does pure objectivism work.. does pure self interest really benefit the human race? - i argue absolutely

[audiognostic]

ok.. this post was originally my reply for a topic on children..

but i found my thinkig so profound (theres my pride again hah.. so glad here i wont get bashed for not following that false humility bullshit..) that i believe it deserves its own special thread..

it started out with me asking this question:

i was thinking.. if the basis of all morality is self interest right... then why shoulld a parent continiue to feed and care for his child if the parent gets sick of it... right?? if he has no duty.. why not just let the child die when it gets too annoying>?

also as a side question, should we go on some moral crusade to save helpless children of the world and all other helpless people through altruistic charity work?? and if not will society be permanently fucked up? and should you feel guilty for not doing so?

here you will see the phlosophy i came up with to aswer my questions that were bugging the hell out of me.. (i have to hold a complete life philosophy in my mind.. engaging in too much relativism, circumstantialism, confusion and doublethik without core principles kills me.. )

ok here is what i came up with...

the only problem with Ayn Rands objectivist thought.. is that she was not thoroughly objectivist enough!! particuarly in the context of a mass broad application!!

in particular, i am speaking mainly in terms of the legal system and the nations.. whereas she thought the law should ONLY exist to protect individual property and bodily rights.. i argue here that this is actually not even purely objectivist.. and that if you switched to PURE objectivism as i demostrate.. everything works fantastically..

here are a few basic premisis for my argument

1. objectivism is all about self interest, not in putting others first.. so who ever said it is our individual goal or responsibility to be a "moral example for how everybody else should live for the good of the human race"??? the whole core of objectivism, is we need not hold ANY non objectivist morals

2. i do not believe pure objectivism is incompatible with a good existance as long as there is minor reframing of issues.. or who iis responsible for what.. and what defines an entity... such as .. the individual is responsible only for his own happiess as an entity, a society, nation, or clan as an entity is responsible for its own self interest as an entity... taht being said.. this leads into..

3... i am not an anarchist, neithr do i believe objectivism supports anarchism so i believe in law, i think the only point i disagree on with ayn rand is the purpose of law.. which i believe should go beyod simply protecting personal property rights.. instead i believe it should do wat it was intended to do by the united states constitution.. to act entirely and thoroughly in the name of its constituents self interest.. staying within the already identified rational moral core of the constitution itself.. which now i will go to demonstrate its sheer perfection and moral accuracy...so that is my reframing...so that being said..

4. based on our representative republic in the usa.. teh law is meant to take care of such things.. such as the rational good of society at large... if you think of the country as an entity in itself, and you expand your view of the application of objectivism and think of objectivism in terms of application to entities at large, not just singular individuals which comprise and create that entity out of their own self interest, with objectivist morality to be applied to that entity and have the desire for happiness and continued life for that entity, and for objectivism to rule the creation of that entity out of individual interest so that the self interest of the entity, truly in the best way represents the self interst of its members, ...pure objectivism and self interst still works.. as long as laws are meant to take of the entity of the nation and its society in a RATIONAL manner.. which is the whole point of electing good politicians and making good laws... and it ALL comes down to self interest... the american people have the government by choice and self interest, rather than by force according to the constitution and declaration of independence.. therefore it is the american peoples individual self interests, for the entity of america to exist.. and it becomes the entity of americas self interest for itself to exist..therefore the defense, military, etc.. and as an entity, following objectivist ethics.. it has the moral obligation of creating its own rational self interest morality system if it wishes to continue to exist.. therefore.. it is not the individuals responsibility to create morals for the good of the people.. but the entities responsibility in which those people wilfully exist.. because anarchy is PURE individualism.. but actually not RATIONAL self interest!! but rather self interest of whim!!! and therefore is immoral and does us no good to further the cause of our own lives.. and does not work..which is why we CHOOSE to have government! - in the wonderful system of the american constitutional republic at least.. and its capitalist economy and entire system.. the most progressive, objectivist, revolutionary system ever truly made.. all those "revolutionary prograssive socialists": really have their head up their ass..

