There are indeed moral standards.

[John Tate]

There has been a lengthy debate over moral standards here that I have looked at. It seems a bunch of moral relativists don't believe they can exist physically or scientifically. Indeed, morality does exist physically. To say it does not is to say our consciousness is powerless to act on the physical world - and by that implication to say morality has no physical evidence is to negate consciousness. Any action by rational beings must be chosen consciously, and those conscious choices to be moral must simply allow for other beings to be selfish in Ayn Rand's philosophy. That is where others come into the picture of the philosophy.

There is no special exemption for John Galt, there is no exception from morality in Objectivism for anyone. If you think Galt has an exemption in Atlas Shrugged because he doesn't behave altruistically, you are not understanding the literature at all and you are assuming morality is altruism. Objectivist morality as a standard is based around the observable fact that we think independently, exist as separate entities, and possess a rational faculty. We exist independently, so we are a self. We exist as separate entities, so we must think for ourselves. We posses a rational faculty (the mind, dummy) so we can look after ourselves. There are billions all with these three qualities. So if a code morality demands I don't think for myself, and demands I look after others it demands I renounce my minds responsibility over my own life as a moral rule. Selfishness in Ayn Rand's philosophy is an Objective principle based around the fact we are individuals, the fact that we have a self.

Her moral code demands people live with purpose and sustain their own lives. Her moral code standard is the self. Altruism and any philosophy that demands collectivism and sacrifice as moral, demands we are tied to arbitrary groups (arbitrary because a group exists out of individuals conscious decisions to belong or make those belong - groups are not natural but essentially man-made in that they are consciously decided). The individual however is an objective fact, which exists through nature. Psychological science generally tends to point in the direction of individuals, and one could say Ayn Rand's standard of morality is the only one that has a scientific basis.

When selfishness is said to be her philosophy, it indeed is. Where do others come into this? Others must also be able to exist selfishly which demands a code for living: morality. We must respect others rights to be a self, and protect our own right to be a self (ie: self-defense).

John Tate

[Brant Gaede]

John, you're trying a little too hard and forcing your arguments. For instance, "Her morality demands ...." When morality does that, someone has their hands on your throat.

--Brant

[John Tate]

John, you're trying a little too hard and forcing your arguments. For instance, "Her morality demands ...." When morality does that, someone has their hands on your throat.

--Brant

Nice strawman, it should be obvious that isn't what I mean.

[tjohnson]

...groups are not natural but essentially man-made in that they are consciously decided). The individual however is an objective fact, which exists through nature.

What about a family of brothers and sisters, is this not an objective, natural group?

[Brant Gaede]

John, you're trying a little too hard and forcing your arguments. For instance, "Her morality demands ...." When morality does that, someone has their hands on your throat.

--Brant

Nice strawman, it should be obvious that isn't what I mean.

Someone shouldn't have to rewrite your post to get your meanings, which was my meaning.

--Brant

Edited January 29, 2009 by Brant Gaede

[BaalChatzaf]

...groups are not natural but essentially man-made in that they are consciously decided). The individual however is an objective fact, which exists through nature.

What about a family of brothers and sisters, is this not an objective, natural group?

In the days of yore before our technology became ever super sophisticated, the extended family was the social unit consistent with our long term survival as a species. In more modern times the Nation State has become the substitute for the extended family. It is not a good imitation, but that is what we have.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[tjohnson]

In the days of yore before our technology became ever super sophisticated, the extended family was the social unit consistent with our long term survival as a species. In more modern times the Nation State has become the substitute for the extended family. It is not a good imitation, but that is what we have.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Does "natural" have to be limited to common dna? What exactly is natural for man? Should we expect what is natural for man to the same as what is natural for animals or can this be pathological for man? Weighty questions

[Brant Gaede]

Man------------natural-----------unnatural

Food-----------organic-----------unorganic(?!)

--Brant

[BaalChatzaf]

Does "natural" have to be limited to common dna? What exactly is natural for man? Should we expect what is natural for man to the same as what is natural for animals or can this be pathological for man? Weighty questions

Humans are animals.

The family is the most efficient unit for improving the chances of a new-born to survive until he/she is autonomous and able to care for his/her self. A species that did not promote the survival of its young would soon be extinct. There are two ways of doing this. Either produce a lot of young so even if a small percentage survive species survival is probable or have few offspring and take good care of them. Humans use the latter strategy. Fish and insects use the former strategy.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[tjohnson]

Humans are animals.

The family is the most efficient unit for improving the chances of a new-born to survive until he/she is autonomous and able to care for his/her self. A species that did not promote the survival of its young would soon be extinct. There are two ways of doing this. Either produce a lot of young so even if a small percentage survive species survival is probable or have few offspring and take good care of them. Humans use the latter strategy. Fish and insects use the former strategy.

Ba'al Chatzaf

All true but not what I was talking about.