One of the reasons that I think therapy is great for Objectivists in particular is that it's really "me" focused, and Objectivists are (at least consciously) willing to accept the selfishness necessary for psychological healing. I think my therapist was surprised and happy to know that I didnt have any issue accepting the selfishness inherent in therapy, making me think that its a psychological roadblock for many people.
I'm reading a book right now called Healing The Shame That Binds You. I'm only 2 chapters in but so far its fantastic and I think it's going to help me a lot.
I can understand this video. As an Objectivist, I was pretty hesitant to enter therapy although I knew I needed it--perhaps I thought my therapist would ask me to compromise my beliefs. And though I always scrutinized my therapists ideas, I've never found a single one that contradicts Objectivism. In fact, I kind of think my therapist is pretty much an Objectivist in his thinking.
I really enjoyed this video. Mr Molyneux has talked about this a lot and he claims to have solved this problem with "curiosity" however I have noticed a similar feeling on the FDR boards. Often times he will claim "they just disagree because they are scared of the truth!" which seems to be very similar to the objectivist repression. Just some random thoughts.
I've wondered about stefbot for a while. I don't think he's real secure in his arrogance. Since you and I are both arrogant, that's not where my critique lies. I get the idea that maybe Stef isn't entirely convinced of his own axiomatic arguments, and is afraid to face that.
Or maybe he's just a prick. Either way, I think he does more good than harm, in an odd sort of way.
I think like any group of people of like minds and ideas you are going to find some people that are especially dogmatic about those views, to the point of even contradicting some of them.
Well, as an Objectivist and long-time watcher of your videos I have to say that chat room -does- sound really weird. I wouldn't hang out in such a place myself.
I've met quite a few other O'ists that reject certain portions of Rand's views on art. I myself reject much of her thought on gender roles and sex. This has yet to get me "excommunicated" among my online O'ist friends. ;)
Even Rand herself said that you shouldn't stop listening to Beethoven just because she doesn't like it.
Secondly, I am somewhat of an objectivist... but I haven't really gotten THAT far down the rabbit hole to be all "you should only listen to this, and not listen to that" (re: music). That seems just kinda wacky to me.
I think at its core, it's a good philosophy... but it, like so many other things, is taken to really stupid extremes.
I often describe myself as Objectivistish. I tend to reject dogma wherever I find it. We have to embrace the fact that we don't know everything and be open to at least thinking about the things we don't currently understand or believe if we are to grow. Good vid.
oh snap! Isn't this heretical or something? As an outsider looking in, it always struck me how a lot of these people engaged in mind control practices surpassing the most ardent statists. It's very dangerous to disregard the psychological aspects of politics, no matter the underpinning philosophies of a particular group. You get cool points from me.
By the way, when we seize the white-house when anarchy comes about, we're totally playing the 1812 overture while we shoot cannons off the white-house at the congress building. XD
I think the guy running the irc chat room is worried about spam. I've seen lots of spam on Ayn Rand fan sites very similiar to what Zizek spews forth in his comedy routine. Such spam is very irritating, though is very funny when Zizek does it!
I'd agree with most of that. A lot of Objectivists seem to be very "top-down" as you put it, trying to fit into a mould of sorts. I'd argue that such an attitude is antithetical to a proper implementation of the philosophy, as starting from the ground-up and working things out for yourself is absolutely fundamental to Objectivism.
... As for aesthetics, I love dark stuff; hence the name. I think artistic preferences should certainly be a reflection of one's values, however I think such preferences are largely founded upon one's experiences and so may vary vastly from one person to the next. Art is a selective process, and so is the appreciation of it. Different people may extract a multitude of alternate meanings from the same artwork/imagery.
