Objecting To Objectivism (Part 2/2)
Top Comments
All Comments (371)
-
@CosmoShidan Whereas science is a meant to understand the natural world and confront it. As for Peikoff, he should try to upgrade his thought with a little Locke and Epicurus.
-
@DMAN123223 BTW, Peikoff's "crusade" against the modern sciences listed above I think is just embarrassing for the field of philosophy. It's bad enough that philosophers are slammed for not conducting experiments and introducing questions that science can't answer by scientists. Those fields of thought, philosophy and science should coexist, then conflict. Without philosophy, we wouldn't have the means to pursue intellectual pursuits or understand ourselves.
-
@CosmoShidan Indeed, I think if not Rand, it would be John Lock and followers of individualism, although that might not quite so obvious to people.
-
@DMAN123223 Even though I hold it against Rand for her outdated metaphysics, repulsive ethics, and her position on evolution, quantum mechanics, environmental science, and neurology, and her pedestrian writing, I admit, she has her place in pop culture. Without Anthem, there would be no Borg or even Star Trek for that matter; nor would have Heinlein gotten ideas for his classic books such as the Door into Tomorrow.
-
@CosmoShidan Bio-shock was in fact based off Atlas shrugged. Rapture is Atlantis.
-
@DasHinchen Really now? Your starting to make the whole philosophy sound like a religion in itself. Why try to make it sound as if you want to join your "secret society"? Well, I sure as hell don't need any philosophy that leads to "self-enslavement" and has nothing to do with the peace of mind. Last you aren't the first objectivist who I've seen act this way. You guys behave in such a collective matter when it comes to criticism you Scientologist-esque schmucks.
-
@CosmoShidan your ignorance just went trough the fucking roof. You have no Idea about Obejectivism, NO IDEA. But you keep insulting us with pointless nonsense that you THINK is Objectivism. And I'm stupid enough to get angry about it!
-
@DasHinchen I serious about the atomic theory that never gets addressed by your kind. I thought you guys were atheists like us and you'd at least believe in science. But in the end, you follow L. Ron Hubbard in drag.
-
@CosmoShidan Thanks for another gush of unrelated, self-worshipping nonsense. will you trouble another one?
-
@DasHinchen And you haven't even asked me what the heck I was talking about when I said beings and objects are made of atoms either! I was mentioning the atomic theory itself. Either you objectivists think it's mysticism or you just don't get it! Also I'm just surprised at you baffoons dodge or are unable to comprehend Epicurus.
I used to be an objectivist, until I decided to read the people whom Rand derided in her works. I read Kant, Hegel and Marx. I soon realized she pretty much lied about what those authors were claiming. Kant in particular was grossly misrepresented by her. First read Kant's Groundwork and then read Rand's Objectivist Ethics. She plagiarized the most important parts of the argument, and the things that she changed she made worse. There's a very good reason why academics don't teach her stuff.
jessemaurais 7 months ago 16
This was an amazingly unacademic look at Rand. I was looking for some solid anti-Rand arguments, but found nothing to work with here.
XanderXereus 5 months ago 6