In Defence of Ayn Rand #6: Metaphysics, Ego & Self-interest

[PrettyNimbusClouds]

@NicolausNA

She's telling people to think for themselves not telling them what to think. Also how much power do you think she could have got being Russian in the united states?

[natritious1]

this guy is the beezs knees

[NicolausNA]

if you really seek your self interest it is better to try take a position of power in the government or a state agency instead of going around preaching BS to people on how they should live... if this russian lady really believed in what she was saying why even bother telling people what to think??? lame philosophy. Back to school

[VegasSkateCulture]

Following someone does not mean you are mindless, and sheep like. that is just your ego trying to tell you your special, and brave.

I follow Alexander the great because like him, not because he entrances me to mimic him. There is a difference between following, and leaching.

And Rand had a very good philosophy, but that philosophy is outdated now that we know more about the brain.

[swu880]

@VegasSkateCulture

wow- and do u even know ayn rand's philosophy? funny u should condemn it when u dont even know what the fuck it is in the first place.

[stepchangeable]

metaphysics is the lowest form of philosophy - nothing but a circle jerk of bullshit.

[Kikarok]

I love how you struggle not to laugh throughout these videos.

[jos0531]

mindless, zombie-like follower

[libertangel]

metaphysics = metabullshit

[svanneman]

In order for the self to exist, it must necessarily be the same as its parts or different from its parts (examples of parts of a human self include such things as memories, feelings, consciousness, body parts, etc.). If the self is the same as its parts, then the self would either be multiple as the parts are multiple or the parts would be singular as the self is singular. If the self is different from its parts, then it would be observed in total isolation from all of its parts. Which one?

[olvew]

Actually, you're right. A car is only an abstraction, the only thing existing is its atoms. We create this abstraction for the purpose of understanding and interacting with the world.

[olvew]

Abstractions do not exist by themselves, they are tools used by Man.

[svanneman]

Are you saying that only atoms and atomically based abstractions exist? How can the self have stable and abiding happiness if it is merely chasing after its own abstractions that appear to its own mind? is the self then like a dog joyfully chasing its own tail? Atoms chasing atoms? Abstractions chasing abstractions? Abstractions chasing atoms and vice versa? Is stable and abiding happiness possible? Does that make the self an abstraction? Is the self merely a tool or does it truly exist?

[svanneman]

jiddu krishnamurti is an interesting person to read.

[olvew]

The self is basically your consciousness, which exists in the form of electric signals in you brain. Where is the contradiction?

[dannidandannikins]

I love how Paul McKeever looks like he's going to burst out laughing at this numbskull.

Including the footage of him gaping blankly after every sentence he makes was a nice touch.

[superdiza]

Poorly minded NLP and public speaking, very interesting content.

Rand believed in external realities, forget that WE create the universe. Including our understanding of it.

[hoomelemele]

If this kid read the Fountain Head and came up with this interpretation, do you really think he is going to understand your argument?

[Johnnydmb23]

another outstanding video from Mr. McKeever.

So what do you think about Harper dissolving the goverment?

[coachtaskmaster]

Isn't it interesting that her own self interests failed her in the end, when her lover decided to pursue HIS own self interests (another lover). All the while of course, she expected her husband to be understanding of her own interests. THAT is REALITY.

[chulahagh]

Not that interesting really. Ayn Rand was a Political Philosopher. Not a Marriage and Relationship Councelor.

"she expected her husband to be understanding of her own interests"

I bet a lot of "selfless" people expect the same, but the premise that somehow she did not live a fulfilling, happy and successful life by her definition of success is phoney-baloney.

[olvew]

As far as I know Ayn Rand was true to her philosophy and respected this choice, which is irrelevant. What is relevant is how Ayn Rand describes and discusses this kind of scenario in detail in her novel Atlas Shrugged, which you should read.

[sethian93]

Leonard Peikoff - Rand's nominated successor - has stated that the Ayn Rand philosophy is a closed system and not open to debate.

[olvew]

Which is irrelevant, because Leonard Peikoff is only a man, not some kind of pope.

[sethian93]

If its irrelevant Rand would not have appointed a successor.

[olvew]

What Ayn Rand thought is irrelevant. Her philosophy is a logically deduced system based on the facts of reality. Thus, as her own opinions are irrelevant to the facts of reality, her oponions are irrelevant to her philosophy. The moment you start supporting Objectivism because, not because you have proven to yourself that it is right, but because "Ayn Rand said so", Objectivism ceases to be an objective philosophy and turns into a cult.

