|
okinawatricam
Feb 12, 2004, 7:45 AM
Post #1 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2003
Posts: 420
|
Alright, I know it's a great book, but why doe it appeal to so many climbers?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
vegastradguy
Feb 12, 2004, 7:47 AM
Post #2 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 5919
|
it is a great book, and appeals to alot of people.
didnt know it appealed to climbers so much. most of my climber friends havent read a book in years......(i said most, not all!)
i'll be interested to hear the responses on this one.
|
|
|
|
|
goodwill
Feb 12, 2004, 8:09 AM
Post #3 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2004
Posts: 28
|
I agree with both posts so far... it is an excellent book, but I also didn't know it was popular among climbers. I'll be curious to see how many others from this site respond about this.
|
|
|
|
|
skiclimb
Feb 12, 2004, 8:17 AM
Post #4 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 11, 2004
Posts: 1938
|
Cause Dagny was hot...
We all think we are Francisco or Ragnar
And perhaps most of us would prefer the Gov't to "get the hell out of my way"
It's Big therefore a great book for storm days...
|
|
|
|
|
supertopoz
Feb 12, 2004, 12:04 PM
Post #5 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 12, 2003
Posts: 25
|
John Galt is a selfish idot who could not cope with the real world so he created his own.
If the selfish life style is truely your own phylosophy then you are missing some of the most important aspects of humanity, just as Ayn Rand missed some of the most humain aspects of humanity.
She failed in many ways to see the big picture. Many of her ideas paint a picture which can never exist for the simple reason that it is so difficult to place exact value on some skills, emotions and friendships that are priceless.
Husband says to wife "oh! yes darling I will clean the car for you, but you must pay me in gold coins" what bullshit is that, you have have to live in a life where for every little task you do, you expect something in return."
If it is climbers that like John Galt then they are laughing in the face of the natural environment that we hold so dear to us. You with OBJECTIVISM it is all or nothing. I want to build a new hotel in Yosimete valley I want it to be big and I want you to pay me lots of money to stay there. This hotel will provide jobs for thousands and put food on my table I don't care what is does to the in terms of changing a natural environment, but I will use the latest technology to make sure it doesn't produce too much polution. You see there are all ways two sides to a story. While I am being selfish doing the things I want another man is loosing out. If he does what he wants then someone else can't, the valley could work in ATLAS SHRUGGED, but you will notice that it misses the point of humanity. That every one is different and everyhuman needs some thing different from the next. It might work on local scale but it can not work on a world wide scale.
OPJECTIVEISM in the United states will always fail because on a global scale people live in wonderful comunities which get on with each other as big groups of familes and friends. If Ayn Rand had lived any place outside of the westeren world for any length of time she would have seen that her ideas where just that, "her ideas".
That my friends is why John Galt is so far from "Jesus, Mohammed, Budda, and any other majour religious leader" They all teach too live in harmony with those around you. Ayn Rand does teach to love your self and Jesus taught the same, Budda taught to love everything around you. But none of the world's greatest thinkers have ever said never work unless you get paid for it. The best gift is always given when we expect nothing in return.
If a climber likes John Gault then he has failed to fully understand the whole concept of what John Gault stands for.
He was a selfish, egotistic, who thought he was better than the whole world and didn't really give a toss about anyone unless they thought like he did.
I have never met a single climber outside of the Unitedstates who is like that.
My spelling AND grammer is bad, but I choose it to be that way, I expect nothing in return for my words, and if you don't like what I say then you may retrun to your own life and not join me in mine.
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Feb 12, 2004, 12:14 PM
Post #6 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
who is he anyway???
|
|
|
|
|
dontjinxme
Feb 12, 2004, 12:49 PM
Post #7 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 18, 2003
Posts: 109
|
Yea right.....good question...
Who is this selfish no good for nothing lump of cow dung.
Never heard of the guy.
|
|
|
|
|
justin
Feb 12, 2004, 12:57 PM
Post #8 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 20, 2003
Posts: 196
|
Personally I prefered "The Fountainhead" though I don't completely agree with Ayn Rand.
Zimmering's "Contradictions In American Capital Punishment" is a blinder too, though that's a personnal recommendation and not related to Ms Rand's work.
|
|
|
|
|
uasunflower
Feb 12, 2004, 1:45 PM
Post #9 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 11, 2003
Posts: 1563
|
I liked the book and do not see why it would contradict climbing (although didnt think untill now about it appealing specifically to climbers). Supertopoz, i had a different understanding of the whole picture, and thought it more honest than selfish. It certainly gets controversial when you push it to the extremes like "what would happen to civil order without gov't (police)" or all the enviromental issues, however the book doesnt go against the natural environment and is not at all as mercantile as you make it sound. What it puts into focus is individual achievement and its recognition, and this could be relevant to many aspects of our lives, certainly to climbing.
Look i.e. at the relationship between the climbing partners. You say that "the best gift is always given when we expect nothing in return", however what motivates me in my inner self to belay someone is the fact that then he will belay me in return. It is a simplification of the whole climbing bond for sure, however i wouldn't climb with someone if the only thing i'd do would be belay. I do not need him to pay me in gold coins for the service provided (Rand lived still in the times of gold standards :) ), the satisfaction from climbing does the trick, but i do not see this motivation as wrong(=selfish in your understanding) per se. All our actions are motivated by self-intrest one way or another, and aknowledging it is plain honest.
Yes, US is the most individualistic country of them al' but that doesn't mean this philosophy could not apply anywhere else. If you look at the collapses in most developping countries, their situations are much closer to what Rand describes than you would imagine. You don't need to go abroad either, just look at the US war policy lately and compare with what Ayn Rand says about gov't-organized conflicts. Welcome looters. Oh, and what's that about "global wonderful communities of friends and family" - have you read any news lately on say any African country :lol: ?