5. the same can be said about a company.. as it is the CEOs and founders self interest for that entity to exist, essentially his self interest becomes congruent with the self interest of the company, and therefore rational principles must be founded for that entity to continue to exist if the ceo wishes to continue to profit from it.. thats why the ceo must pay his employees and provide them with proper faculties, rather than taking everything for himself.. none of this is altruism, but a continuation of rational self interest and objectivist morality

6. that being said, we as individuals do not need to neccessarily be concerned about being an example for everybody, or if our personal values would benefit society at large... for they are our own and solely for our own benefit and not for anybody else.. we do not need to worry "what if everybody did this.. what would happenn to society" for the reasons i mentioned above...

7. therefore.. coming back to my example with not feeding your children... and taking proper care of them... ultimately how you choose to raise your childern is entierly up to you.. and your self interest, unfortunately, but it is just part of reality, that some children will be raised in less than proper families, others will be raised in great families.. this is just human nature..no matter the system we run or the laws we make, there is no way we can ever get rid of this .. so if you wish to have your children grow up in a good family.. that is your self interest.. and it is in their best self interest that you do not have them until you are capable of doing so without sacrificing your own happiness as taht would make for an immoral and un-good family dynamic.. so in the end self interst and non altruism always wins as the best choice.. and if you wish to regulate what is good for all of society.. dont worry about shouting to the world how righteous you are ad how they should follow your example.. instead do what you do.. and vote..there is nothing else we relaly can do about it other than make rational laws for regulation.. for example.. it is still all self interest to feed your children and clothe them, because due to the laws of teh entity we have elected to have through self interest, adults are responsible for their children to the degree which the law has decided, and if you go too far you will be charged with child abuse which will cause you more trouble than your self interested self desires to bear...

8. am i saying that the government should intrude in our personal lives unneccesarily? no.. and our representative republic model in the usa handles this perfectly by constitutional (perhaps not current) theory.. since we as "societal groups" willingly elect our representatives to make laws which would be the best for society.. and therefore we indirectly as groups decide what is best for us as groups.. society will end up through this process finding and evolving laws for that of RATIONAL self interest.. in other words.. that which works.. and which leaves society as a unit maximally satisfied.. there will never be the perfect utopia.. but we can make the best laws possible.. such as curernt child abuse laws.. laws for children to be educated.. etc.. which our own people and society see fit.. this is different from the dictatorial model of governmet intruding ito family life.. since by the reprsentative model, if the people decide that the laws are not in their best mass self interest, tehy will vote the representatives out of office..

therefore.. individual self interest.. and mass self interest.. is all taken care of by one giant objectivist style system of rational self interest which is inherent in the american constitution ad the american way...

i hope that clears some shit up..

in other words.. keep freely following all your rational self interest entirely...

objectivism works

no need for mystic duty..

not all of life will always be purely utopian with all children being equal and everything great and rosy no matter what system you have.. even nature itself is set up that way.. we have the cards we are dealt.. life is not total about equality and utopia.. that is un natural and does not work as communist systems have proven

it is up to you and within your rational self interest how you wish to raise your children within the confines of the law.. and how you wish to interact with your family.. and there is no need for any sort of un secular, irrational mystical morality

vote

follow the law

[audiognostic]

also to add to this topic.. let me say this much.. for those of you who want to help a particualr group of others significantly

if you are creative enough..

i believe you can always find a way to have your cake and eat it too

for example.. lets say you are a music artist.. why not have a benefit concert.. where you dont sacrifice, you take in enough ticket prices to repay yourself back to ground zero and get enough food to eat and gas for the night and all that.. so you lose nothing.. and give all profits to a cause..

guess what that does?? it boosts your name in the eyes of the people, boosts your popularity, you can get on tv, people will think you are a "good person" and be more inclined to support you even though you never sacrificed yourself..

