Reason vs. Faith, Question 5 of 8 - Ayn Rand Institute

http://www.aynrand.org

Dr. Yaron Brook, executive director of The Ayn Rand Institute, discusses how capitalism could develop from a culture that nominally upheld Christian ethics.

See more at http://www.aynrand.org/reg_ls_index

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• religion
• ethics
• morality
• atheism
• capitalism
• Yaron
• Brook
• Ayn
• Rand
• Institute
• Objectivism
• Objectivist
• selfish
• Christianity

[Youhavethebody]

"It was a miracle."  -Classic.

[LegalizeCapitalism]

that is not reasonable at all. how do you account for definition? the universe is absolute. reality is objective. things have identity, and no thing identifiable in nature leads to infer the existence of anything else but the natural: no god, no spirits, no mystic power. give up the appeal to ignorance and use some real reason.

[Aerensiniac]

@LegalizeCapitalism

Give it a definition then please.

Till there is no definition you are trying to make up a difference based on a philosophical assumption.

Ultimately all that oppose faith with nothing but philosophy are chasing down other people based on assumptions.

Take your time, research, kill faith by proving that their definition is wrong, but dont go and make up philosophical crap based merely on your own bias and logic. Prove.

[chuFFisTwo]

@Youhavethebody showing that that's an insufficient answer. GREAT.

[MrChirpsky]

Every good thing to the glory of an ingenious elitist named Aristotle (reduced for the sake of Objectivist polemic to a catch-all invocation). Disbelieve this if you like, but I posted this before I heard the answer (it's always the same formula).

[FilipinoObjectivist]

Dr. Yaron Brook is amazing. Love the guy.

[LegalizeCapitalism]

The nature of a concept is based on the natural, its a man centered abstraction for characteristics one may attribute to the object, since the object doesnt direct in how to store itself in your knowledge, you have to create a way to retain it; the symbols of language/writing are used in thought and based on conceptualization before being developed into a form one can exhibit in reality, like cave paintings and the alpha-numeric system. For more read Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology

[ummidkme]

just a question: how do identifiable beings, i.e. thinking creatures (humans), account for abstract thought if they can only identify with the natural? also explain language and writing that account for other identities without the ability to self-identify.

[InFromTheVoid]

It is the fact the humans really do act in their rational self interest if given the opportunity. And religious people are really good double thinkers lol

[Scrampster]

zhrob1, let me take that control you don't need anymore away. Let's see what it'd be like shall we: No computers, no house (yes, someone built it), no communication other than the occasional GRUNT, no walking (yes, you control your legs), not even the most basic inventions like fire, or the wheel. You'd be nothing more than an animal. Nice going there buddy.

I'll keep the knowledge and control, and I'll build on it for a better future. THAT'S MORAL, ETHICAL AND RIGHT.

[zhrob1]

Scrampster

/There's no need for the ... just more knowledge and control over the universe./

It is this control and knowledge that has led to so much trouble in the first place! Better Ethics and morals by whose standard, the same guiding force that has led to man being morally deficient even now. It is like one saying my forefathers are not as smart as I am, and they said they same thing about those before, where does it end?

/we're smarter, stronger, better than we were before. /

lol nope

R

[LegalizeCapitalism]

Its not common sense if nothing within your book can inferred from existence without it. its complete old-world fiction, a fetus of philosophical thought. And your builder example is an incredibly weak metaphor: man is conscious and may therefore act with purpose. the universe is not a conscious entity, but it does have conscious beings. since the universe is not conscious it cannot think, nor implement any will to act since it is not a living thing, but a collection of them. Rand is better.