Anyway, in conclusion, i think the main idea people usually misunderstand in Rand's philosophy is that it's not a zero-sum game (if someone wins, someone else has to starve), but a win-win situation (in utopic world of atlas at least) she defends. And don't mix philosophy and religion, it's a neverending chasm :wink:
ps - i just saw "touching the void" and you could perfectly justify Simon's actions through Ayn's philosophy. Ayn's ideas apply well in the mountains, maybe because we are reduced to our basics out there, maybe because we are more honest while climbing...
|
|
|
|
|
supertopoz
Feb 13, 2004, 1:46 AM
Post #10 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 12, 2003
Posts: 25
|
uasunflower you, are right in all that you say because what you say deals with Ayn Rands philosophy in it's ideal state.
I am sorry for mixing in some religion, but many of the greatest religious leaders were essentialy promoting their own version of the "Truth".
I do follow the news extensivily and try to take a constant opjective point of view. Thus I never watch CNN or any other American news broadcast. The looters do exist and it is they who hold 90 percent of the worlds wealth. I do also believe that hard work should be rewarded. But I do not believe that Ayn Rand presents a phylosophy which can work out side of her own sphere of influence.
As for climbing I have read many of Joe simpsons books and he is the prime example of egotisim. Quite often it was his selfish ego that created many of the problems that he found himself in. Had he for one moment stopped and thought about what he was doing then, he might have slowed down a little and learned more abot mountainering and the why's and where for's. Don't miss understand, I don't have nothing against his system. But you can see that had he aplied Ayn Rands thinking, then he would have taken the where with all to drink more water and eat more food, or turned back.
My problem with Ayn's thinking is that it is based on helping ourselves which works fine in a argerian, healthy, fit, suntaned society. But where poor people are involved, where the sick and the needy are involved. Ayn presents them as the looting people, and I agree that that sometimes it is there own fault. But so long as there are a whole countries of people doing what they want to when they want to, making money as their single aim. Then there are always going to be the less well of doing the hard work to make those people rich.
And don't tell me we can all be rich because we can't, basicaly because then money looses it's value.
Have you, uasunflower have you ever tried going climbing with a group of people where you only belayed all day. If you don't like this stlye then you have never visited Asia.
What is wrong with gaining satisfaction from helping another man to achieve his goal. Sure he can reach the goal by himself, but he will surly be great full for a friend who helped him with out expecting a single thing in return. That is how the society of climbing friends I live works. We all have our goals and aims, but we all put our best effort into helping the next man achieve his.
That my friend is KARMA and LOVE, Give what you would like to recieve, but EXPECT nothing in return.
Climbing is a poor example to which to apply OBJECTIVISM because the end reuslt is nothing, you have produced nothing you have gained nothing material.
Which is the oposite from OBJECTIVISM. Climbing is about self fullfillment and self developement, but none of that in it's self gains any thing material.
As for those professional climbers, who in the upper percentile of the climbing comunity, do they climb for the gain of material wealth? it is hardly a good carrer move to spend twenty years getting to the top of you profession to be rewared by demanding sponsors and snearing peers because you only climb for material gain. Then along comes a young upstart who is better than you any way.
I wish to engage in a dicussion which clearly contradicts what as say and is based upon the advantages of so called OBJECTIVISM
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Feb 13, 2004, 2:28 AM
Post #11 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Atlas Shrugged was 500 pages TOO LONG.
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
How many times, over and over and over, must the same point be made?
Well, about 1000 pages worth I guess.
Who is John Galt?
Who the fuck cares! Freakin drivel
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
iamthewallress
Feb 13, 2004, 2:41 AM
Post #12 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 2463
|
I bought this horrendous Ode to Selfishness on tape because for my dollar it got me the most listening hours which translated to the most trips to Yosemite and back. It took endurance to get through the first few tapes. I was praying for a semi to swerve into my lane and put me out of my misery by half way. Two sides of a tape were dedicated to John Galt's soliloquy. I kept hitting fast forward, but the pain wouldn't end. I actually did finish listening to all 20 tapes (or something like that...) Disgusting philosophy. Terrible book.
|
|
|
|
|
gravitytheory
Feb 13, 2004, 2:42 AM
Post #13 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2003
Posts: 261
|
I think its a type of Beer (John Galt's Malt Beverage), hence its appeal to climbers.
But seriously, Ayn Rand's philosophy was an extreme reaction to her experience growing up in the Soviet Union. Hence the complete antithesis of "equality" among men (and women). That said, she does make some good points, and her style is fun to read because it is so extreme. Read the book, if only because the title is so darn cool. "Atlas Shrugged". I love mythological and Biblical reference in literature. It hits some sort of primal region of the brain where the archetypes dwell in their abstact glory. Ahhh, the beauty of the cultural evolution of humanity... now if we would just stop screwing over the environment we could get somewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
noodlearms
Feb 13, 2004, 3:29 AM
Post #14 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2002
Posts: 145
|
Atlas Shrugged is a great book, if you're 16 and looking for an oversimplified view of life that you can use to justify strutting around, being a jerk to people, and feeling superior.
Rand talked like she had cornered the market on reason -- to the point of naming her philosophy "Objectivism". But her philosophy is not based on reason. She was, in fact, a champion rationalizer. She started with an image of what she wanted an "ideal" man to be, and simply ignored any evidence to the contrary.
Her fundamental mistake is her assertion -- without any justification from biology or psychology -- that man is a rational being. That all emotions come from reason.
Even the incredible train wreck of her own personal life, the result of attempting to put her theories into practise, did not make her change her mind. She died an adolescent.
I still love her first novel, We the Living. It's mostly her emotional reaction to the life she led in the Soviet Union. It was in her subsequent attempt to construct a philosophy to justify those emotions that she lost touch with reality.
|
|
|
|
|
mtn_eagle
Feb 13, 2004, 3:36 AM
Post #15 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 25, 2002
Posts: 88
|
IMO people enjoy reading Ayn Rand if they have a big enough ego (or imagination) to think that she writing about them when she makes characters like Galt and Roark. The reality is however that Rand would place most of those dreamers at the back of the line.