It seems to me that some objectivists are trying to be randroids. I don't know how many times that she tells a person to use their own minds to decide things for themselves. I think the core tenents can't be argued (e.g. A is A, existance exists, etc) but other things, like art, are somewhat more subjective, although not entirely (i.e. a blank canvas is NOT art; whereas a webpage might be considered art by someone). I think they are missing the forest for the trees.
people who are that unable to work with others will keep them from surviving politics. the forum guy wont ever make it out of his parents basement.(no offense to people wh olive in their parents basement)
The goal of ethics is not to achieve a happy life. It is the study of a given situation and finding the most reasonable conclusion for that situation or what one ought to do. The goal of ethics often involves a conclusion that will not necessarily make one happy rather it supplies us with the best conclusion based off the most reasonable arguments for that conclusion.
Of course not, the people involved do that, they bring up arguments backed by reason for or against whatever the situation, not such a hard concept to grasp now is it? I mean people do it everyday, doctors, for goodness sake, are constantly faced with ethical dilemmas.
Well, I'm not sure how to answer that. There's no standard per say that I can think of rather smart thinking rational people, ethicists, preferably atheist ethicists, working it out. There's no hard answer that will solve all ethical dilemmas, we are just too complicated but that doesn't stop us from trying to create some ethical theory.
it's not that i want to throw ethics out of the window, i just wanted to clear out a few things so i could explain my issue with your first comment: since the standard is not "set" rigidly or a priori it can be proposed that our general way of acting in order to achieve the ultiamte good is according to our long-term rational self-interests, in other words, happiness.
don't take it the wrong way, i'm not here to harrass you, this is just the way i look at it.
There's nothing "general" about ethics that I can see, right now anyway, hey I'm still learning give me time, rather it's highly specific. We all have our own principles but it's the good practicing ethicist that does the work. The Terri Schiavo case is a good example of an ethical dilemma and a complicated one at that. So how does a "general way of acting" achieve anything here? And certainly no one is really happy whatever decision is made. I don't take you the wrong way. ; - )
i don't mean to imply that ethics is a simple and exact science. there will always be dilemas. the "good" is relative to whom and what.
i also don't claim to have all the answers because i don't think there are ultimate answers.
i'm not all that familiar with the terri schiavo case. unless the woman had made it explicit in the past what she wanted done with her in that situation, there's probably no way out.
Just wiki her name and I suggest it as a case study for the aspiring ethicist. Nope there are no ultimate answers, though we wish there were, sure would make life easier.
Talk about assumptions.
wesvillager 2 years ago
One of the reasons that I think therapy is great for Objectivists in particular is that it's really "me" focused, and Objectivists are (at least consciously) willing to accept the selfishness necessary for psychological healing. I think my therapist was surprised and happy to know that I didnt have any issue accepting the selfishness inherent in therapy, making me think that its a psychological roadblock for many people.
justinwlaurab 2 years ago
I'm reading a book right now called Healing The Shame That Binds You. I'm only 2 chapters in but so far its fantastic and I think it's going to help me a lot.
XOmniverse 2 years ago
I can understand this video. As an Objectivist, I was pretty hesitant to enter therapy although I knew I needed it--perhaps I thought my therapist would ask me to compromise my beliefs. And though I always scrutinized my therapists ideas, I've never found a single one that contradicts Objectivism. In fact, I kind of think my therapist is pretty much an Objectivist in his thinking.
justinwlaurab 2 years ago
I really enjoyed this video. Mr Molyneux has talked about this a lot and he claims to have solved this problem with "curiosity" however I have noticed a similar feeling on the FDR boards. Often times he will claim "they just disagree because they are scared of the truth!" which seems to be very similar to the objectivist repression. Just some random thoughts.
NoGodsNoGovernments 2 years ago
"Stefbotism" shares this trait with Objectivism, I think.
XOmniverse 2 years ago
I've wondered about stefbot for a while. I don't think he's real secure in his arrogance. Since you and I are both arrogant, that's not where my critique lies. I get the idea that maybe Stef isn't entirely convinced of his own axiomatic arguments, and is afraid to face that.
Or maybe he's just a prick. Either way, I think he does more good than harm, in an odd sort of way.