well they think you sacrificed your profits.. but you really didnit.. all you did is played on their beleif that altruism is good to your own selfish needs.. they think you lost something, when what you really gained is more album/merchandise sales/ more of a name, etc.. in the end

never let somebody convince you that selfishness is a bad place to come from..

you can ALWAYS use EXTREME selfishness to have your cake and eat it too.. as in the above example..

there was a company i have also heard of in a video which stated a foundation to give loans to poor african people..

unlike other companies who were heralded who gave loans with no gurantee of payback and expected no return profit, and did not come after those who did not repay, and did so non profit, this company did so with interst and to gain profit..and highly qualified potential loaners and came after thoes who did not pay back.. actually not only made a profit.. but made greater contribution to the africans thesmelves, because it motivated the africans to work harder and actually make soemthing of the money, so when they got paid back.. with interst.. that was a mark that hte loan was actually working to create productive work and success for the african people.. these people got bitched out interestingly enough for being "selfish".. in the end they created more productive workers than the non profit companies

or how about donating to yoru favorite charity or cause as a form of not having to pay taxes and tax deductable spending?? fuck straight donation.. write the shit off on your taxes!

you benefit, they benefit..

or how about letting a struggling very close friend stay at your house for a month, with the contract that he does your house work, cooking, and runs errands in order to work for his living in the time that he does not spend looking for a job

depending on how long he spends looking for a job vs helping you.. sure you might sacrifice a little.. but not significantly.. and the value trade off may just be worth it.. and you wont be left feeling resentful.. if it is in yoru self interst to help that friend.. at least you know he is not siting around on his ass eating your shit and drinking your beer while he is out of work and taking your money

and if he bitches about having to work.. that just lets you know his true intentions.. of laziness.. never support an unproductive person who doesnt WANT to work.. fuck guilt tripped altruism

win - win..

you can always have your cake and eat it too...

never let somebody bitch you out saying lose - win is the moral standard

[Selene]

Pope:

Out of curiosity, how old are you?

Are you a student? If so, what are you studying?

Do you live in one of O'bama's fifty-seven (57) states?

If not, what country do you live in?

Adam

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Somewhere near Brea, California. (Outside of LA.)

Michael

[Selene]

Excellent, then it is a short drive to the tar pits...

[audiognostic]

what is this about.. my spelling and grammar? give me a fucking break

how about the content of my ideas

your pet peeve may be spelling and grammar

my pet peeve is people whos brain frys when they read anything without perfect spelling and grammar

this is a god damn internet forum, i am not trying to write works of literature here

do not criticize me as you have in a previous post about my grammatical errors..nor the style of my writing composition.. for honestly.. i dont give a damn about your opinions on that

what i want to hear is your opinions about the content of my ideas

[Selene]

what is this about.. my spelling and grammar? give me a fucking break

how about the content of my ideas

your pet peeve may be spelling and grammar

my pet peeve is people whos brain frys when they read anything without perfect spelling and grammar

this is a god damn internet forum, i am not trying to write works of literature here

And you have succeeded admirably at posting sub-standard writing.

I guess your standards of effete pompousness only apply to all the competent people you intend to make judgments about.

How old are you child?

Do you go to school?

What have you accomplished?

Bring it on dude...

Adam

[audiognostic]

talk about immature..

ad hominem attacks...

criticism of the structure of my writing vs the actual content..

all nonsense.. totally irrelevant..

i dont have to answer any of your questions old man

what exactly is your personal beef against what i wrote that you get so mad about..

are you one of those posters on here thats actually against objectivism and pro altruism.. like ive seen quite a few posts of already

so far you have neither addressed nor effectively criticized even a single point i have made

[Selene]

Here child:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842

From the moment the first airplane crashed into the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11, 2001, the world has asked one simple and compelling question: How could it happen?

