News for conservatives: You can't reconcile Ayn Rand and Jesus.

Roodog

Posts: 9,737

Jun 20, 2011 -- 12:08AM, Namchuck wrote:

Then, alternatively, we could just think of other people before we think of ourselves.

Why invoke an entirely hypothetical third entity and place it at the top of the list?

That only applies to people who believe in a deity.

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9

fodaoson

Posts: 10,061

IDBC: I did not “Write” the phrases you attributed to me , I quoted and cited Nathaniel Brandon.
I was only answering your previous questions, neither espousing nor
negating objectivism. I was not a teenager but was in my mid twenties
when I first read Atlas Shrugged and Fountainhead
. I was neither impressed nor influenced
by Ayn Rand.

“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon

IDBC

Posts: 4,088

Howdy CL

Jun 20, 2011 -- 1:14PM, Christianlib wrote:

Again, the point, which some righties conveniently not only refuse to get, but refuse to even directly discuss, is NOT whether Objectivism, or even Christianity, are viable, workable philosophies.

What some lefties conveniently refuse to get is that Christianity is a religion and Objectivism is a philolosophy.

Jun 20, 2011 -- 1:14PM, Christianlib wrote:

The point is, they are mutually exclusive philosophies, and cannot be reconciled.

I would agree they are mutally exclusive. I would disagree that Christianity is a philosophy.

Christianity is a religion and religion is grounded in faith.

With faith all things are possible. Even the belief that Jesus Christ and Ayn Rand or Christianity and Objectivism can be reconciled.

Objectivism can not be philosophically reconciled because it would violate the philosophical law of non-contradiction.

In other words, you cannot honestly be claiming to live the two simultaneously.

HAVE A THINKING DAY MAY REASON GUIDE YOU

Christianlib

Posts: 21,848

Well, for one thing, there are Objectivists who seem to grasp the "philosophy" with religious fervor.

As to your trying to split the hairs of "religion" and "philosophy", I think your argument presents a distinction without a difference, and is therefore invalid.

Democrats think the glass is half full.
Republicans think the glass is theirs.
Libertarians want to break the glass, because they think a conspiracy created it.

Ebon

Posts: 7,676

Jun 23, 2011 -- 9:48AM, Christianlib wrote:
Well, for one thing, there are Objectivists who seem to grasp the "philosophy" with religious fervor.

That would be all of them. I've never met a self-proclaimed "Objectivist" who didn't regard Rand's every word as some kind of revealed holy writ.

Were I a cynic, I would doubt... Hang on, I AM a cynic. "Objectivism" is even really a "philosophy", it's just a collection of excuses for being an arsehole.

He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. ~ Proverbs 14:31

Fiat justitia, ruat caelum

IDBC

Posts: 4,088

Howdy CL

Jun 23, 2011 -- 9:48AM, Christianlib wrote:

Well, for one thing, there are Objectivists who seem to grasp the "philosophy" with religious fervor.

And there are Liberal and Conservative Christians who seem to grasp their "philosophy" with religious fervor.

Jun 23, 2011 -- 9:48AM, Christianlib wrote:

As to your trying to split the hairs of "religion" and "philosophy", I think your argument presents a distinction without a difference, and is therefore invalid.

I think the distinction between "religion" and "philosophy" is like the distinction between "astrology" and "astromony" or the distinction between "Creation Science" and "Darwins Theory of Evolution" and thefefore is valid.

Jun 23, 2011 -- 10:07AM, Ebon wrote:

Jun 23, 2011 -- 9:48AM, Christianlib wrote:

That would be all of them. I've never met a self-proclaimed "Objectivist" who didn't regard Rand's every word as some kind of revealed holy writ.

I would certainly agree that Objectivist are ferverent in their belief. And they do "kind" of idolize Ayn Rand. But I do not but I am not an Objectivist.

Jun 23, 2011 -- 10:07AM, Ebon wrote:

Were I a cynic, I would doubt... Hang on, I AM a cynic. "Objectivism" is even really a "philosophy", it's just a collection of excuses for being an arsehole.

Objectivism is a philosophy. And cynics think that everyone is an arsehole.

I think the distinction between Liberal Christianity and Conseverative Christianity trying to split hairs and is a distinction without a difference and therefore is invalid.

Certainly you have more in common with each other than you do with Objectivist.

HAVE A THINKING DAY MAY REASON GUIDE YOU

CharikIeia

Posts: 8,303

Jun 23, 2011 -- 10:07AM, Ebon wrote:

I would doubt "Objectivism" is even really a "philosophy", it's just a collection of excuses for being an arsehole.

Well put, Ebon. I also fail to see the philosophy there.

tl;dr

IDBC

Posts: 4,088

Howdy Ebon

Jun 23, 2011 -- 10:07AM, Ebon wrote:

"Objectivism" is isn't even really a "philosophy", it's just a collection of excuses for being an arsehole.

That is poorly put claim because you did not give reasons as to why you think it's just a collection of excuses for being an arsehole.

It is a rhetorically polemical statement. I can just as easily claim that:

"Socialism" is even a really a "philosophy", it's just a collection of excuses for being an arsehole.

or to make a richer statement.

"Socialism" isn't really a "philosophy" it's just a collection of excuses for beling an arsehole.

HAVE A THINKING DAY MAY REASON GUIDE YOU

Ebon

Posts: 7,676

Jun 24, 2011 -- 12:00PM, IDBC wrote:
That is poorly put claim because you did not give reasons as to why you think it's just a collection of excuses for being an arsehole.

It is a rhetorically polemical statement. I can just as easily claim that:

"Socialism" is even a really a "philosophy", it's just a collection of excuses for being an arsehole.

or to make a richer statement.

"Socialism" isn't really a "philosophy" it's just a collection of excuses for beling an arsehole.

Picking on my typos? Really?

The thing is, socialism's core principles don't lend themselves to being a jerk. The central principles (and I mean the real ones, not the Fox News version) are about cooperation, sharing and communal management. The central principles of Objectivism are about selfishness, pleasing the self and taking what you desire i.e. being an arsehole.

He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. ~ Proverbs 14:31

Fiat justitia, ruat caelum

Erey

Posts: 15,093

Jun 24, 2011 -- 12:00PM, IDBC wrote:

Howdy Ebon

Jun 23, 2011 -- 10:07AM, Ebon wrote:

"Objectivism" is isn't even really a "philosophy", it's just a collection of excuses for being an arsehole.

That is poorly put claim because you did not give reasons as to why you think it's just a collection of excuses for being an arsehole.

It is a rhetorically polemical statement. I can just as easily claim that:

"Socialism" is even a really a "philosophy", it's just a collection of excuses for being an arsehole.

or to make a richer statement.

"Socialism" isn't really a "philosophy" it's just a collection of excuses for beling an arsehole.

I know! Nobody has given any real reasons yet except to say Rand does not espouse altruism. Socialism neither espouses altruism, you should not need to be altruistic in a well run socialist environment because the state will not let anyone have unmet needs.

I go back to my statement that this is nothing more than bobble-headed bandwagonism.

Beliefnet On Facebook

What's Hot