I suggest Don Quixote, which I think is much more to a climber's taste and will keep you entertained for a few big walls.
|
|
|
|
|
noodlearms
Feb 13, 2004, 3:39 AM
Post #16 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2002
Posts: 145
|
In reply to: IMO people enjoy reading Ayn Rand if they have a big enough ego (or imagination) to think that she writing about them when she makes characters like Galt and Roark.
I can testify from my own adolescent attitude way back when that you are right on the money.
|
|
|
|
|
justincoyle
Feb 13, 2004, 3:51 AM
Post #17 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2003
Posts: 11
|
I read a poll a few years ago that said Atlas Shrugged was the second most influencial book in peoples lives. It came in right behind the Bible.
|
|
|
|
|
noodlearms
Feb 13, 2004, 3:56 AM
Post #18 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2002
Posts: 145
|
Yeah, and it made Officer Barbrady quit reading on South Park....
|
|
|
|
|
jv
Feb 13, 2004, 5:11 AM
Post #19 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2003
Posts: 363
|
What's this doing in the General forum? And the Hall Monitors are usually so efficient.
JV
|
|
|
|
|
okinawatricam
Feb 16, 2004, 6:18 AM
Post #20 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2003
Posts: 420
|
It seems that the debate goes on
|
|
|
|
|
okinawatricam
Feb 16, 2004, 7:02 AM
Post #21 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2003
Posts: 420
|
I agree that the Fountain Head does a much better job at showing how objectivism works.
While it i true that she often omit certain characters from her book that are present in the real world. Overall, her ideas are good.
|
|
|
|
|
drkodos
Feb 16, 2004, 7:06 AM
Post #22 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2002
Posts: 2935
|
In reply to: What's this doing in the General forum? JV
There is of yet no Overhyped-slush-for-pseudo-intellectuals forum to which it can be fitted properly.
|
|
|
|
|
justin
Feb 16, 2004, 10:43 AM
Post #23 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 20, 2003
Posts: 196
|
nonetheless, I'm glad I read 'em and popular culture does make a few references to Ms Rand. I'd think one would be at a disadvantage for not at least being aware of her treatise.
|
|
|
|
|
yay_chris
Feb 16, 2004, 12:50 PM
Post #24 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2004
Posts: 141
|
Ayn Rand made it very easy for a reader to believe her theories because she lined-up beautiful, dashing, smart capitalists against ugly, evil, petty socialists.
Her philosphies would really be put to the test if some of the antagonists were dashing and intelligent and caring - which none were.
But Francisco is my hero nonetheless, and I agree that money is wrongly convicted for all the crap that goes on in the world.
|
|
|
|
|
zozo
Feb 16, 2004, 1:24 PM
Post #25 of 76
(6400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2004
Posts: 3431
|
Mix alittle darwinism, a dash of arragance and throw in a ton of "Days of our Lives" = Atlas shrugged. Like many have already said I dug the heck out of Ms. Rand when I still thought the world revolved around me.
|
|
|
|
|
mike_the_sumo
Feb 16, 2004, 6:41 PM
Post #26 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2003
Posts: 66
|
myAtlas Shrugged is a great book, if you're 16 and looking for an oversimplified view of life that you can use to justify strutting around, being a jerk to people, and feeling superior
I see it as quite the opposite - at 16, one is still expecting that the world owes him something. Mommy and Daddy have provided everything, often at the expense of their own happiness, and there's no reason to believe the world operates differently. In fact, the looters portrayed in that book are no different than the typical 16 year old. They often "strut around, being a jerk to people, and feeling superior". Read through the 'blogs of people that age or talk to any high school teacher. Listen to the complaints of "mom took away my car again" (never mind who's paying for the f***ing thing). This is a far cry from the portrayal of John Galt.
|
|
|
|
|
gat
Feb 16, 2004, 8:37 PM
Post #27 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 3, 2003
Posts: 420
|
In reply to: In reply to: What's this doing in the General forum? JV There is of yet no Overhyped-slush-for-pseudo-intellectuals forum to which it can be fitted properly.
:D
|
|
|
|
|
skiclimb
Feb 16, 2004, 9:44 PM
Post #28 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 11, 2004
Posts: 1938
|
Looks to me like Atlas shrugged hit a few looters between the eyes...lol
|
|
|
|
|
brutusofwyde
Feb 16, 2004, 10:20 PM
Post #29 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 3, 2002
Posts: 1473
|
In reply to: Yes, US is the most individualistic country of them al' but that doesn't mean this philosophy could not apply anywhere else.
Most individualistic country of them all??
Ahh, how does that explain why the U.S. government feels it is necessary to protect people from their own actions with mandatory seat belt and helmet laws, with bans on climbing El Capitan during the tourist season (circa Harding et al) and bans on attempting the Diamond...
|
|
|
|
|
tobin_kelly
Feb 16, 2004, 10:34 PM
Post #30 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 2, 2003
Posts: 28
|
I read Atlas Shrugged last year. I say 'read' but to frank I had to skip long sections, primarily the interminably long speeches that plague the whole book. Overwhelmingly it seemed to me an historical oddity, maybe a reaction to a period - the 50s - when it may have seemed that the US was standing alone in a world drifting towards socialism. And many of the images in the book seem to belong to the 19th century - all that emphasis on steel and railways and heroic owner-managers in a Rockefeller mode (did she understand the concept of the joint-stock company?). I don't think the book has much to say to us now at all. In fact at a simple level most of Rand's philosophy seems be in line with mainstream behaviour in the western world. For example, we take it for granted now that successful entrepreneurs are admired. Should she claim some credit for that? I doubt it.
There's something rather alarming about the sexual undercurrents in the book too. Dagne always seems to be 'submitting' and the men seem to have 'violent' impulses .... was Ayn a rape fantasist?
|
|
|
|
|
galt
Feb 16, 2004, 11:20 PM
Post #31 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 3, 2002
Posts: 267
|
Who is John Galt? I was...
