books

I have a copy of Atlas Shrugged. I just read the Galt speech.

A return to Homer, yeah. The drama of battles among individuals, great heroes, wrath of the gods, strength and cunning. The narrative seems too neat for me. Not only is western philosophy a lot richer than Plato, but Plato himself is a lot richer than Republic.

 

Nice. I wonder how they'll pull that off on film. Rumor has it, Part III is supposed to be a musical. lol

 

I'm no political philosopher, but I do have vague libertarian leanings. Objectivism, though...it seems to come out of nowhere. I don't think rights can be objectively derived from survival, and I don't think the ideal of rational self-interest in a market economy scales down to personal relationships. On a person-to-person level you should be charitable, communal, loving, etc. Or at least, you're probably going to end up miserable if you aren't. Just my two cents.

 

Agreed^

It seems everyone thinks everything is a "right" these days, and it is beyond presumptuous. Often I'm lambasted on this forum for being conceited - which I AM, but not to the extent that I think you'd have to be in order to support objectivism.

 

Well it's not that I don't believe in rights, it's just that my intuitions are more classical/Lockean. But like I said, I'm no political philosopher. Honestly, I haven't thought enough about it. Deriving rights from the right to life seems like a naturalistic fallacy to me. Better to start from value, not life.

 

You , me, and everyone else will end up even more miserable if we are to sacrifice a value to a non-value.

Just mine.

 

I was referring to the idea that that there needs to be an intellectual revolution by way of Neo-Aristotelian thought.

Your rights are inherent and your choice to believe or not believe in rights is an exercise of your rights.

 

Yeah, like a "right" to health care and a "right" to a "free" education. Someone demanding that someone else be a slave to them - to work for free/by compulsion. Damn right, presumptuous as hell.

 

I saw a billboard proclaiming that chocolate sauce on an ice cream sundae is a right. What would you (and Rand) say to this?

 

That you can't both have your cake and eat it too.

But seriously; it is a choice, though an essential one.

 

Aristotle was a statist...?

 

No. the other way around.

Statism descended from Platonism. Only Aristotle decreed that the individual was the highest value. Plato doesn't even know what an individual is.

 

Well, I would agree about Plato. His account of the polis being analogous to a person in Republic makes me think that he does not properly respect the separation of individuals, and that's a recipe for rights violations.

But I dunno, Aristotle? He's like the Bible, so I'm sure people have made anarchistic arguments using him as a source, but who knows. Personally, I'd prefer not to have a return to anything - people have always been miserable.

 

I believe mankind needs less of both "philosophers" and "priests". A less ideological world would be nice at this point.

 

Ideology permeates everything!

 

I have never seen an amount of what would best be described as useless mental masturbation as the one I have seen in the field of "philosophy". Having said that, I don't think that you quite see what I meant with the word ideological in this context.

 

Hence the prefix NEO. Plato has dominated for too long and too wide. So let's try an objective reality based idea as a foundation and the individual as the only significant entity for once.

You know, people can hate Ayn Rand all they want; but like her or not- Ayn Rand was the first person in history who started ripping mysticism out of philosophy.

 

Are you serious?

 

Well, I am naturally attracted to masturbation. That's why I like progressive rock.

 

fair enough