Kbiomech 2 years ago
I think like any group of people of like minds and ideas you are going to find some people that are especially dogmatic about those views, to the point of even contradicting some of them.
StefanKugar 2 years ago
Well, as an Objectivist and long-time watcher of your videos I have to say that chat room -does- sound really weird. I wouldn't hang out in such a place myself.
I've met quite a few other O'ists that reject certain portions of Rand's views on art. I myself reject much of her thought on gender roles and sex. This has yet to get me "excommunicated" among my online O'ist friends. ;)
Even Rand herself said that you shouldn't stop listening to Beethoven just because she doesn't like it.
StefanKugar 2 years ago
First of all, that IRC guy was a repressive dick.
Secondly, I am somewhat of an objectivist... but I haven't really gotten THAT far down the rabbit hole to be all "you should only listen to this, and not listen to that" (re: music). That seems just kinda wacky to me.
I think at its core, it's a good philosophy... but it, like so many other things, is taken to really stupid extremes.
eagleeye1975 2 years ago
I often describe myself as Objectivistish. I tend to reject dogma wherever I find it. We have to embrace the fact that we don't know everything and be open to at least thinking about the things we don't currently understand or believe if we are to grow. Good vid.
AnarchyInYourHead 2 years ago
oh snap! Isn't this heretical or something? As an outsider looking in, it always struck me how a lot of these people engaged in mind control practices surpassing the most ardent statists. It's very dangerous to disregard the psychological aspects of politics, no matter the underpinning philosophies of a particular group. You get cool points from me.
ChannelMikeG 2 years ago
Very interesting video.
IndividualAutonomy 2 years ago
Oh the irony, I was just listening to Tchaikovsky XD.
LaughingMan0X 2 years ago
I was just watching a documentary on Tchaikovsky lol
EpistemicDuty 2 years ago
High five!
LaughingMan0X 2 years ago
I actually do like Tchaikovsky more than Beethoven, but not because of Ayn Rand.
XOmniverse 2 years ago
1812 Overture FTW
By the way, when we seize the white-house when anarchy comes about, we're totally playing the 1812 overture while we shoot cannons off the white-house at the congress building. XD
It has already been decided, and it shall be epic
LaughingMan0X 2 years ago 3
Ive thought about this before, and this seems like an appropriate time to ask you omniverse. Do a majority of objectivists lean 'INTJ'?
EZkill25l7 2 years ago
I think so. The same is true of a lot of philosophically minded people though.
XOmniverse 2 years ago
I think the guy running the irc chat room is worried about spam. I've seen lots of spam on Ayn Rand fan sites very similiar to what Zizek spews forth in his comedy routine. Such spam is very irritating, though is very funny when Zizek does it!
Signofthedollar 2 years ago
Objectivist here.
I'd agree with most of that. A lot of Objectivists seem to be very "top-down" as you put it, trying to fit into a mould of sorts. I'd argue that such an attitude is antithetical to a proper implementation of the philosophy, as starting from the ground-up and working things out for yourself is absolutely fundamental to Objectivism.
D4rkReaver13 2 years ago 3
... As for aesthetics, I love dark stuff; hence the name. I think artistic preferences should certainly be a reflection of one's values, however I think such preferences are largely founded upon one's experiences and so may vary vastly from one person to the next. Art is a selective process, and so is the appreciation of it. Different people may extract a multitude of alternate meanings from the same artwork/imagery.
D4rkReaver13 2 years ago 3
It seems to me that some objectivists are trying to be randroids. I don't know how many times that she tells a person to use their own minds to decide things for themselves. I think the core tenents can't be argued (e.g. A is A, existance exists, etc) but other things, like art, are somewhat more subjective, although not entirely (i.e. a blank canvas is NOT art; whereas a webpage might be considered art by someone). I think they are missing the forest for the trees.
nosavage25 2 years ago
Would you consider yourself to be an objectivist?
drew335533 2 years ago
drew: I don't think ideological labels are healthy. They are artificially constricting on your own thinking.