Three and a half years later, not everyone is convinced we know the truth. Go to Google.com, type in the search phrase "World Trade Center conspiracy" and you'll get links to an estimated 628,000 Web sites. More than 3000 books on 9/11 have been published; many of them reject the official consensus that hijackers associated with Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda flew passenger planes into U.S. landmarks.

Background • For background on this investigative feature, please click here.

Healthy skepticism, it seems, has curdled into paranoia. Wild conspiracy tales are peddled daily on the Internet, talk radio and in other media. Blurry photos, quotes taken out of context and sketchy eyewitness accounts have inspired a slew of elaborate theories: The Pentagon was struck by a missile; the World Trade Center was razed by demolition-style bombs; Flight 93 was shot down by a mysterious white jet. As outlandish as these claims may sound, they are increasingly accepted abroad and among extremists here in the United States.

To investigate 16 of the most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters who, together with PM editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core content of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military.

In the end, we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense. We learned that a few theories are based on something as innocent as a reporting error on that chaotic day. Others are the byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate. Only by confronting such poisonous claims with irrefutable facts can we understand what really happened on a day that is forever seared into world history.

Read more: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - World Trade Center - Pentagon - Flight 93 - Popular Mechanics

[audiognostic]

WHAT????????

i thought this forum would be filled with intelligent people who are into philosophy

but now i fear may have been mistaken

[PDS]

also to add to this topic.. let me say this much.. for those of you who want to help a particualr group of others significantly

if you are creative enough..

i believe you can always find a way to have your cake and eat it too

for example.. lets say you are a music artist.. why not have a benefit concert.. where you dont sacrifice, you take in enough ticket prices to repay yourself back to ground zero and get enough food to eat and gas for the night and all that.. so you lose nothing.. and give all profits to a cause..

guess what that does?? it boosts your name in the eyes of the people, boosts your popularity, you can get on tv, people will think you are a "good person" and be more inclined to support you even though you never sacrificed yourself..

well they think you sacrificed your profits.. but you really didnit.. all you did is played on their beleif that altruism is good to your own selfish needs.. they think you lost something, when what you really gained is more album/merchandise sales/ more of a name, etc.. in the end

never let somebody convince you that selfishness is a bad place to come from..

you can ALWAYS use EXTREME selfishness to have your cake and eat it too.. as in the above example..

there was a company i have also heard of in a video which stated a foundation to give loans to poor african people..

unlike other companies who were heralded who gave loans with no gurantee of payback and expected no return profit, and did not come after those who did not repay, and did so non profit, this company did so with interst and to gain profit..and highly qualified potential loaners and came after thoes who did not pay back.. actually not only made a profit.. but made greater contribution to the africans thesmelves, because it motivated the africans to work harder and actually make soemthing of the money, so when they got paid back.. with interst.. that was a mark that hte loan was actually working to create productive work and success for the african people.. these people got bitched out interestingly enough for being "selfish".. in the end they created more productive workers than the non profit companies

or how about donating to yoru favorite charity or cause as a form of not having to pay taxes and tax deductable spending?? fuck straight donation.. write the shit off on your taxes!

you benefit, they benefit..

or how about letting a struggling very close friend stay at your house for a month, with the contract that he does your house work, cooking, and runs errands in order to work for his living in the time that he does not spend looking for a job

depending on how long he spends looking for a job vs helping you.. sure you might sacrifice a little.. but not significantly.. and the value trade off may just be worth it.. and you wont be left feeling resentful.. if it is in yoru self interst to help that friend.. at least you know he is not siting around on his ass eating your shit and drinking your beer while he is out of work and taking your money

and if he bitches about having to work.. that just lets you know his true intentions.. of laziness.. never support an unproductive person who doesnt WANT to work.. fuck guilt tripped altruism

win - win..

you can always have your cake and eat it too...

never let somebody bitch you out saying lose - win is the moral standard

I believe you are mixing the "having your cake and eat it too" elements of epistomology and ethics.

On the epistomology side, Rand has said "the law of identity does not permit you to have your cake and eat it, too."