I was the man who believed I was an end to myself. I was the man who cared about nothing other then my own life. I was the man who ended up alone and miserable...
I have read Atlas 4 times and am probably the most qualified person on this site to talk about Ayn Rand and Objectivism. I was a member of my school's Objectivist club for 2 years & I've read every piece of fiction & non-fiction she's ever written. I was John Galt.
Who am I now? I am the man who has discovered there is so much more to life then myself. I am the man who fought for everything I thought was important just to realize the people around me were the only things worth fighting for. I am now the man who truly belongs on earth.
No doubt I'll be harassed for my contradictory statements & I'll gladly explain myself if need arises, but until then I won't bore you with my life's story.
Don't ask who John Galt is, figure out who you are... then live your life accordingly. A is most defiantly A!
(Note: I still think it's a great book, but I'm not there anymore. And let's face it, Ragnar was so much cooler then Galt anyway.)
|
|
|
|
|
brutusofwyde
Feb 16, 2004, 11:56 PM
Post #32 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 3, 2002
Posts: 1473
|
In reply to: A is most defiantly A!
eh?
|
|
|
|
|
timstich
Feb 17, 2004, 12:38 PM
Post #35 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2003
Posts: 6267
|
In reply to: Atlas Shrugged was 500 pages TOO LONG. Who is John Galt? Who the f--- cares! Freakin drivel DMT
Two great pieces of information to know. I trust your judgement on this.
BY THE POWER OF CASTLE GREYSKULL, I BANISH THIS THREAD TO COMMUNITY!
|
|
|
|
|
noodlearms
Feb 17, 2004, 10:12 PM
Post #36 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2002
Posts: 145
|
In reply to: Atlas Shrugged is a great book, if you're 16 and looking for an oversimplified view of life that you can use to justify strutting around, being a jerk to people, and feeling superior I see it as quite the opposite - at 16, one is still expecting that the world owes him something. Mommy and Daddy have provided everything, often at the expense of their own happiness, and there's no reason to believe the world operates differently.
I see your point. My statement was overly general. My point is that Rand's "worldview" is incredibly simplistic, and that those most susceptible to such a no-shades-of-gray viewpoint are often teenagers. Probably not the teenagers you're talking about though. Probably more misfits and loner types. It's such a seductive shortcut -- just buy this philosophy wholesale, and you have the answer to EVERYTHING.
Like galt, I speak from personal experience.
|
|
|
|
|
okinawatricam
Feb 17, 2004, 10:53 PM
Post #37 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2003
Posts: 420
|
A phylosophy that teaches hard work, self respect, and dedication to what you believe is a shortcut. Interesting.
How many people take up full time climbing has their passion and abondon what the world expect of them complety for what they love.
When you read her bokk Athen, you realize that she doesn't preach "do it for money," she preaches do what you really want to do.
Of course, like anything, to much of anything is not good either. But has a guideline to life, she makes sense.
|
|
|
|
|
roninthorne
Feb 17, 2004, 11:16 PM
Post #38 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 27, 2002
Posts: 659
|
In reply to: I read a poll a few years ago that said Atlas Shrugged was the second most influencial book in peoples lives. It came in right behind the Bible.
You had to have read this poll in the Ayn Rand Fanzine, because I don't know ten people (outside of this forum discussion) who have even cracked Atlas shrugged. If it was a huge influence on people, it was likely because it influenced them to avoid Rand's work, and long, generally pontificating books... say those in which the main character can deliver a freaking 80-page monologue/dissertation.... and no one listening gets bored, walks out, or yawns.
If all these ubermen exist in AR's world, how did they let things get so f***ed up in the first place? Maybe chasing some wench like Dagny, who, in the end, is no more than a Cosmowhore... looks shiny and chic on the surface, throws her legs to Jesus just as fast as a drunken truckstop waitress, swaps boyfriends the way some folks change mouthwash.
|
|
|
|
|
robgordon
Feb 17, 2004, 11:52 PM
Post #39 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 3, 2003
Posts: 543
|
I think climbers like it because to climb is to work against an objective hazard, and toward an objective goal.
|
|
|
|
|
scottcody
Feb 18, 2004, 1:13 AM
Post #40 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 27, 2003
Posts: 577
|
In reply to: My spelling AND grammer is bad, but I choose it to be that way, I expect nothing in return for my words, and if you don't like what I say then you may retrun to your own life and not join me in mine.
You could have saved us the disertation, this says it all.
"My spelling AND grammer is bad, but I choose it to be that way,"... ok so you want the rest of us to work harder and spend our time, time that could be spent doing things that make our lives better, decifering your post.
"and if you don't like what I say then you may retrun to your own life and not join me in mine"... thanks for the permission. I'm glad you assumed that I would need it to continue with my life.
And for this non-sense
In reply to: I was the man who believed I was an end to myself. I was the man who cared about nothing other then my own life. I was the man who ended up alone and miserable...
A=A is statement about seeing the connections between our actions and our life, and most importantly, accepting responsibility for those outcomes.
|
|
|
|
|
okinawatricam
Feb 18, 2004, 3:14 AM
Post #41 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2003
Posts: 420
|
It seems to me that the movers and shakers in her book were quite social. Afterall they gathered and settle in the same valley.
I guess they are like climbers, we seems to collect in the same valleys and don't care what other think of it.
|
|
|
|
|
noodlearms
Feb 18, 2004, 6:43 AM
Post #42 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2002
Posts: 145
|
In reply to: A phylosophy that teaches hard work, self respect, and dedication to what you believe is a shortcut. Interesting.
Yes, it teaches that. Unfortunately it also teaches a lot of other stuff that is utter rubbish.
It oversimplifies. A young person can read her stuff and come away feeling he/she has the answer to everything. When in fact real life is so much more complex and takes so much more work to figure out, if you ever do.