[sethian93]

Exactly true.

[olvew]

I would like to add that I am an Objectivist and most definitevely regard it as an open system. In order to be objective, cannot defy the facts of reality. If there is but one contradiction between reality and Objectivism, Objectivism would become a rationalistic system; no more objective or rational than Christianity. Thus, as we gain new knowledge about reality, the philosophy must change in order to reflect this. A closed system would by definition be irrational.

[sethian93]

I think if you are interested in reality then best things to study are the sciences, not any philosophy - except perhaps the philosophy of science. Science, especially relativity and quantum physics, have profound metaphysical implications, most of which go directly against Objectivism, which is a rationalistic cult. The political implications of science are addressed by the technocratic movement with far greater truth value than Objectivism. Buckminster Fuller is a far better guide than Rand.

[olvew]

To be honest, I have reflected on this problem for months, without finding a solution.

[trimmerman1]

I like how you managed To find a real subject for a dialog. Your subject is no expert on Ayn, but he is capable of serious debate, pity.

[BrianMcD86]

Hey guys, let's argue on the internet :)

[Ramcattery]

Nice filters, bro.

[dcc543]

Nice. how did you get the camera between the bookshelves at the public library, you moronic simp?

[PinoX7]

wtf do you have a scientology banner on your page?...

[freezzertime]

love listening to you...it make sense...

[PaulMcKeever]

If so: mission accomplished. Thanks.

[Ramcattery]

Quote unquote bullshit.

Quote-unquote, "bullshit".

Quote, unquote, bullshit.

How exactly would you type that out? I'm having trouble.

[2007Obi1]

Listening to you, Mckeever I am struck by your sincerity & depth of typical objectivist philosophical argument. You say AR started at the "bottom" with metaphysics & worked up to the top. I say the opposite is true. Her theory is inferior to biblical teachings & Jesus Philosophy (Rd the New Testament). Her conc that God doesn't exist is proof of her error. As a Jew, AR was included in the BLOOD Covenant btwn Abraham & God. Means that she could get a 2nd chance b4 God. Where does that leave you?

[Youhavethebody]

What the heck are you talking about?

What "God"?

No Theologian has *ever* proven God's existence, and from experience it's obvious that "He's" not self-evident like perception, for example.

But I suppose you'll be the first to prove His existence, out of all of the thousands who have said they would. Well, be my guest.

[Moragauth]

For those who doubt Ayn Rand as a philosopher, please actually read her works and works by Douglas den Uyl and Douglas Rasmussen. Little gnats proclaiming her not to be a philosopher, when they have no knowledge of her to begin with, are amusing.

[plotinus1]

you are a follower. Rands views are extremist and she is barely a second-rate novelist--not a philosopher. Her ethics are particularly distasteful and I suspect it appeals to ppl you rationalize their lack of empathy (ppl who need help).

Watts is far better if you are looking for meaning...

[normbreyfogle]

Ayn Rand is grade school. High School would be Alan Watts. College? Well, that's where you'd write your own thesis.

Rand was correct, in her terms. Watts questions and explicates all the meanings of all the terms, and this is a wise progression in one's developement. After one has studied all of that, then one can be a creative leader rather than a follower.

[xcyst]

really really really cool vid,

though i must say i was a bit dissapointed not to hear the squelch at the end of the vid :-)

[yoyothasme123]

You really get it! My dad wants me to go to college because he wants me to have a stable future, but I truly believe that my music career will thrive. I have it the talent and the skill set that I busted my ass for! I can't stand sitting in class. I'm wasting my time. I'' get nothing but a certificate for forty grand a year. My self esteem suffers because I am enrolled in something that I am mediocre at. My results are minimal. Barely passing. what to do?

[plotinus1]

what you put in, you get out. worker smarter not harder.

[ceremonyforafatlip]

Why even take time to try to explain the philosophy to someone who clearly doesn't even understand the English language? Also, even if this kid had the intelligence or experience to make objective judgments for himself, so what? You are NEVER going to convince anyone of anything by arguing. If you consider yourself an Objectivist, your actions will attract those capable of rational thought into asking you questions about your motivations. Only then can they learn.

[teatimeboner]

The interesting thing is that the fellow you quote may be misusing the term 'ego' according to Ayn Rand, but his usage is sound within the defition one will find in any random dictionary.

