The Thinker's Manifesto
Loading...
Loading...
1:10
Re: The Golden Mean - Virtue or Fallacy?by chocobofish161 views- 0:35
Template trackingby chocobofish139 views
- 14:59
Albert Camus The Stranger-Part 2-Existentialism- Philosophy of Existenceby cobracarg4,534 views
- 0:12
College Puzzle Challenge 2008 - Three and a Half Jewsby chocobofish397 views
- 6:20
Predicate Logic and Existenceby Cimbolic808 views
- 1:40
Decade counter magicby chocobofish920 views
- 1:10
NASA Robotics Academy 2008 projectby chocobofish473 views
- 14:46
1. Better Never To Have Been - David Benatarby FreeDeterminThinker4,782 views
- 7:59
1A - Manly P. Hall - Nature Of Godby abovebelow12,516 views
- 7:44
The Examined Life Pt. 2by daudnew20093,471 views
- 2:19
Re: Re: Chomsky refutes "libertarian" "anarcho"- capitalismby chocobofish710 views
- 6:23
Re: Why?by jeffsmithluedke4,961 views
- 2:26
10 Mad Scientific Theoriesby alltime10s90,528 views
- 8:10
William Lane Craig and Divisive Scienceby DasAmericanAtheist3,276 views
- 1:52
Proof that God Existsby MrMinistryMan48,628 views
- 7:57
Explaining the Existence of the Mindby yuttadhammo4,423 views
- 3:41
Alan Watts - Existence Is Weirdby discordian42041,626 views
- 9:50
Does God Exist?: Howe-Shook Debate Spring 2011 (Part 1)by RatioChristiTV1,018 views
- 10:28
Richard Swinburne on Arguing God Through Analytic Philosophyby shinobirastafari1,873 views
- 5:01
Existenceby peteherron6,599 views
the mythologies of the heroic individual are over rated and often exploited. margaret thatcher once had the audacity to say that societies don't exist, only individuals do. this myth may have served her political purpose (ironic coming from one living off tax payers) which was to exalt the myth of the free market at the expense of truth, which would be closer to claim that there is no such thing as an individual, at least in the anthropological sense. genius or not, we don't exist in a vacuum.
canteluna 1 year ago
young people can be so idealistic and rigid. is this ayn rand you're quoting? whoever wrote this doesn't understand how the brain works and what its multitude of purposes are. thinking, or what you are really getting at, philosophizing, is only a small part of what the brain does. i suggest you read some recent studies by scientists studying the brain. you will learn that they understand just how social we are--biologically.
canteluna 1 year ago
Two comments: 1. just retaliation when there has been a violation of Rand's non-aggression principle is, yes, based on "eye for an eye". Eye for an eye implies that society would not kill a person who, for example, violated the n.a.p. by stealing from, or hitting, someone.
2. If your manifesto is objectivist, you need to redo the piece on purpose which, in Rand's philosophy, is your own happiness, not "to reason"; and whichis absolute, not "relative".
PaulMcKeever 4 years ago