I'm not sure there's much point in arguing about this with you. Ayn Rand fans generally hate to hear this kind of thing. They tend to be the type who like things simple even when things just aren't simple.
In reply to: But has a guideline to life, she makes sense.
She has a guideline for life, just not life as a human being on this planet. Her philosophy is internally consistent, but inconsistent with much of what it means to be a real person.
Maybe when we develop AI, Objectivism will work for the machines.
|
|
|
|
|
noodlearms
Feb 18, 2004, 6:45 AM
Post #43 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2002
Posts: 145
|
In reply to: It seems to me that the movers and shakers in her book were quite social. Afterall they gathered and settle in the same valley.
Yes, but only with those who were worthy, using an ABSURDLY NARROW set of criteria.
I seem to remember from Rand's biography that she had very few friends at the end of her life... only a few pathetic ones who never disagreed with her.
|
|
|
|
|
noodlearms
Feb 18, 2004, 7:05 AM
Post #44 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2002
Posts: 145
|
Omigod... while I was browsing this topic here at RC.com, the "google ads" on the left brought up this:
http://www.aynrandsingles.com/
An Ayn Rand dating service!
I can't imagine....
|
|
|
|
|
okinawatricam
Feb 18, 2004, 9:14 AM
Post #45 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2003
Posts: 420
|
Actually, I am not a big fan of hers. To clarify where I stand. Her basic premise is good and her philophy is fine, but real people in the real world don't act the way she claims.
I order for the book to be worth reading and her Phi;losophy explained, she needed to show an extreme.
Unfortunately, most people who criticize her, critisize her on the basis that money is what drives her character.
Two things are tru about me:
I do things for me and noone else. (If it helps others great, often it does)
I am very selfish. (When I climb, noone but me gets anything out of it) When I put up routes, they are for my enjoyment. If others enjoy them to, good, if not tuff.)
|
|
|
|
|
noodlearms
Feb 18, 2004, 11:04 AM
Post #46 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2002
Posts: 145
|
In reply to: I order for the book to be worth reading and her Phi;losophy explained, she needed to show an extreme.
Yeah... as long as one doesn't try to swallow it whole, I agree there is much good to be taken from her philosophy.
I don't think Rand herself was just exaggerating for effect though. I think she believed every literal word of it.
In reply to: Unfortunately, most people who criticize her, critisize her on the basis that money is what drives her character.
Yes that is unfair. She was definitely deeper than that.
|
|
|
|
|
mazzystr
Feb 18, 2004, 4:56 PM
Post #47 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 450
|
I've read Atlas Shrugged a good 5times...as well as Fountain Head and We the living...
Objectivism is a way of life. Its holding your head high and doing the best job, not "YOUR" best because "YOUR" best will always be out done by someone elses best. This applies to working at McDonalds or being CEO of the world largest energy company *cough* Enron *cough*. It applies to the way you deal with your family. Are you a good husband? Do you do things that "will rock the boat" of your marriage? Are you a good Father? Are you raising your kids to explore the world or to be afraid of the world? Its realizing that everything external to your mind reflects on yourself...
Personally, it is my religion. People ask if I beleive in God. I say Yes. God is that voice inside me that dictates morality. Some people call it intuition... Others call it conscience.
|
|
|
|
|
galt
Feb 18, 2004, 5:31 PM
Post #48 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 3, 2002
Posts: 267
|
Actually Roninthorne, Justincoyle is right. According to a study done, Atlas Shrugged is the most influential book in the world second only to the Bible. Pretty cool considering the book has only been around 60 some odd years. (Note: A book doesn't have to be read by the masses in order to be influential.)
Okinawatricam, Rand's philosophy DOES NOT teach "Figure out who you are and live your life accordingly." It teaches "Live your life how you want so long as it doesn't conflict with my philosophy." Her books are full of examples of characters that fit into this category, but we'll use Atlas since that's what being discussed here... Eddie, a good guy who loves his life, loves Dagny, and who is obviously a producer. What happens to him at the end? (I case anyone is reading I won't spoil it for you.) What's the point? Be a producer who and live for yourself (not for Dagny) or you'll end up like Eddie. Need more examples in Atlas? Look at Cheryl and the Wet Nurse...
So I say again. Stop asking 'Who is John Galt?' and figure out who you are and live your life accordingly.
|
|
|
|
|
unabonger
Feb 18, 2004, 7:18 PM
Post #49 of 76
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 8, 2003
Posts: 2689
|
Her philosophy is characteristic of all philosophies: They present an ideal to strive for. That the leaders of all our "churches" (objectivism included) fail personally to live up to those standards doesn't negate the value of all the ideas of a philosophy.
Above all, she advocated truth--to oneself and to others; and adherence to values. One of the values she promotes was productive effort--work hard. She said that no man's need was a de facto claim on another man's effort; but she never said you shouldn't share. She tended to overlook the power of emotional attachment; that hurt her and many around her.
As for the literary quality, well, if you like epic storytelling with a philosophical bent, Les Miserable by Hugo is far better. It is similar in that it is the struggle of a man fighting against great odds to stay true to his values, but even in translation the writing is far more appealing, the story more coherent, and the characters more believable.
Oh, iamwallress; the book probably isn't to your taste, but judging a book by the tape version is like judging a perfume by licking the sample page. Many a fine book has been ruined on tape. At any rate, getting through that much material on tape is somehow admirable in a punishingly martyrish sort of way.
To the Original Poster: The book appeals to the individualistic among us--it presents the idea that man is heroic and capable of heroic acts, and can through reason and toil, reshape the world as he wants it. Those are qualities common in climbers, I think.
To dingus: Read faster.
The SelfishBonger
|
|
|
|
|
builttospill
Feb 18, 2004, 11:00 PM
Post #51 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2004
Posts: 814
|
I've read a lot of Ayn Rand's stuff, and I was fairly impressionable at the time I read it (18 years old, going through some questioning of my faith and what not---that was only about a year ago). I never subscribed fully to her philosophy, I had some of the qualms with it that others do. I've realized though, that for me it makes some sense. I'm not saying I'm going to try to emulate the characters from her book (by the way, the sexual scenes are a bit weird for my liking......as someone else mentioned). However, I do see some positives in her philosophy.
