Because egoism can only end in nihilism. In fact, the current nihilistic world we live in today is little more than Galt's Gulch driven to its logical conclusion, into decay, rot and collapse.
That's why I'll never be an Objectivist, because I believe in things beyond my own mindless desires, and if you reduce your entire worldview to nothing but selfish desires, you're a walking dead motherfricker
No, if everyone taught the same shit, the actual "power" of thought would be lost. This should be obvious. If everyone is thinking the same shit, most groundbreaking things would end up taking way longer to happen. This is the exact reason why the Middle Ages didn't really had a lot of philosophical development compared to other times.
People should be free to think whatever the frick they want, and ideally they can think in more than a single system. There is that too, I would say that a "well educated citizen" should be able to think in at least 3-4 "systems of thought".
11 months ago
Anonymous
You're arguing with yourself here. Enjoy it, I guess 😛
11 months ago
Anonymous
How is being actually free to think whatever the frick you want something bad? Because even if you end up like that, you will end up most likely defaulting to some previous school of thought.
11 months ago
Anonymous
lol trolling confirmed
11 months ago
Anonymous
What is wrong with kids learning about what is a troony? There will still be trannies out there.
Because it's in self interest is to suppress other people's base self interest and raise culture up again (which lolbertarianism of course helps destroy) so I don't have to live in this hellish modern society anymore. I'm sure 3/4 of young men basically agree with this statement.
because if everyone just fundamentally followed their self-interests we wouldn't have a civilization. For the greater good of society it is necessary to make individual sacrifices to better the whole. This applies to parenthood and to love as well. The lack of selflessness is a direct cause of the dystopian nightmare we're living in.
one of the only criticism I have for free markets is how much it hurts the arts, as, people really watch shitty films and most books that sells are homosexualuber diaries.
Well, maybe it's just because of keynesian consumerism, but I wonder if classic liberalism today would revert art to its aristocratic values.
More consequential than people making bad consumptive choices because they‘ve been provided the option is cultural programming which fosters bad art because it doesn‘t elevate the populace toward upheaval and turns a profit once a week to keep the subjects‘ dopamine running.
Because they misunderstand it. Your self-interest is not the same as what you happen to want. Your self-interest is what is objectively good to you, regardless of what you subjectively might desire.
Because it's worse stirner written by a hypocrite. She got popular because she wrote accessible and functional fiction for teenagers disillusioned by status quo and thought right-libertarianism was transgressive at the time.
She's essentially the right's Orwell. Both of them had utopian yet unrealistic visions for their respective system of capitalism or socialism, all written in boring yet functional fiction.
Orwell snitched on socialists, and Rand went on welfare.
She made some really good points, she was absolutely right that the self interest of capable entrepreneur-capitalist-CEO types is what makes living standards and technology and everything that the rest of us plebs can enjoy
I don't see any flaw in what she said
She cut collectivists to the core
I think the reason she is so hated is because this post
She wrote accessible works that were often teenager's first exposure to some sort of dissident thought. So collectivists really hate her, as a threat to capture young people's minds and save them from their own indoctrination program
Rand was right about everything she talked about the only thing she was missing was Christianity
There is an anthropological and historical precedent for working for your folks interest instead of purely your own. I wouldn't say I "go mad" about her writing, it's just flat out wrong and suggests chaos is superior to order. It isn't largely self interest that pushes people to do nursing, say, it is invaluable altruism that helps our societies to function
Working for your "folks interest" helps with your own interest, i.e. mutually-beneficial egoism. You've probably heard of this as quid pro quo, "you scratch my back, I scratch yours," The Golden Rule, etc.
They benefit from your help, and you benefit from helping -- even if it's as minor as the pleasure you feel from helping (pleasure being the prime motivator of action).
And if anything, this is literally the root of most modern problems. Religitards and trannies, both are fighting over what will prevail in people's thoughts. Instead of just accepting things and learning with each other, and frick it, to each one their own ideas.
Because she says that this is le ultimate good. People get all butthurt about it
Because egoism can only end in nihilism. In fact, the current nihilistic world we live in today is little more than Galt's Gulch driven to its logical conclusion, into decay, rot and collapse.
That's why I'll never be an Objectivist, because I believe in things beyond my own mindless desires, and if you reduce your entire worldview to nothing but selfish desires, you're a walking dead motherfricker
>nihilism
This is the problem with religitards, you want everyone thinking the same shit. This is madness, literally bugmen thinking.