I probably agree with Rand 80% of the time but I wouldn't call myself an Objectivist.
XOmniverse 2 years ago
What is objectivism typically defined as?
rickdelagarza 2 years ago
people who are that unable to work with others will keep them from surviving politics. the forum guy wont ever make it out of his parents basement.(no offense to people wh olive in their parents basement)
greenghost2008 2 years ago
that fucker makes objectivism look bad.
greenghost2008 2 years ago
xomniverse FTW
greenghost2008 2 years ago 4
Great response.
drew335533 2 years ago
That guy in the chatroom reminds me of Rothbard's "Mozart was a Red"
vonPeterhof 2 years ago
good vid, xo.
Chrisnoscrub047 2 years ago
Insightful video, sir. One of your best in awhile if you don't mind me saying. Curiosity is so important.
OpineTime 2 years ago
I agree
xkeltoix 2 years ago
As a randian I can only say this:
MUSIC OR DIE!
watch?v=uNu_OTKZYGc
QIQrrr 2 years ago
Do you feel like you express your emotions in a fulfilling way? Whether you do or not, do you think objectivism had anything to do with that outcome?
ForOrAgainstUs 2 years ago
ForOrAgainstUs: That's a hard question to answer for a number of reasons, at least the second part.
XOmniverse 2 years ago
Getting banned for not agreeing. Sounds like the Free Domain Radio forums.
Mementomori690069 2 years ago 7
The goal of ethics is not to achieve a happy life. It is the study of a given situation and finding the most reasonable conclusion for that situation or what one ought to do. The goal of ethics often involves a conclusion that will not necessarily make one happy rather it supplies us with the best conclusion based off the most reasonable arguments for that conclusion.
notfitforsociety 2 years ago
"It is the study of a given situation and finding the most reasonable conclusion for that situation or what one ought to do."
"ought to do" with respect to what? the situation itself does not dictate the most reasonable course of action.
fede2 2 years ago 2
Of course not, the people involved do that, they bring up arguments backed by reason for or against whatever the situation, not such a hard concept to grasp now is it? I mean people do it everyday, doctors, for goodness sake, are constantly faced with ethical dilemmas.
notfitforsociety 2 years ago
the arguments backed by reason are based on some standard. where does that standard come from? this is what i want to discuss.
fede2 2 years ago
Well, I'm not sure how to answer that. There's no standard per say that I can think of rather smart thinking rational people, ethicists, preferably atheist ethicists, working it out. There's no hard answer that will solve all ethical dilemmas, we are just too complicated but that doesn't stop us from trying to create some ethical theory.
notfitforsociety 2 years ago
it's not that i want to throw ethics out of the window, i just wanted to clear out a few things so i could explain my issue with your first comment: since the standard is not "set" rigidly or a priori it can be proposed that our general way of acting in order to achieve the ultiamte good is according to our long-term rational self-interests, in other words, happiness.
don't take it the wrong way, i'm not here to harrass you, this is just the way i look at it.
fede2 2 years ago 2
There's nothing "general" about ethics that I can see, right now anyway, hey I'm still learning give me time, rather it's highly specific. We all have our own principles but it's the good practicing ethicist that does the work. The Terri Schiavo case is a good example of an ethical dilemma and a complicated one at that. So how does a "general way of acting" achieve anything here? And certainly no one is really happy whatever decision is made. I don't take you the wrong way. ; - )
notfitforsociety 2 years ago
i don't mean to imply that ethics is a simple and exact science. there will always be dilemas. the "good" is relative to whom and what.
i also don't claim to have all the answers because i don't think there are ultimate answers.
i'm not all that familiar with the terri schiavo case. unless the woman had made it explicit in the past what she wanted done with her in that situation, there's probably no way out.
fede2 2 years ago
Just wiki her name and I suggest it as a case study for the aspiring ethicist. Nope there are no ultimate answers, though we wish there were, sure would make life easier.
notfitforsociety 2 years ago
ok, i'll do that. good talking to you.
fede2 2 years ago