Ideas on Chewing

[Stryder]

Hi all.

I'm a long time fan of Ayn Rand and loved reading her work and watching The Fountainhead. I became a fan because she saw many of the things I did and held most of the values I do but she, like most of you, got tangled by her own open-ended to ambiguous definitions backed by what seems to be a sociological constriction anchored around a she said, "..." so it is right, true, and/or logical premise. Several times throughout this forum I find this "arguement of intimidation"(as defined in The Ayn Rand Lexicon) and have found none yet that have received even a rebutal for it. After 10 years since the first time I read Atlas Shruged I had hoped things would have been fixed, atleast some of the fundamentals. Instead I find that nothing had been done and that the bromides that plagued the ARI since it's inception are still hampering the critical thinking base needed to see the way.

Ideas on chewing:

Reverse the transpositions of objective and subjective so that the universal definition is the same regaurdless of one's approach.. rather than having to force people to read a book like Atlas Srugged or The Fountainhead so they can have a clue when the terms are used.

Piece together the obligatory Objectivist Theory of Knowledge, just as posted in "FAQ: What is the Objectivist Theory of Knowledge (Epistemology)?" in the epistimology section of this forum so that it is whole, single, and absolute.. rather than a derivitive of a potential. It's like reading the bible, leaves you to put the pieces together without continuity and closier. An integral flaw of this nature is one of the most distortive of its kind and is one of the main reasons objectivism hasn't changed.

Philios Sophias, love of wisdom, brotherly love ... wisdom, is useless but to those whom hold that love and is not an -ism. So, Objectivism is only a club for like minds and not a basis for moral, logical, or social obligation. It is a tool to build them so to obtain a finished project that will be mass produced for the betterment of mankind. Ayn Rand said something along the lines of "The point of philosophy is to get to where it is not needed anymore." and I see it the same. Forgive me for not recalling where I found that, if you know where she said it or can prove she didn't, please show me.

Please take your time and chew on these as I look forward to learning more about you.

Stryder

*Admin, just FYI, didn't know where else to post this. Please move it as needed.*

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

*Admin, just FYI, didn't know where else to post this. Please move it as needed.*

I found a suitable place.

Michael