannot. The definition of power. Or in other words, "superpowers".

I won't even pretend to say I hold up to this standard, or practice Objectivism consistently, but I believe if this philosophy is taken to its fullest implications, the result should be quite radical and different than the current one I live now.

Thoughts?

I can offer a few from the view of someone who is not an ideologically pure Objectivist, but yet lives by many of the objective moral principles advocated by Ayn Rand.

Objectivism is just an intellectual fantasy for weak impotent unproductive failures so long as they lack the ability to actually manifest "what should be" into "what is".

The only real Objectivists are the people who make the engine of the world RUN.

Greg

Yes, there's a word for that: mental masturbation. Objectivism has devolved into endless talking, debates, not taking things seriously etc.

Kind of a contradiction, is'nt it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, there's a word for that: mental masturbation. Objectivism has devolved into endless talking, debates, not taking things seriously etc.

Yes. Those have become substitutes for actually doing things in the real world. That is one of the most admirable attributes of Ayn Rand's protagonists:

They got things DONE.

But Objectivism is a very "masculine" (active) philosophy, and it's counter-productive, literally, to only "talk" about it.

Well... all there could ever be on any internet forum is talk, so that needs to be taken into consideration so that there won't be unrealistic expectations from this setting.

But aside from that, your point is well taken. And I wholly agree that Objectivism is an active masculine ideology. It is the counterpoint to the feminized ideology of liberalism.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am struck by this profound quote:

Romanticism is the conceptual school of art. It deals, not with the random trivia of the day, but with the timeless, fundamental, universal problems and values of human existence. It does not record or photograph; it creates and projects. It is concerned—in the words of Aristotle—not with things as they are, but with things as they might be and ought to be.

I am not speaking here specifically about Romantic literature, but the idea of "things as they might and ought to be". A category of ideas about "what is possible" rather than "things as currently observed". This part of the quote made me think deeply and lead me to some interesting conclusions.

Objectivism, by it's nature is a highly demanding philosophy, that if consistently practiced, should create people of extraordinary ability, similar to the process of creating a professional athlete.

Unlike other philosophies like Epicureanism, which values friends, leisure and stagnant pleasures, Objectivism values conscious activity, progress, and constant growth. It values a sort of radical outtake on life that completely disregards social conventions, mores, beliefs and constraints.

The obvious implication is that practicing Objectivists should stand out quite visibly from their peers.

By "superpowers" I don't mean in the supernatural, mystical sense, but ability far and above what most people consider "normal" or "average", even that which is envisioned by most people, but nevertheless possible.

For example, (and this man is not an Objectivist) taking up the demanding sport of running his entire life, this man has apparently developed the ability to run forever, without ever tiring. There are many outstanding examples of human beings in this world that defy our expectations of what is "normal" or "possible" in common, everyday parlance. Most of them have never even heard of Objectivism. I now wonder what this same type of person, equipped with the right philosophy could achieve.

I don't neccessarily think Objectivists should be good at everything, but in our specialized society, most Objectivists should be extraordinary at atleast one particular thing, akin to Malcom Gladwell's "10,000 hours" theory.

My point is, operating at a high level of performance consistently, both mentally and physically, as Objectivism demands, one should feel as if he can do things other people can't, see things they cannot, be what they cannot. The definition of power. Or in other words, "superpowers".

I won't even pretend to say I hold up to this standard, or practice Objectivism consistently, but I believe if this philosophy is taken to its fullest implications, the result should be quite radical and different than the current one I live now.

Thoughts?

Peter Keating on steroids.

--Brant

try living with integrity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pride, the forgotten virtue:

Man, the rational being he is born able to create, but must create by choice—that the first precondition of self-esteem is that radiant selfishness of soul which desires the best in all things, in values of matter and spirit, a soul that seeks above all else to achieve its own moral perfection

- Galt's Speech

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am struck by this profound quote:

Romanticism is the conceptual school of art. It deals, not with the random trivia of the day, but with the timeless, fundamental, universal problems and values of human existence. It does not record or photograph; it creates and projects. It is concerned—in the words of Aristotle—not with things as they are, but with things as they might be and ought to be.

I am not speaking here specifically about Romantic literature, but the idea of "things as they might and ought to be". A category of ideas about "what is possible" rather than "things as currently observed". This part of the quote made me think deeply and lead me to some interesting conclusions.

Objectivism, by it's nature is a highly demanding philosophy, that if consistently practiced, should create people of extraordinary ability, similar to the process of creating a professional athlete.

Unlike other philosophies like Epicureanism, which values friends, leisure and stagnant pleasures, Objectivism values conscious activity, progress, and constant growth. It values a sort of radical outtake on life that completely disregards social conventions, mores, beliefs and constraints.

The obvious implication is that practicing Objectivists should stand out quite visibly from their peers.

By "superpowers" I don't mean in the supernatural, mystical sense, but ability far and above what most people consider "normal" or "average", even that which is envisioned by most people, but nevertheless possible.