How many of you people out there get mad when you see frivolous lawsuits? How many of you say to yourself to the people who get fat on mcdonald's food and then sue the company "christ, take some personal responsibility for your own actions"????? That is part of what Ayn Rand advocates.
I know that as a kid growing up in a religious household, I always dreaded service to others (when it was forced on me)....that was part of what my rebellion against my religion and toward objectivism was fueled by. How many of you want to live your life for yourself? I'm seeing a lot of you saying that this is selfish, immature, unrealistic, etc. Personally, I think there is nothing more rewarding than taking care of yourself, taking responsibility for your own actions, relishing fully in your own successes, and accepting your own failures. How many of you guys enjoy climbing partially because it is an individual sport where the success or failure of your mission relies entirely upon you (well, belaying is the exception, but you get the point)??? That is what Ayn Rand advocates....
How many of you believe that human beings are capable of amazing things, both physically, intellectually, etc??? That is what Ayn Rand is saying.....humans are capable of amazing things. Their capacity for greatness is huge. How do we go about tapping into this capacity for greatness? By letting people succeed and fail on their own more or less. By encouraging people to strive for success, and not bailing them out if they are lazy and choose not to pursue it. That is what Ayn Rand advocates.
How many of you are sickened by people who think they are better than others or doing more for this world than others based on their service to others? I'm not sure about this point, but Ayn Rand believes that they are harming the world and the people they serve because they are not allowing them to reach their full potential (on their own). Come to think of it, I do more or less agree with this one. If you were climbing some tough route, would you feel less of a sense of accomplishment if you had to get pulled up or something? How pissed would you be if your belayer did this without asking you if you needed it first? Think about it.
Atlas Shrugged is listed as the 2nd most influential book on the American people, I believe the survey was conducted by the Library of Congress. It is influential not because it had/has a wide readership, but because some of the people who read it change the way they live their lives, just like the Bible and other books that were listed in the top 10 (I know the book of mormon was somewhere between 4 and 10).
Sure, it's an idealized world. It certainly is exaggerated to make a point (although some have said that Rand was not exaggerating in her own head......I'm not sure). It does include some notable and significant omissions (there are no children portrayed in the book, except Dagny and Francisco when they are young....although both are already mature). The philosophy in its purest form (as Ayn Rand's own personal life attests) does not work the way the world currently is (both what philosophy does.....communism does not function unless we lived in an ideal society, same with just about every philosophy I've seen). However, the SPIRIT of her philosophy can still be lived, and it can make people more happy. I've adapted the philosophy with parts of others that I think make sense, and I think my philosophy makes a lot of sense (it is a somewhat odd mixture of objectivism, libertarianism and transcendentalism). The principles of objectivism are worth looking into.
|
|
|
|
|
builttospill
Feb 18, 2004, 11:01 PM
Post #52 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2004
Posts: 814
|
As for one of the original questions.....why does Atlas Shrugged appeal to climbers? It is because of what I wrote in my post.....taking personal responsibility.....accepting failure or success as a function of yourself, and no one else, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
dbarandiaran
Feb 19, 2004, 2:57 AM
Post #53 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2003
Posts: 113
|
wow there are some strong opinions on this one...
for those that complain that this book is too long, or that it is too repetitive, boring, etc. i say THROW AWAY YOUR TV! if you can't read an 80 page soliloquoy (sp?) highlighting and explaining the major points of a philosophy, then your attention span is too short. It would take that much space anyway to fully and eloquently explain a philosophical viewpoint. sure it may be repetitive, but if you've ever taken a course in philosphy you will find that rather repetitive too.
And who is John Galt? His spirit lives in all of us, the spirit of determination and of self-sufficiency is, in my opinion, a required portion of a climber's personality. Does that mean that we are all John Galts? no, but certain aspects of his personality, those main aspects, seem to be pretty common among climbers.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Feb 19, 2004, 3:15 PM
Post #54 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: I've read Atlas Shrugged a good 5 times...
I don't believe I woulda told that one.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
justin
Feb 19, 2004, 3:21 PM
Post #55 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 20, 2003
Posts: 196
|
Damn, I've never read anything five times. Well, except for American Psycho and I'd only admit that on the net.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Feb 19, 2004, 3:23 PM
Post #56 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: To dingus: Read faster.
Why? So I can torture myself more frequently and with greater intensity?
Can't I just borrow that book on tape (um, no I can't, now that I think about it) and hold the fast forward button part way down? Wouldn't that accomplish the same thing?
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
cyberhobo
Feb 19, 2004, 4:01 PM
Post #57 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2002
Posts: 8
|
I read Atlas Shrugged at the same as Upton Sinclair's The Jungle. It's a useful contrast, because the two authors use many of the same literary devices towards opposing viewpoints. It reveals some of the strengths and weaknesses of each, and makes it easier to discard the romantic drama they use in their arguments.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Feb 19, 2004, 6:06 PM
Post #58 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: for those that complain that this book is too long, or that it is too repetitive, boring, etc. i say THROW AWAY YOUR TV! if you can't read an 80 page soliloquoy (sp?) highlighting and explaining the major points of a philosophy, then your attention span is too short.
It wasn't the first 80 page diatribe that put me off. It was the 10th or the 11th that did me in. And each of them simply restated what had already been said.
I read a lot, mostly for entertainment. We are a reading household. We have a 20" TV with rabbit ears on it and 5 usable channels. Needless to say, that encourages reading. My daughter at 12 has literally (get it, literally? hehe, I just KILL MYSELF sometimes!) read more books than most adults.