To suggest that one may not rid themselves of their own ego (or self) is entirely secular (or even atheistic). I do believe that one may rid himself of 'the self' or 'ego' Try meditating! Try being an audience member watching a play! You certainly can detach yourself from your 'ego'.

[jpararaja]

1 ego (psychoanalysis) the conscious mind

2 self, ego

 your consciousness of your own identity

3 ego, egotism, self-importance an inflated feeling of pride in your superiority to others

[paddycarson]

I think you may be refering here to self awareness. If ego is self then this could be called ego awareness. Is it possible to lose self (ego)awareness and maintain an ego? I find this a really intersting question as I have had moments too where I have felt no distinction between my self as seperate from my surroundings and maintained awareness of it. What does Rand say about ego and awareness?

[teatimeboner]

You made a fine distinction between 'egoism' and 'egotism'. Since you know the definition so well, you sir, are egotistical.

Does cutting someone up here and making them look foolish serve your 'self'?

[jpararaja]

Since he has not taken words out of contect, to successfully make him look foolish means that he is foolish. And frankly with your incorrect assessment regarding the word "ego", so sir are you.

[Moesizla]

Excellent vid

[plotinus1]

ummm not really. I felt like vomiting when he mentions that being compassionate is not meaningful or one's highest virtue. He is admitting that he it is meaningless to be compassionate! twisted.

[oconco]

No, he means that being compassionate should not be the main priority of existence,it should be completely voluntary, not guilt imposed self sacrifice to a higher cause, that defeats the purpose of existing..

[methochias]

I've made a similar mistake in the past confusing metaphysics with mysticism. I think laymen believe that metaphysics are outside the realm of reason. Redliter needs to read a little philosophy such as kant to find out what metaphysics really is.

[sdrs85]

wow someone finally gets it... thanks for posting this up... awesome...

[londonkev]

Paul,

I loved this video.

Good work.

[elsa8001]

...also...love the plaid shirt and the music! ;-)

[elsa8001]

Really enjoyed your video! When I saw that it was over 16 minutes I thought "oh no! not a 16 minute Youtube video!" But I must say it was quite good! I have been interested in Rand for many years and agree with much of what she said. Thanks for posting!

[MisfitDoctor]

Paul, I love your videos, it makes objectivism a little clearer to we the laymen.

[PaulMcKeever]

Thanks for the kind words MD.

[froilanvincent]

Ayn Rand never advocated irrational selfishness... it's rational selfishness, stupid! That she never preached that man shouldn't feel compassion for others... If you feel and find and see happiness in helping others, that's egotism because you follow yourself... but if you help just because that's what you teaches taught you, and that's what society tells you, then that's not egotism... that's exactly altruism...

[froilanvincent]

What the (anti-rand) guy is talking about is that objectivism is all about selfishness and that man should not care of others... The guys is confused... The answer should be this way: that man's only motive is to achieve, that his pursuit is happiness and man should live the way he should be.

[redduckinpond]

You responded to a guy who said:

"None of us has a stable identity"

"All of us are suffering"

Nathaniel Branden has responded Erich Fromm who has raised similar arguemtns in the following manner:

"Speak for yourself, Brother!"

[PaulMcKeever]

Beautiful.

[racingbritain]

Excellent job, once again, Mr. McKeever. Huzzah!

[AynRandOeuvre]

"Is that what you learned from Dr.Akston?" she asked, pointing at the stove.

"That among other things."

"Did he teach you to spend your time -your time!-" she could not keep the shudder of indignation out of her voice -"on this sort of work?"

"I've spent time on work of much lesser importance." (DT:JG\AS\AR)

[aaron0883]

I have gone through about half of your videos so far. I haven't had any contentions so far, and so I figured I would say thank you.  I figure that your intentions in participating in these discusions is for intelectual stimulation, and/or intelectual approval. Therefore ... I figured I would show some approval. Everything is well thought out. Good job.

[PaulMcKeever]

Thank-you for your kind remarks.

[marneedear]

Good job Paul. I am enjoying your grasp of Objectivism and defense of Ayn Rand.

On egotism --> I prefer to refer to that as solipsism. I beleive it may be more precise and it removes the possible confusion between the two "ego" isms.

Just sayin'.

[PaulMcKeever]

I find the effort rewarding. As for my on-the-fly example of egotism: yes, hardly a precise definition on my part, or a definition at all. Cheers. PM.

[redliterocket4]

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. -Gotama Buddha

I'll respond in a video in a few minutes.

[PaulMcKeever]

I hope to watch it later today. PM.