On the ethics side, Rand has said that there are no conflicts of interest among rational men. I actually think your post is focused upon the latter point: i.e., letting your pal who is down on his luck sleep on your couch may actually be in your self interest. I tend to think this is true, espeically if the guy is a pretty good pal. Does my distinction make any sense?

Regarding your grammar, punctuation, etc., I would suggest that you will be doing your readers a service if you pay more attention to such things. Nothing more, and nothing less. Paragraphs longer than train smoke are hard on the eyeballs, and usually not read very closely. Keep your chin up. At least you are thinking, which is more than can be said by most people the age you appear to be.

[audiognostic]

i would have to hear the explanation for the assertion of not having your cake and eating it too

since i think that is one of the dumbest, most self destructive statements ever made

i believe if you are creative enough.. you can almost always figure out how to have your cake and eat it too

plus it depends on the circumstance.. as in the case of actual cake.. i can have it.. and i can eat it too.. haha

or in the case of charity. you can donate to charity.. AND get a tax deduction.. again having your cake and eating it too

so there is no way this assertion can be made universally, except for perhaps in unique individual circumstances

i personally believe that creativity and will can out do anything.. if we have managed to fly to the moon and teleport atoms, coming from living in dirt and playing with sticks..

we can figure out how to have our cake and eat it too

either way i appreciate your rational response.. thinking and values and reason are very important to me, for without, many feel lost in this world, and turn to nonsense like religion and mysticism to give them a purpose in life and drive

also in the case of letting your friend stay over.. why not make him work during the period of his stay??

i dont think the term "Selfish" can ever be used as a criticism as long as nobody initiates force upon anybody else

i can be as selfish as i desire.. and i do not have to put anybodys, even my friends needs ahead of my own.. if it is in my self interest to make him scrub my toilet as a precondition to living at my home for free.. i shall make that contract.. guilt free.. and if he doesnt WANT to work for his stay.. i feel no empathy for him attempting to be a leech

to me everything is about SELF interest first.. NOT the interest of others

like ayn rand said, friendship ties are not valued above productive work

[PDS]

i would have to hear the explanation for the assertion of not having your cake and eating it too

since i think that is one of the dumbest, most self destructive statements ever made

i believe if you are creative enough.. you can almost always figure out how to have your cake and eat it too

plus it depends on the circumstance.. as in the case of actual cake.. i can have it.. and i can eat it too.. haha

or in the case of charity. you can donate to charity.. AND get a tax deduction.. again having your cake and eating it too

so there is no way this assertion can be made universally, except for perhaps in unique individual circumstances

i personally believe that creativity and will can out do anything.. if we have managed to fly to the moon and teleport atoms, coming from living in dirt and playing with sticks..

we can figure out how to have our cake and eat it too

either way i appreciate your rational response.. thinking and values and reason are very important to me, for without, many feel lost in this world, and turn to nonsense like religion and mysticism to give them a purpose in life and drive

Again, it would appear you are talking about ethics, and not epistomology. But ethics is not actually where Rand focused her use of the phrase.

I think you are using the phrase to discribe something more akin to Rand's formulation of the countless "value for value" transactions at the core of capitalism and/or the pursuit of one's rational self interest.

You are mixing apples and oranges.

[audiognostic]

never got into epistemology , only looked at ethics so far.. so i wouldnt understand exactly what you are saying

I would have to look into it first before i understand it, or believe it, or understand teh context behind the statement

[PDS]

never got into epistemology , only looked at ethics so far.. so i wouldnt understand exactly what you are saying

I would have to look into it first before i understand it, or believe it, or understand teh context behind the statement

Fair enough. Rand's epistomology ain't for the faint-hearted.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

In feel, therefore I emote and posture.

That is not the function of a discussion forum.

Michael

[audiognostic]

In feel, therefore I emote and posture.

That is not the function of a discussion forum.