With some authors I reach a lifetime saturation limit. Stephen King, for example. As a teenager I ate that crap up, read everything he wrote. Then one day, half way through Cujo (when it was new) I hit my King limit. Haven't read a word since, not one.
Hit that limit with other authors, musicians (I have every Led Zeppelin original vinyl album and about 10 years ago hit the wall... now my radio policy is "No Led Zeppelin, None of the Time.") and people.
Ayn Rand was special... she hit my lifetime limit inside of one book. She's not the only one. I've read 900 pages of 1000 page epics only to realize I didn't give a damn about how it came out. ROUND FILE.
Who is John Galt? Who cares!
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
flagpolewizard
Feb 19, 2004, 7:45 PM
Post #59 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 10, 2004
Posts: 68
|
I have read many of her works although it has been some time (her short stories that she wrote early on are by far my favorites, even though they were never meant to be published) and I will not claim to be an expert on her philosiphy or anyone elses, but I did notice one consistent thing about them, the various "heros" of her books and many others that people say inspired or enlightened them
the "heros" never spent time believeing in or bieng driven by anything external, they never read enlightening or inspirational books in the stories, they were pretty consistently guided internally, and just an honest observation, but I don't think her own ideal characters would have found her books to be of any value
one last thing about any rand, russian women are amazing, admitedly thats why I read her books in the first place, thanks Svetlana
|
|
|
|
|
smellyhippie
Feb 19, 2004, 8:02 PM
Post #60 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2003
Posts: 155
|
To me Ayn Rand's view of the world is not moral. The book was well written, but annoying in that it was merely a vehicle for, as Dingus wrote, sending a message
over
and over
and over again.
Nate
|
|
|
|
|
okinawatricam
Feb 19, 2004, 10:42 PM
Post #61 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2003
Posts: 420
|
I think Ann would agree with you about her book not being moral, if you use a christain based moral defenition.
With that said, I am Atheis, yet I would not consider myself inmoral. Actually I am much more "moral" than most christains I meet.
|
|
|
|
|
pbjosh
Feb 19, 2004, 11:04 PM
Post #62 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 22, 2002
Posts: 1518
|
In reply to: With some authors I reach a lifetime saturation limit. Stephen King, for example. As a teenager I ate that crap up, read everything he wrote. Then one day, half way through Cujo (when it was new) I hit my King limit. Haven't read a word since, not one.
I know what you mean, heh. I couldn't finish Atlast Shrugged. I enjoy though have a hard time finishing books by Gabriel Garcia Marquez and Guenter Grass (slow reading for me). War and Peace will put you off Tolstoy when you should be reading Anna Karenina, same for Crime and Punishment killing Dostoevsky when you should be reading The Brothers Karamasov.
I've personally reached the limit with many authors - Stephen King didn't take long though the short stories collection which includes Stand By Me or whatever it was based on I still like, though I doubt I'll re-read. John Irving had a 3 book limit for me. TC Boyle is fun but had a one book limit, too long for the lack of worthy content. Hemmingway had a one book limit for me, can't take it. I don't know if Stephen Crane wrote anything other than Red Badge of Courage but after that crap I'll not bother finding out - probably the book I've most disliked over the years, and I've not really disliked more than a couple.
josh
|
|
|
|
|
okinawatricam
Feb 20, 2004, 9:35 PM
Post #63 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2003
Posts: 420
|
Maybe you just don't enjoy readin. :?
|
|
|
|
|
roninthorne
Feb 20, 2004, 9:58 PM
Post #64 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 27, 2002
Posts: 659
|
In reply to: According to a study done, Atlas Shrugged is the most influential book in the world second only to the Bible. (Note: A book doesn't have to be read by the masses in order to be influential.)
Perhaps the most influential among the people studied, but who were they.. campus eggheads and bluenosed intellectuals, most likely. I'm sorry, but there is no way this study was demographically diverse, or included the teachings of Siddharta, the Torah or the Koran. Are you going to try to tell me that a paperback had a greater impact than the words of Mohammed, Abraham, or Buddha? Sounds like a study done in SLC, or at Bob Jones University.
"Study findings" prove whatever the author is trying to say in their thesis paper, and little else.
|
|
|
|
|
roninthorne
Feb 20, 2004, 10:06 PM
Post #65 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 27, 2002
Posts: 659
|
In reply to: for those that complain that this book is too long, or that it is too repetitive, boring, etc. i say THROW AWAY YOUR TV! if you can't read an 80 page soliloquoy (sp?) highlighting and explaining the major points of a philosophy, then your attention span is too short.
I've read Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, Campbell, Locke, SunTzu, Musashi and Hawkings.... some concurrently. Now, what was that about attention span and the inability to understand subtle philosophies?
|
|
|
|
|
galt
Feb 21, 2004, 4:17 AM
Post #66 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 3, 2002
Posts: 267
|
Roninthorne: Check out this website:
http://www.atlasshrugged.tv/book.htm
I quote: "Atlas Shrugged is the "second most influential book for Americans today" after the Bible, according to a joint survey conducted by the Library of Congress and the Book of the Month Club"
Sorry I was off. It's only an influential book for Americans today... but its still a powerful statement seeing as the book has only been around for 47 years.
|
|
|
|
|
builttospill
Feb 21, 2004, 9:51 AM
Post #67 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2004
Posts: 814
|
smellyhippie: What do you find immoral about the philosophy (I am geniunely curious here)? I'm assuming it is that she discourages service to others and "compassion"..........is that right? I agree though, the repetition was a bit much, but I agreed with the points she was making over and over again, so I was able to get through it. I don't know how one of old my english teachers did it (she claims it is her favorite book, but she doesn't seem to agree with the philosophy).
roninthorne: doubtful that a study done in Salt Lake City (what I assume you meant by SLC) would have anything written by Ayn Rand anywhere in the top 10....unless it was a "top 10 books the devil uses to brainwash us." Rand was an atheist and many believe that her following was a cult (I don't have enough info one way or the other to decide). She discouraged service to others, compassion, humility and selflessness.....not exactly something a good mormon boy or girl would want to be caught reading. It made my mom nervous when I read it....for good reason (I was mormon at the time).
|
|
|
|
|
okinawatricam
Feb 21, 2004, 11:58 PM
Post #68 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2003
Posts: 420
|
I think in her pholosophy, she discourages service to others only if it at cost to you.
