2. In respect to "Atlas Shrugged", at least, the government had everything to do with the issue of the novel...that is, people's desire to live to their own desires and self-sufficiency and other's use of government to bend them to THEIR own selfish desires.
-I don't trust a man who talks about ethics when he's picking my pocket.- Time Enough For Love - Robert A Heinlein
My avatar created by Feliza Estrada email@example.com
I found her tedious and generally didn't finish. Anthem is short. Like Trotsky (and Hubbard), her short stuff was the best for me.
Last edited by ecofarm; 08-15-12 at 11:26 PM.
I am a fairly orthodox libertarian, but I abhor selfishness. "Libertarian" does not mean "libertine."
Last edited by Guy Incognito; 08-15-12 at 11:29 PM.
"God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
-C G Jung
Tucker Case - Tard magnet.
Funny hearing a self-described "objectivist" arguing that morality is relative. You do realize that this undercuts your entire argument, don't you?It may be your own definition of good, but good and bad are relative terms, and are agreed to by majority consent, and nothing else. My definition is that the concept of good implies that I cause no harm to others by my actions. My definition of bad implies that I actively cause harm. Inaction does not cause harm.
If you do not value selfless sacrifice for the same of others, then you do not value treating others as an end unto themselves, because one necessarily follows from the other. Self interested actions may be a right under the law, but helping oneself at the expense of others is, by definition, treating others as a means to a selfish end.Morality is derived from majority consent, and exists in order to maintain control. I can see where your misunderstanding of Rand's concepts is in error. You are assuming that one can only treat oneself as an end by using others, which is not the case at all, and is apparent in the initial quote from Rand that I cited.
Self sacrifice is necessary as an acknowledgement of the worth of others. Randianism is utterly incoherent unless it is based on the solipsistic belief that only ones self exists, others if a Randianism acknowledges tha others exist and are to be treates as ends unto themselves, it is irrational to treat them as means to self interested ends. Rand fails on the most elementary principles of logic.
No, that is irrational. Self-sacrifice is not rational as a basis for living. It may make you feel good, but it denies your own worth, which is not less than that of anyone else.