AnitaB86

Since loyalty to one's ideology create suffering for the innocent, the real question is whether the ideology is sound or not. A sound ideology may breed pride. However, an ideology may be unsound, yet one may be proud of their ideology, as they are unaware of the flaws.

What I mean by 'sound' is with respect to its internal and external consistency. A sound philosophy is one that is consistent and irrefutable by any logical argument. That is, it has no logical fallacies. An ideology may be quite convincing (apparently sound), but may suffer from a logical fallacy that ultimately reveals it to be either limited or incorrect. I'm simply saying that people may believe in ideologies that are extremely convincing, but not entirely correct; believing it to be infallible, they become proud. A true ideology does not rest on pride, but on the strength (soundness) of its internal and external consistency. It is mathematically true, and provably so. Me being proud of 2 + 2 = 4 does not make it any less or more equal to 4. It is simply so, irrespective of my beliefs (or disbelief) in it. That said, many ideologies are not provable, limiting their soundness - that does not however mean that people will stop believing in them.

All that said, the very definition of ideology, is not entirely clear. In the strictest sense an ideology is the science of ideas. But in the general use, it is a world-view, or a belief structure that shapes (one might say, biases) one's perspective.

What do you think? Is ideology sound or unsound? What is the definition of an ideology?

3. Yes, you are. You will stay with me forever. Wherever you are, whenever I see the name Pippi however spelled, I will see you splashing through the rainpuddles in your haste to be the first to jeer at the tackiness of the memorial service for Christina, and the everyday heroes with whom she died.

I will translate 1 and 2 into your native Fuckish although I am not fluent in it.

1. nobody gives me anything and other people get given everything and i deserve it more than they do i hate them

2. i had to look up amagram and i cant figure it out nothing the dunce writes makes any sense

Just what I needed : more trolls.

What happens when your mind starts to go?

I don't know why you're being so obtuse about this. Before you do anything to save your own life you need to value your own life. An ethical system that places personal survival at the apex of the value hierarchy provides the best moral justification for the necessity to save your own life.

Hypothetical:

Two individual cases: these individuals are shipwrecked alone on a desert island.

Individual #1: Regards the situation is hopeless, makes minimal attempts to survive, becomes emaciated, dies after a few weeks when rescuers fail to come. His bones and little else are discovered some years later when the island is explored.

Individual #2: Spends every waking moment trying to improve his situation, builds shelters, discovers every food source available makes good use of it. He lives for many years, decades, before dying of natural causes. Years after his death his island is discovered. His bones are discovered along with his very well built shelters, stone and wood sculptures, poems and prose written in stones and carvings, and messages to family and possible descendants. Observations about the details of life on this island for every year he lived, how he survived are recorded for whoever may find it.

Question: Who is the more moral person? Individual 1 or 2?

Morality does not apply. There was no question of wronging another person.

What does apply was the determination to survive. That is the exercise of a preference. Sort of like choosing between vanilla and strawberry. Or like between living and dying. Just a choice. And no other party was involved so it has no moral import whatsoever.

I would rather live than die. That has nothing to do with morality. Whereas choosing between stealing and not stealing. That is a moral choice. Why? Because stealing wrongs another.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Thanks, you all! Interesting posts!! I'm in a thinking mode now.

Pip, no worries.

If you dislike gender studies so much why are you pursuing it?

(Unfortunately anytime I hear the word "gender" my flesh starts to crawl-i am not sure why)

Pursuing it? What an interesting assumption.

I'm not.

AnitaB,

If you understand the objectivist ethics (as defined in 'the Virtue of Selfishness'), there is no hesitation to call yourself a believer in objective existence and reason/rationality (what I would say are the fundamentals of Objectivism).

And, if asked about one's philosophy, what answer could avoid 'giving labels a surface to adhere to'?

Mike

I'm not criticizing the philosophy at all but its one thing to like the philosophy and its another to label yourself as such. What I keep wondering is, why must we have labels, period? I'm just asking for a rational answer, nothing to avoid.

Welcome to OL Anita:

What brings you to OL?

Are you a student or a working slave for the state?

Additionally, where do you hale from?

Adam

Thank you for the warm welcome, Adam!

I've been looking for an independent forum for some time now as I have been growing a bit tired of the Gender&Womens Studies section on Yahoo Answers (a gender war there, I tell you!).

I'm a student and a worker :-) in Texas!

You?

Anita:

Thanks.

A mediator, divorce and family as a specialty. NY City boy all my life except for four (4) years in Virginia and the last three (3) in New Jersey.

What are you studying?

Is it true that the mantra in women and gender studies is:

"If a man speaks in the forest and there is not a woman there to hear him.....ready....

Is he still wrong?

Adam

Hardly. The mantra of GS, if you are a feminist is " Feminism means equality." They often use the reduction fallacy and fail miserably since I've called them out several times. You cannot possibly be for equality when all your posts have been for the equality of women. Its all an appeal to emotions and I can only tolerate rational posts.

Welcome to OL Anita:

What brings you to OL?

Are you a student or a working slave for the state?

Additionally, where do you hale from?

Adam

Thank you for the warm welcome, Adam!

I've been looking for an independent forum for some time now as I have been growing a bit tired of the Gender&Womens Studies section on Yahoo Answers (a gender war there, I tell you!).

I'm a student and a worker :-) in Texas!

You?

Or do you not mind giving labels a surface to adhere to you?

What? I dont think I like your tone-it seems condescending. If you could prove me wrong I would be happily surprised.

What do you mean by "or do you not mind being a surface for labels"?

Are you an Objectivist?

I'm sorry if I appeared condescending in my post but I assure you that was not my intent. I am just wondering why people are quick to assign labels to others as well as themselves. Just a wonder - nothing more, nothing less. A forum, after all is an exchange of ideas, not about spreading propaganda or bullying others into their beliefs (I've experienced this in another forum).

To answer your question, no I am not.

Or do you not mind giving labels a surface to adhere to you?