For example, (and this man is not an Objectivist) taking up the demanding sport of running his entire life, this man has apparently developed the ability to run forever, without ever tiring. There are many outstanding examples of human beings in this world that defy our expectations of what is "normal" or "possible" in common, everyday parlance. Most of them have never even heard of Objectivism. I now wonder what this same type of person, equipped with the right philosophy could achieve.

I don't neccessarily think Objectivists should be good at everything, but in our specialized society, most Objectivists should be extraordinary at atleast one particular thing, akin to Malcom Gladwell's "10,000 hours" theory.

My point is, operating at a high level of performance consistently, both mentally and physically, as Objectivism demands, one should feel as if he can do things other people can't, see things they cannot, be what they cannot. The definition of power. Or in other words, "superpowers".

I won't even pretend to say I hold up to this standard, or practice Objectivism consistently, but I believe if this philosophy is taken to its fullest implications, the result should be quite radical and different than the current one I live now.

Thoughts?

Peter Keating on steroids.

--Brant

try living with integrity

Cheap shot. This has nothing to do with impressing others.

Rather it is about achieving ones fullest potential because it is life affirming, pleasurable and moral to do so. The result is a richer experience of life. A life made more interesting by your own achievements. Go back and re-read my post. Then, go back and read up on the virtue of pride. Then watch your favorite professional athlete and marvel at the enormous dedication he undertook, and resulting pride he must feel for achieving glittering success in his sport. No steroids required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pride, the forgotten virtue:

Man, the rational being he is born able to create, but must create by choice—that the first precondition of self-esteem is that radiant selfishness of soul which desires the best in all things, in values of matter and spirit, a soul that seeks above all else to achieve its own moral perfection

- Galt's Speech

Rand screwed up more than her life with this crap. She screwed up her philosophy.

Pride needs to be examined elsewhere and whether it is or is not a virtue. A virtue, however, is something good about you you do. Pride is a feeling.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter Keating on steroids.

--Brant

try living with integrity

Cheap shot. This has nothing to do with impressing others.

Rather it is about achieving ones fullest potential because it is life affirming, pleasurable and moral to do so. The result is a richer experience of life. A life made more interesting by your own achievements. Go back and re-read my post. Then, go back and read up on the virtue of pride. Then watch your favorite professional athlete and marvel at the enormous dedication he undertook, and resulting pride he must feel for achieving glittering success in his sport. No steroids required.

I can only conclude you haven't read The Fountainhead.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marcus wrote:

I am struck by this profound quote:

Romanticism is the conceptual school of art. It deals, not with the random trivia of the day, but with the timeless, fundamental, universal problems and values of human existence. It does not record or photograph; it creates and projects. It is concerned—in the words of Aristotle—not with things as they are, but with things as they might be and ought to be.
I am not speaking here specifically about Romantic literature, but the idea of "things as they might and ought to be". A category of ideas about "what is possible" rather than "things as currently observed". This part of the quote made me think deeply and lead me to some interesting conclusions.

Objectivism, by it's nature is a highly demanding philosophy, that if consistently practiced, should create people of extraordinary ability, similar to the process of creating a professional athlete.[

Unlike other philosophies like Epicureanism, which values friends, leisure and stagnant pleasures, Objectivism values conscious activity, progress, and constant growth. It values a sort of radical outtake on life that completely disregards social conventions, mores, beliefs and constraints.

The obvious implication is that practicing Objectivists should stand out quite visibly from their peers.

By "superpowers" I don't mean in the supernatural, mystical sense, but ability far and above what most people consider "normal" or "average", even that which is envisioned by most people, but nevertheless possible.

For example, (and this man is not an Objectivist) taking up the demanding sport of running his entire life, this man has apparently developed the ability to run forever, without ever tiring. There are many outstanding examples of human beings in this world that defy our expectations of what is "normal" or "possible" in common, everyday parlance. Most of them have never even heard of Objectivism. I now wonder what this same type of person, equipped with the right philosophy could achieve.

I don't necessarily think Objectivists should be good at everything, but in our specialized society, most Objectivists should be extraordinary at at least one particular thing, akin to Malcom Gladwell's "10,000 hours" theory.

My point is, operating at a high level of performance consistently, both mentally and physically, as Objectivism demands, one should feel as if he can do things other people can't, see things they cannot, be what they cannot. The definition of power. Or in other words, "superpowers".

I won't even pretend to say I hold up to this standard, or practice Objectivism consistently, but I believe if this philosophy is taken to its fullest implications, the result should be quite radical and different than the current one I live now.

Thoughts?

I can offer a few from the view of someone who is not an ideologically pure Objectivist, but yet lives by many of the objective moral principles advocated by Ayn Rand.

Objectivism is just an intellectual fantasy for weak impotent unproductive failures so long as they lack the ability to actually manifest "what should be" into "what is".

The only real Objectivists are the people who make the engine of the world RUN.

Greg

What happens when they retire?

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter Keating on steroids.

--Brant

try living with integrity

Cheap shot. This has nothing to do with impressing others.

