Let There Be Lightbulbs

[C. Jordan]

Q: How many Objectivists does it take to change a light-bulb?

L. Peikoff: That is not funny. The answer should have been obvious; I see ominous parallels between your question and…

N. Branden: If we had only 5% more light, that would be a step towards improving one's self-esteem.

B. Branden: It was the nature of Rand's psychology not to tolerate a lack of light, when she was working. The bulb was changed.

D. Hsieh: Are you making fun of me? I knew you were a dishonest Þ®¡¢k who keeps evading the truth.

R. Bissell: It takes 1 to change the bulb, 2 true believers to deconstruct the immoral motives of the bulb-changer, 3 more true believers to slander the motives of anyone who would change the bulb, and 4 of us to rebut their comments in an intelligent manner, after which 5 true believers return to the assault…

E. Stuttle: The bulb won't be changed, given the in-fighting.

Kat: Do you mean real Objectivists? In that case, only one.

C. Sciabarra: Removing the old bulb, replacing it with a newer model, does not lead to a dialectical contradiction.

J. Valliant: Given that this question was asked by a man who has read the work of the Brandens, we must assume immoral motives. Certainly he gives no evidence of a burnt-out light bulb that would stand up in court.

M.S. Kelly: Amazing how many true believers have a hard time with actually changing bulbs. Given the emphasis Rand put on dealing with reality, I find that surprising. Dayyaam.

E. M. Toohey: Isn't that selfish of you? Worrying about whether you have enough light, when your poor brothers in Zambia don't have any light bulbs!!

G. Wynand: Toohey, change that bulb or you're fired!

P. Keating: My firm changed the bulb with (uh) a little help…

D. Francon-Keating-Wynand-Roark: The world doesn't deserve a new light bulb.

Dr. F. Ferris: Why do you think that there are light bulbs?

H. Rearden and/or E. Wyatt: A light-bulb? Either of us can electrify the whole neighbourhood. It only takes enough motive power.

E. Lawson: I couldn't help it, that the bulb went out. I need wider powers.

D. Taggart: I will hold out, without light, in order to maintain my world against the irrational.

K. Argounova: Life should be bright. I'd change the bulb, but the Soviet government has stolen all the bulbs.

A. Rand: Changed the bulb, and went back to writing. (I don't think she liked the joke.)

H. Roark: He didn't just change the bulb, he redesigned the ceiling and improved the rest of the house.

J. Galt: He changed the bulb for a newer model: an improved variety of glass and a filament of Rearden metal, such as would not burn out. It goes without saying that the electricity is now generated by Galt's own invention.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Chrys,

That's cute. Good job.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL...

Michael

[Fran]

V. funny. I really enjoyed that

[Chris Cathcart]

F. Weiss - No Kelleyite ever managed to fix a light bulb. Damn straight.

R. Campbell - Just one. Real Objectivists don't travel in claques. Denounce enough bulb-changers as pseudo-bulb-changers, and the orthodoxy may award you new bulbs, but don't count on it.

L. Perigo - Light bulbs over here are just fine; it's the dim bulbs over there who keep stumbling around in the dark.

E. Hudgins - Oh, happy happy joy joy, the light bulbs are working so well, things are so bright and all lit up! To celebrate, we're announcing another new name! Wheee!

R. Bidinotto - The creeps and guttersnipes obsess every last wa(n)king moment about others' light bulbs, without ever once bothering to lift a finger to change their own.

C. Fahey - Have you read PLCC?

P. Coates - Here I am, totally cleaning up on the lightbulb-changing debates. I changed your bulbs real good! Now that I've got my points out and they haven't been addressed, I'm the winner!

P. Donna - Mmmm, come over here and change my lightbulb, you cutie you!

G. Reisman -

Light Bulb Changing Requires Capitalism

by G. Reisman

How many times and in how many ways can it be said: bulb-changing -- indeed, the very existence of bulbs themselves -- depends on capitalism. All bulb-changing policymakers know this.

A. Reed - I had observed N. Branden many times playing with a sub-bulb-changer.

W. Sherk - El Bolbo Change-O! This way and that! Reee-reee-reee, eh-eh, eh-eh. Whooooaaaannggg!!!

R. Bissell - Oopsies, looks like some bulb-change crusaders slipped in their own poodle poop! Looks like Ms. Bulb-Screwer screwed the poodle on that one! Bulb Screwer? More like Boob Screwy, screwin' up again!

MS Kelly - I've got a novel argument about bulb screwing, i.e., turn the other bulb. What, what's wrong with it? It makes perfect sense, and it's totally how Rand viewed it, too! What's wrong with you people?

C. Sciabarra - Bulb change requires a multi-level, hierarchically-and-horizontally-cross-integrated, mutually-reciprocating, doubly-interpenetrating, synchronic-diachronic-chronic-chronic ontologicalepistemologicalethicalsociopolitical context. Without all that, bulb-change is a one-sided affair -- the changer without bulb, or bulb without changer, neither of which can thereby have identity as what they are. What we need are the prerequisites for total bulb change.

C. Cathcart - Who cares about how many Objectivists it takes? More importantly, how many lezbos does it take?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Chris,

I would like to welcome you to OL. I find many of your posts on other forums very intelligent, so I look forward to interacting with you. But I want to make sure we are on the same page.

I have mixed feelings about your post on this thread - not because it lampoons people (I don't mind that), but because the nature of the humor for a good deal of it involves the discussions on Solo Passion and Noodlefood as background. Since those people insult us as a profession, this gives your post a flavor of mocking, not a playful jab in the ribs.

Are you intimate enough with all of the people in your post for them to consider this as good fun, not mockery?

I am presuming right now that your intention is good fun. (Benefit of the doubt and all that...) But I believe you are talented enough to be even funnier, so I suggest editing a few of the entries to get them more into the person lampooned and less away from the bickering of the other sites.

To the people lampooned by Chris,

If anybody has any objections or is offended, please send me an e-mail: mikellyusabr@yahoo.com.

Michael

[Ellen Stuttle]

Just in case Chris changes his post or deletes it, I copied it so as not to lose it. I thought it was a gem. (Same compliment to Chrys's initial lampoon).

Ellen

___

[Chris Cathcart]

Yes, my posting was in good fun, of course. I was in a particularly geeked-up mode when I did it, too, which helped. It may be in the context of bickering in some cases, yes, but that can be when people say their most lampoonable stuff. In other cases, it can be lampoonable just because. I did address Ed H. directly on the other site about his pretty-rosey outlook on things -- positivity is healthy, though there's context to consider . . .

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Chris,

Please accept a warm welcome to OL. I look forward to your thoughts.

(btw - I couldn't stop laughing about turning the other light bulb...)

Michael