If an Objectivist is acting an ass are they still objective?

I'm not the most eloquent of speakers so I'd like to give a summary of what I was trying to say.

If it is your goal to explain and communicate your ideas to another person, then it is in your own personal self-interest to keep the conversation cordial. If your acting like an asshole people tend to stop listening, discount what your saying, and become more defensive. So if you call yourself an objectivist but you act like a prick, your being a hypocrite, your not being objective, and your not acting in your own self-interest.

I have a particular believe that the foundation of economic philosophy has nothing to do with money. I mention Ayn Rand's book "Capitalism: the unknown ideal" a book which details free and voluntary exchange. Communication is an exchange, so it still falls under an ethical umbrella. Are you being fair, equatable, are you taking advantage of the conversation? Just because you wish to defend a rational position doesn't mean you have a license to defend it in an irrational way. And if you think of communicating with people more like a act of exchange, I believe you might find more incentives to be humble, friendly and kind.

Being an objectivist is not a license to be an prick.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• randroid
• ayn
• rand
• objectivism
• paulmckeever
• jwoodswce
• libertarian
• libertarianism

[XOmniverse]

Glad you liked it. I don't call myself an Objectivist because there are components of the philosophy (mostly in the political realm) that I disagree with as an anarchist.

[Sparkygravity]

I think objectivism has a real methodology that can be implemented in a pragmatic and practical way to help people be more rational. Ultimately I hope that means people start acting and making decisions in a more rational way.

Examples:

Do you obey the law because your afraid of jail, or because it's in your best interest?

Do you obey your boss because your afraid of be fired or because your working together towards a goal?

Is the 700 billion dollar bail out a solution or an act of desperation?

[Sparkygravity]

The biggest problem I see with people when they communicate to each other about their ideas on philosophy and ethics. Is that they get up on their soap box and they forget that it has a purpose. You don't need to get defensive or offensive, if it's not going to help you explain your ideas.

I liked your vid because I see a lot of people who get turned off to objectivism that could actually use it... even some people who desperately need it in order to to form some kind of life that makes sense.

[grantsinmypants2]

Its sad, really. There is SO MUCH that could and should be thought about and said about this topic you're talking about here, but because of a premature example of it 20 years ago (the David Kelley incident), it's been completely shut down. There were careers and fortunes and reputations involved, so instead of having a vigorous discussion about "tactics for promoting Objectivism", there was just alot of posturing, hurt feelings, and ultimately wasted time

The aholes of today are the result

[Sparkygravity]

Look at us, the three of us... baiting each other going back and forth with the arguments of "Vote for me, I'm the most rational of Youtubers". What kind of message do you think we're sending to others? Those who don't care about the particulars, the details, and have no quarrel with anyone here?

If I were to do a character study of us, I ask myself the frightful question, "Is this the kind of people that Objectivism produces?" Are we encouraging or discouraging others, to think, be rational?

[Sparkygravity]

That's understandable, I'd personally have a honest scathing response to one that panders to insincere, or disingenuous mannerisms.

And I think that your right in that sometimes people can take a hint, and learn from a "rhetorical punishment" from a peer, or mentor. But it seems that these back and forth discussions are really too narrow.

Xomni, isn't going to change your mind, and visa versus. So really shouldn't the educational and rhetorical focus be turned to the many others on Youtube?

[XOmniverse]

My mistake, it was anther youtube Objectivist that did the video called "Aaron Hates Children." Yours was "Aaron0883, Ignorant with Stupid Tendencies." Far as I know, this is my first factual error with regard to this issue.

"Aaron0883, Ignorant with Stupid Tendencies." was the video I had watched before I did my video "Randroids and Irrationality."

Apart from effectively calling him stupid in the title, you mocked him viciously in your video with various sneers and imitating him.

[jwoodswce]

Having determined that I cant reason someone out of a position that they did not use reason to get to, I sometimes choose to apply a rhetorical punishment through a biting identification.

I view this as benevolent by applying a minor consequence to give them the opportunity to examine their premises before they suffer a graver consequence from reality.

Frankly, I do not make more of an effort because they are not valuable enough to me.

[jwoodswce]

S,

doesn't Xomniverse have a point? Your not going save everyone from irrationality... but do you ever wonder whether you turn people off with your brash nature?

The issue in my mind is that some individuals cant ante up to participate in a substantial discussion. Generally, I determine this by probing their epistemology with leading questions, which often can occur somewhere other than where I am brash.

cont...

[jwoodswce]

X,

If the 'he' you are referring to is me, as the context suggests, then you are continuing to display a troubling habit of substituting your emotional reactions for facts in your memory.

My vid suggested that Aaron0883 was ignorant with stupid tendencies and it did not deal with children specifically.

Either substantiate plausibly that you were not referring to me, or man up and apologize for your error.

[XOmniverse]

He did a video titled something along the lines of "Aaron0883 Hates Children" when he clearly does not. This is an obvious attempt to intimidate someone. I don't take back anything I said.