Rather it is about achieving ones fullest potential because it is life affirming, pleasurable and moral to do so. The result is a richer experience of life. A life made more interesting by your own achievements. Go back and re-read my post. Then, go back and read up on the virtue of pride. Then watch your favorite professional athlete and marvel at the enormous dedication he undertook, and resulting pride he must feel for achieving glittering success in his sport. No steroids required.

I can only conclude you haven't read The Fountainhead.

--Brant

I can only conclude you have'nt read my initial post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter Keating on steroids.

--Brant

try living with integrity

Cheap shot. This has nothing to do with impressing others.

Rather it is about achieving ones fullest potential because it is life affirming, pleasurable and moral to do so. The result is a richer experience of life. A life made more interesting by your own achievements. Go back and re-read my post. Then, go back and read up on the virtue of pride. Then watch your favorite professional athlete and marvel at the enormous dedication he undertook, and resulting pride he must feel for achieving glittering success in his sport. No steroids required.

I can only conclude you haven't read The Fountainhead.

--Brant

I can only conclude you have'nt read my initial post.

Howard Roark does not exist in your initial post. But then, he wasn't an Objectivist, was he?

You don't seem to know much about sports or competence either. A certain complexity is missing.

Your view of what being an Objectivist is is like Peter Keating's mother's view of him being an architect.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter Keating on steroids.

--Brant

try living with integrity

Cheap shot. This has nothing to do with impressing others.

Rather it is about achieving ones fullest potential because it is life affirming, pleasurable and moral to do so. The result is a richer experience of life. A life made more interesting by your own achievements. Go back and re-read my post. Then, go back and read up on the virtue of pride. Then watch your favorite professional athlete and marvel at the enormous dedication he undertook, and resulting pride he must feel for achieving glittering success in his sport. No steroids required.

I can only conclude you haven't read The Fountainhead.

--Brant

I can only conclude you have'nt read my initial post.

Howard Roark does not exist in your initial post. But then, he wasn't an Objectivist, was he?

You don't seem to know much about sports or competence either. A certain complexity is missing.

Your view of what being an Objectivist is is like Peter Keating's mother's view of him being an architect.

--Brant

Because you can tell I don't know much about sports from.....a few typed words? Yeah, sure (My brother played college and professional football). I know enough about sports to know pride when I see it on the face of a man (or woman).

And you're making alot of assumptions, like a blind man reaching in the dark. As usual your "drive by" style of writing leaves others bewildered and is actually counter productive to your whatever point you're trying to get across.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marcus,

I agree that there is an inspirational quality to Rand that makes the reader want to embrace greatness.

A whole bunch of high-achiever millionaires use her that way, too. (Starting with Richard Branson.)

The only way to get others to do the same, though, is to inspire them. Not tell them they should be that way as if somehow decreeing it.

I think your spirit is in what these high-achievers are doing and the flack you are getting is from expressing it the way it doesn't work.

Nobody attracted to Objectivism I know of likes to be told what to do by a peer.

Probably not even you.

:)

I see a style of expression thing, so if you are interested and so choose, it is easy to correct. And if you want to see people living their inspiration from Rand in a high-stakes business way instead of just talking about it, look at the folks around Branson, but there are a lot more out there.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point with the post (which some here are seeming to misinterpret) is to sum up a 'feeling', a result of deliberate, consistent, demanding action. The physical and mental result, not just the emotional. I brought up professional athletes because they are the most relatable, concrete examples of what I sought to convey (i.e. examples of excellence and achievement).

The response I got from some of you is really bizarre (especially this being an Objectivist forum?). Pride is not a virtue, this goes in the humor section etc,.

Almost as if it springs not from genuine criticism but insecurity. But Mike, I get your point. I did'nt aim to bring it across as "You're damned and lame if you don't do this!", just used "superpower" as a device to convey what I was thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reaching for the best within you, doing the best you can do, is not the same as being the best as a goal. That last can powerfully motivate someone as in sports, but it's not to be found in the writings of Ayn Rand, even her advocation of moral perfection--wrong as it was--was not to be the best morally.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point with the post (which some here are seeming to misinterpret) is to sum up a 'feeling', a result of deliberate, consistent, demanding action. The physical and mental result, not just the emotional. I brought up professional athletes because they are the most relatable, concrete examples of what I sought to convey (i.e. examples of excellence and achievement).

The response I got from some of you is really bizarre (especially this being an Objectivist forum?). Pride is not a virtue, this goes in the humor section etc,.

Almost as if it springs not from genuine criticism but insecurity.

This is a thinking forum. Objectivism takes second place.

--Brant

Rand, third, but for the record she did really gear it up writing her two great novels, especially AS

(I may do drive-by, but I keep circling the block)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Achieving a prideful state--or pride--is a consequence of virtue, not virtue in itself.

--Brant

It is both a virtue and a consequence of virtue. Forming a feedback loop. Or we can agree to disagree. Reality will sort it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Achieving a prideful state--or pride--is a consequence of virtue, not virtue in itself.

--Brant

It is both a virtue and a consequence of virtue. Forming a feedback loop. Or we can agree to disagree. Reality will sort it out.

This is a small matter, regardless. The (religious) trap is in thinking one's pride is necessarily sinful.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now