1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Are any of you political objectivists?

Discussion in 'Chit Chat' started by edgy, Oct 7, 2014.

  1. edgy

    edgy Guest

    You don't have to answer if you know you're not

    But are any of you (politically) objectivist?
     
  2. SemiCharmedLife

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2013
    Messages:
    3,062
    Likes Received:
    85
    Location:
    KY
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Pretty sure I would get banned and/or arrested if I posted what I would do to Ayn Rand if I ever met her.
     
  3. resu

    Advisor Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    4,968
    Likes Received:
    395
    Location:
    Oklahoma City
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Some people
    I dislike the term. "Objectivism" is quite subjective in it's rationalities. Philosophers have debated for centuries on things like the problem of evil or on what is the optimal political system. I much prefer pragmatism and egalitarianism (though I'm quite left-leaning), and I think objectivism (and it's relative libertarianism) can often be anti-egalitarian.
     
  4. Ryujin

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2014
    Messages:
    1,561
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Location Location
    The more and more I read into it, the more I go 'uhhhhhh'
     
  5. One Man Army

    Full Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2014
    Messages:
    618
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Essex, UK
    My theory is that Ayn Rand's brain was taken out minutes after birth, due to severe post-natal complications. The doctors then replaced it with a damp sponge, fully expecting that she wouldn't survive the night.

    Remarkably, she did pull through but she lived her whole life with a fucking sponge for a brain. That alone would account for the sheer stupidity of her ideas.
     
  6. Hexagon

    Full Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    8,558
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Earth
    This.
     
  7. Wuggums47

    Wuggums47 Guest

    I know what you mean. The only words I can think of to describe her starts with selfish b- and aren't very feminist. Selfishness like that is disgusting to me, our purpose in life is not simply to please ourselves.
     
  8. MintberryCrunch

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sherman Oaks, CA (orig. Denver)
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Politically, no. I agree with her metaphysical ideas, but not with her political ones.
     
  9. itsonlyrelative

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2013
    Messages:
    330
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Virginia (Washington D.C Area)
    Aren't her political ideas extremely similar to the concepts of libertarian ideals?
     
  10. SomeLeviathan

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    651
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    the natural condition of humankind
    no.

    I can't get on with Rand because epistemologically she shares an awful lot of space with the Logical Positivists who were rightfully trounced by Kuhn, Popper, and Quine. Rand's "philosophy" is less fleshed out than that of the log-pos tradition, while still sounding basically the same.

    I have a lot of problems with Rand.

    1. She treats Kant as if he is the font of all subjectivism, which is just wrong. It's a failure of understanding Kantian epistemology.

    2. The jist I got from her objectivist epistemology is if you can't offer a percise defintion of everything you say (the essence of what a table is for example), you're full of it. She fails to address Wittgenstein's attack on essentialism in definitions offered in Philosophical Investigations, which more or less annihilates the idea he put forward in his early work Tractatus Philosophicus, that you can offer exact atomistic language (although he doesn't use the phrase atomist) definitions for everything, and if you can't, you ought to not talk. This position on language is wrong and Rand fails to offer any sort of criticism for Wittgenstein's argument against definitional essentialism that actually works.

    3. Even if I accept her epistemological positions (which I won't ever because there are a load of holes in it), I can't get on with ethical egoism. It supposes that people ought to do what benefits them. This form of consequentialism is loaded with problems. As opposed to utilitarian consequentialism which is agent neutral, ethical egoism is agent-centered. The problem being this doesn't respect any sort of conception of rights. If I ought to do what benefits me, ought I not stop to help someone after I hit them with my car if it would make me late to work?


    What Rand is describing when she says something is objective, that it would exist without humans, is not objective. that is, philosophically, intrinsic, not objective.

    Our moral intuitions, as pointed out by John Rawls in A Theory of Justice are largley deontological.


    Rand ultimately comes down to being some sort of Minarchist, but not of the Nozickean variety. These sort of governments should almost always collapse into larger governments as the need to pay for police, court systems, and an armed forces is realized as a serious problem.

    So on any level I am not an objectivist because I reject Rand's epistemology as a shittier version of logical-positivism.

    I also have an issue with how when she's axe-grinding about philosophers in some way she ends up making their arguments later on. Like she complains about Kantian ethics, but argues at one point that if everyone in society were moochers, it would suck, so we all ought not to be moochers, which is appealing to Kantian deontological ethics to make a moral ought.

    In case it wasn't really made clear in this post, ethically I'm a Rawlsian deontologist, which influences my politics of self describing as a Rawlsian liberal with non-Marxist socialist leanings. Epistemologically I'm partial to Kant as well.

    religiously I'm a Hegelian/Schleieacherean.


    I sort of have a thing for Germans Philosophers

    And I have huge beef with Rand's characterizations of Kant
     
    #10 SomeLeviathan, Oct 7, 2014
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2014
  11. asdfghjk

    asdfghjk Guest

    "fuck you got mine"

    so yes
     
  12. SomeLeviathan

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    651
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    the natural condition of humankind
    Rand rejects libertarianism while parroting their talking points almost to a t.
     
  13. BryanM

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Messages:
    2,894
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Columbia, Missouri
    Gender:
    Genderqueer
    Gender Pronoun:
    They
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I'm the polar opposite of Ayn Rand.
     
  14. Sitri

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    Messages:
    990
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Aceldama
    Gender:
    Male
    So... you're a racist that supports capital punishment, the draft, and censorship?

    Don't get me wrong, I can't stand Ayn Rand, but just because I feel her her reasons were wrong, doesn't mean every idea from her mouth is.

    Ayn Rand is important, for the only way to find yourself is to hear every argument, listen to every side, and filter it off from yourself. You do no service to yourself by completing blocking out the philosophies of someone because you disagree with what is initially heard. Listen, reflect, and then determine the truth, or at least the facts.
     
  15. SpaceSuit

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2014
    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Mid-West Ohio
    Gender:
    Female
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I think that something can be gained from reading her writing (not entirely sure what, though), but future political templates is not one of those things.
     
  16. MisterTinkles

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2014
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The World is My Chewtoy
    I object to all political structures, except mine.
     
  17. BryanM

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Messages:
    2,894
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Columbia, Missouri
    Gender:
    Genderqueer
    Gender Pronoun:
    They
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Clarification: I reject Rand's idea of political objectivism.

    And I have read up on Rand's ideologies, and I reject a supermajority of them. Just because I haven't read every single book she read or listened to every interview she's ever had doesn't make me ignorant of what her views are.
     
  18. SomeLeviathan

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    651
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    the natural condition of humankind
    You don't need to read her drivvel to get the point.
     
  19. An Gentleman

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2013
    Messages:
    1,673
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Cali
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    A few people
    We the Living was interesting enough.
    I can tell you that I'm right of center and that I agree with some of her points but not all of them.
    Honestly, I need to think about it.
     
    #19 An Gentleman, Oct 7, 2014
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2014
  20. QueerTransEnby

    Full Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2014
    Messages:
    3,708
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Gender:
    Genderqueer
    Gender Pronoun:
    They
    Sexual Orientation:
    Other
    Out Status:
    Some people
    Yes, I'm a log cabin libertarian. :slight_smile: I like Ayn Rand and Rand Paul. Go Rand squared. lol.