Michael

tell that to Mr. Selene

i only come with cold hard reasoning

Edited September 24, 2012 by audiognostic

[Selene]

In feel, therefore I emote and posture.

That is not the function of a discussion forum.

Michael

tell that to Mr. Selene

i only come with cold hard reasoning

Pope:

Oh, I am so sorry to actually ask you to have a rational argument, supported by evidence on the other thread. You come back with a YouTube video of firefighters who stumble over their syntax and claim questions with no evidence.

Poor baby.

I will be much more gentle with your sensitive ego from here on.

I apologize for asking you to actually advance an argument supported by evidence that passes the normal probative tests of validity.

Adam

[caroljane]

i would have to hear the explanation for the assertion of not having your cake and eating it too

since i think that is one of the dumbest, most self destructive statements ever made

i believe if you are creative enough.. you can almost always figure out how to have your cake and eat it too

plus it depends on the circumstance.. as in the case of actual cake.. i can have it.. and i can eat it too.. haha

or in the case of charity. you can donate to charity.. AND get a tax deduction.. again having your cake and eating it too

so there is no way this assertion can be made universally, except for perhaps in unique individual circumstances

i personally believe that creativity and will can out do anything.. if we have managed to fly to the moon and teleport atoms, coming from living in dirt and playing with sticks..

we can figure out how to have our cake and eat it too

either way i appreciate your rational response.. thinking and values and reason are very important to me, for without, many feel lost in this world, and turn to nonsense like religion and mysticism to give them a purpose in life and drive

also in the case of letting your friend stay over.. why not make him work during the period of his stay??

i dont think the term "Selfish" can ever be used as a criticism as long as nobody initiates force upon anybody else

i can be as selfish as i desire.. and i do not have to put anybodys, even my friends needs ahead of my own.. if it is in my self interest to make him scrub my toilet as a precondition to living at my home for free.. i shall make that contract.. guilt free.. and if he doesnt WANT to work for his stay.. i feel no empathy for him attempting to be a leech

to me everything is about SELF interest first.. NOT the interest of others

like ayn rand said, friendship ties are not valued above productive work

Do you have a wide circle of friends? I get the impression that you do not host many house parties.

[Dglgmut]

This guy reminds me of Ali G.

[syrakusos]

Selene reminds me of Ally McBeal trying to be a parent to someone else's kid.

Audiognostic is unpolished, for sure. Either reply to him or not. Putting him down achieves nothing.

[Selene]

Selene reminds me of Ally McBeal trying to be a parent to someone else's kid.

Audiognostic is unpolished, for sure. Either reply to him or not. Putting him down achieves nothing.

Really?

[Dglgmut]

Selene reminds me of Ally McBeal trying to be a parent to someone else's kid.

Audiognostic is unpolished, for sure. Either reply to him or not. Putting him down achieves nothing.

Hopefully he's not most sensitive about his unpolishedness, or you'd be a big hypocrite.

... and the Ali G comment was meant to be a compliment.

[Brant Gaede]

Selene reminds me of Ally McBeal trying to be a parent to someone else's kid.

Audiognostic is unpolished, for sure. Either reply to him or not. Putting him down achieves nothing.

Really?

Well, Michael achieved a contradiction, a trite one, to be sure.

9-11 and the WTC is a hot button issue for Adam. Casual, uninformed crap is not welcome.

--Brant

[caroljane]

talk about immature..

ad hominem attacks...

criticism of the structure of my writing vs the actual content..

all nonsense.. totally irrelevant..

i dont have to answer any of your questions old man

are you one of those posters on here thats actually against objectivism and pro altruism.. like ive seen quite a few posts of already

There is a hilarious vid of Lil Wayne refusing to answer questions at a deposition, exhibiting this same attitude.

Mr Audio has already scoped out enemies, in a place where he expected only to encounter friends and fans who would recognise his talents and applaud his proper pride.

His grammar is actually fine, his spelling and punctuation are just standard rapper style.