Strawmen. Some things should be individual, some things should be communal. Any society that takes either approach to the extremes is bound to fail.
No, if everyone taught the same shit, the actual "power" of thought would be lost. This should be obvious. If everyone is thinking the same shit, most groundbreaking things would end up taking way longer to happen. This is the exact reason why the Middle Ages didn't really had a lot of philosophical development compared to other times.
People should be free to think whatever the frick they want, and ideally they can think in more than a single system. There is that too, I would say that a "well educated citizen" should be able to think in at least 3-4 "systems of thought".
You're arguing with yourself here. Enjoy it, I guess 😛
How is being actually free to think whatever the frick you want something bad? Because even if you end up like that, you will end up most likely defaulting to some previous school of thought.
lol trolling confirmed
What is wrong with kids learning about what is a troony? There will still be trannies out there.
>rand
>egoist
>nihilism
>bad
kek
Yes
Because it's in self interest is to suppress other people's base self interest and raise culture up again (which lolbertarianism of course helps destroy) so I don't have to live in this hellish modern society anymore. I'm sure 3/4 of young men basically agree with this statement.
*it's in my self interest to
because if everyone just fundamentally followed their self-interests we wouldn't have a civilization. For the greater good of society it is necessary to make individual sacrifices to better the whole. This applies to parenthood and to love as well. The lack of selflessness is a direct cause of the dystopian nightmare we're living in.
NO, I WANT TO SMOKE CIGARETTES AND HAVE LE SEX WHILE I BOSS PEOPLE AROUND AND I WON'T HAVE CHILDREN.
Kek, maybe if she had kids she wouldn't have had to go on welfare.
self is shaped by public institutions controlled by 1%
one of the only criticism I have for free markets is how much it hurts the arts, as, people really watch shitty films and most books that sells are homosexualuber diaries.
Well, maybe it's just because of keynesian consumerism, but I wonder if classic liberalism today would revert art to its aristocratic values.
It wouldn‘t.
More consequential than people making bad consumptive choices because they‘ve been provided the option is cultural programming which fosters bad art because it doesn‘t elevate the populace toward upheaval and turns a profit once a week to keep the subjects‘ dopamine running.
Because they misunderstand it. Your self-interest is not the same as what you happen to want. Your self-interest is what is objectively good to you, regardless of what you subjectively might desire.
Because it's worse stirner written by a hypocrite. She got popular because she wrote accessible and functional fiction for teenagers disillusioned by status quo and thought right-libertarianism was transgressive at the time.
She's essentially the right's Orwell. Both of them had utopian yet unrealistic visions for their respective system of capitalism or socialism, all written in boring yet functional fiction.
Orwell snitched on socialists, and Rand went on welfare.
Stirner is an Amoralist Egoist
Rand is a Eudaimonic Egoist
Latter>>>>>shit=former
She made some really good points, she was absolutely right that the self interest of capable entrepreneur-capitalist-CEO types is what makes living standards and technology and everything that the rest of us plebs can enjoy
I don't see any flaw in what she said
She cut collectivists to the core
I think the reason she is so hated is because this post
She wrote accessible works that were often teenager's first exposure to some sort of dissident thought. So collectivists really hate her, as a threat to capture young people's minds and save them from their own indoctrination program
Rand was right about everything she talked about the only thing she was missing was Christianity
>right about everything
>christcuck
>criticizing indoctrination
Is this some kind of joke? This is starting to get repetitive.
There is an anthropological and historical precedent for working for your folks interest instead of purely your own. I wouldn't say I "go mad" about her writing, it's just flat out wrong and suggests chaos is superior to order. It isn't largely self interest that pushes people to do nursing, say, it is invaluable altruism that helps our societies to function
Working for your "folks interest" helps with your own interest, i.e. mutually-beneficial egoism. You've probably heard of this as quid pro quo, "you scratch my back, I scratch yours," The Golden Rule, etc.
They benefit from your help, and you benefit from helping -- even if it's as minor as the pleasure you feel from helping (pleasure being the prime motivator of action).
Atlas Shrugged predicted the competency crisis
And if anything, this is literally the root of most modern problems. Religitards and trannies, both are fighting over what will prevail in people's thoughts. Instead of just accepting things and learning with each other, and frick it, to each one their own ideas.
jannies are trannies