Take Galts engine, he didn't keeo it to himself, he let those who could afford it have. Seems resonable to me.
|
|
|
|
|
jeffers_mz
Feb 22, 2004, 4:34 AM
Post #69 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 11, 2002
Posts: 357
|
Kudos, Unabonger.
**********
Simplistic?
So is a concrete filled trench, but you can build a shed or an accelerator on top of it.
Might have wanted to be a little simpler yet, as some are still unable to grasp what was offered, but then you lose the other end of the spectrum.
Moral?
In Rand's strictest definition?
Maybe.
I am beginning to have the outlines of doubts.
Specifically, regarding the anti-thesis to "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need."
The parable she used was, as close as I can get from memory, since my copy fell apart a long time ago was, "Every worthless rotter who thinks his need entitles him to his superior's wealth, forgets those below him, who think that their need entitles them to HIS refrigerator" or something like that.
Good math. Indubitable. But is it the full equation?
Where are Einstein's children? Tesla's? Bell's? More importantly, where are the respective intellectual dynasties?
Did Darwin, in saying that the less fit will be more oft denied opportunity to reproduce, accidently or unknowingly imply that the overly fit will be also denied the same opportunity?
There is empirical evidence to suggest that this is the case.
Is there an "evolutionary speed limit"?
If so, the counterpart to the parable becomes "Every hungry capitalist who thinks his ability entitles him to acquire that which he is able, and to keep the fruits to himself, forgets that there are others, more able than himself, with whom he must compete, in an ultimately zero sum environment."
Any edges defined by the co-parable are necessarily diffuse, for the present, anyway, but the natural tendency toward entropy has a discrete quantification, and the amount of mass-energy available for conversion within our grasp is also finite.
If you accept the above reasoning, then the axiom under the parable works out to something like this:
Progress (the center of the bell curve of collective human ability and achievement) will necessarily be constrained to a finite, potentially measurable rate, such that the number of persons rendered obsolete within their own lifetimes does not rise above the threshold at which the collective actions of the disenfranchised negate the advancement of the whole.
From which follows some fascinating math.
Can you quantify the second law's ability to increase entropy, treat it as a discrete physical force, capable of also quantifiable action?
Can you then quantify the minimum energy expenditure necessary to sustain organic life as a function of the enthalpy required for a being of that order?
Establishing the potential of the locally available mass-energy as a limiting factor is, by comparison, easily accomplished, and from here you have the fundamentals required to attempt to build the maximum, minimum, and ideal forward progress (delta collective enthalpy) curves.
Heady stuff.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
mazzystr
Feb 22, 2004, 10:59 AM
Post #70 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 450
|
In reply to: .....not exactly something a good mormon boy or girl would want to be caught reading. It made my mom nervous when I read it....for good reason (I was mormon at the time).
really.
i dated two mormonds that were both highly educated in various philosophies as well as economics and engineering.
could it be that they werent hardcore mormons? (they went to seminary and church twice a week)
-chris
|
|
|
|
|
okinawatricam
Feb 22, 2004, 10:20 PM
Post #71 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2003
Posts: 420
|
Cool, dating two guys. How did you keep track?
|
|
|
|
|
builttospill
Feb 24, 2004, 3:01 AM
Post #72 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2004
Posts: 814
|
I can't speak for all mormon people here.....but in my experience a lot of them have said that you shouldn't read material that goes against the church in anyway (as objectivism does because it is atheistic).......they argue that even if you don't believe in Rand's philosophy, you should "avoid even the appearance of evil." In my experience there are some mormons who are very openminded in terms of education (my dad was one of them.....he has a PhD in economics, and he knows a lot of philosophy and what not) and just know that they don't believe it (my Dad knew a lot of philosophy, but also still believed the church was the one true philosophy), while there were others that feared all types of stuff like that. I'd imagine this is true in most any religion.
A good example is the church's best educational institution, BYU. Other BYU students may hate me for this, but it is not like other schools educationally (and of course socially as well....although that MAY be a good thing). BYU's biology intro class talks a lot about the church, its welfare system, and how biology backs up the church's beliefs. There is also an almost automatic disclaimer on philosophy classes. That's fine for some people, but its not a broad-based objective education like I expected from college.
|
|
|
|
|
unabonger
Feb 24, 2004, 3:21 PM
Post #73 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 8, 2003
Posts: 2689
|
In reply to: Establishing the potential of the locally available mass-energy as a limiting factor is, by comparison, easily accomplished, and from here you have the fundamentals required to attempt to build the maximum, minimum, and ideal forward progress (delta collective enthalpy) curves. Heady stuff. Thoughts?
Jesus jeffers. I'm pretty sure you made a typo when trying to go to physicsgeeksgophilosophical.com. My take? The limiting reagents may be finite, but we've seen that with technological improvements, we've expanded our resources by orders of magnitude--because of competition.
Capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the others.
The MagnitudeBonger
|
|
|
|
|
okinawatricam
Feb 26, 2004, 2:38 AM
Post #74 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2003
Posts: 420
|
In reply to: Capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the others.
Very true. I am sure that one day, something new will come along, if we allow it that is.
|
|
|
|
|
okinawatricam
Mar 1, 2004, 11:29 PM
Post #75 of 76
(5482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2003
Posts: 420
|
The more I think about it, the more I realize that I agree with John. I am selfish, I climb for me and nobody else.
|
|
|
|
|
okinawatricam
Mar 8, 2004, 10:42 PM
Post #76 of 76
(4547 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2003
Posts: 420
|
Since it came up, I didn't realize that someone liking rough sex made them loose there credibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
