in

Freedomain Radio

Latest post 09-14-2007 9:29 PM by Chx. 4 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (5 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 09-14-2007 8:51 PM

    • Chx
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on 09-15-2007
    • Posts 38

    Hello.  I started with Ayn, stumbled upon Stefan on an Objectivist board, and, frankly, have found Molyneux's philosophy to be, if not better than Objectivism's, at least friendlier.  Not that Objectivism is unfriendly: it's ethics are amazing, it's just that I'm sick & tired of having to put up with paleo-Objectivists (as opposed to: neo-Objectivists).  On the board, I dissed the ARI.  Eventually Branden was brought up.  Since I am neutral on the subject of Branden & Rand...  ...well, I'm sure that you can predict the rest.  It kinda went downhill.  Scratch that: it went uphill: now I know that Objectivism can still be dogmatic.  Anyway, enough rambling: I've made my way here & am ready to discuss Molyneux-ian philosophy.  I'm sure that Stef isn't going to ban people who disagree with him, though.

     

    Philosophical positions:

     

    Atheist

    Minarchist (govt.'s only legit prupose is to prevent the initiation of force)

    Objectivist Metaphysics & Epistomology

    Unsatisfied with how "why good things happen to bad people?" has been addressed (not at all) 

    Aesthetics: freedomainradio.  Not really into the whole Romantic Realism, though I like the idea.  Read AS, but not Fountainhead.

    Operating System: Xubuntu 

  • 09-14-2007 9:03 PM In reply to

    Re: Chx

    Hi there, Chx, welcome to the boards!

    I have two questions for you, if you don't mind:

    1) What's the difference between a neo- and a paleo-Objectivist?

    2) Why "Chx"?

    Secret question 3) What's your take on Market anarchism/anarcho-capitalism? What do you have to say for and against it?

    Secret question 4) How did you get into libertarianism/objectivism?
    Balloon I love you, You are round, smooth and pretty. I rub you. Static.
  • 09-14-2007 9:21 PM In reply to

    Re: Chx

    Yo, welcome, great to have you!Big Smile

    I know what you mean about Objectivists - what happened when you brought Branden up? What's the take on that topic these days?

    And - sure, disagree with me all you want. My opinions don't count - only the truth!Big Smile 


    All Free! - Audio, PDF. Print starting @ $9.99+
    Freedomain Radio Needs Your Support! Easily send podcasts, videos, books and feeds to your friends with FDR Referrals.

     


     

  • 09-14-2007 9:24 PM In reply to

    • Chx
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on 09-15-2007
    • Posts 38

    Re: Chx

    Reply to Nasikabatrachus

    1) paleo-Objectivist: A Randist, more affiliated with the ARI.  Cares about intra-Objectivist politics.   There's a wiki article on neo-Objectivism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Objectivism

    2) My first name is Charles, my middle name is Xavier.  Portmaneu them and you get: Chx

    3) Anarcho-capitalism: almost right, but competition & the laws of supply and demand quit working when force is used.  Plus: I haven't heard how practical setting up DRO's are, or if they would be recognized.  Still, if force were not used, it'd be optimal.  Tell me about the transition.

    4) John Stossel introduced me to the word "libertarianism."  I was a conservative then, but libertarianism seemed interesting.  I was a huge religionist, too.  Gradually, I began realizing more stuff.  It helped that I was an individualist conservative rather than a traditionalist-conservative.  One huge revelation was that morality shouldn't be legislated.  Later, I learned Objectivism.  For about a year I was still a Theist.  Gradually, I heard satisfying (as in logically consistent, not emotionally comforting.  Emotionally comforting they were anything but) refutations of the Ontological argument, argument from design, Pascal's wager, etc.  But there was still the cosmological argument.  I was a Deist for a year, because only the cosmological argument worked and Deism seemed to be the most logical way to satisfy the need for a Prime Mover.  I figured that God was immune to infinite recursion since he was infinitely old.   Then on June 16, 2007, in the shower (also the place where I thought of an elegant proof for the Koinsberg Bridge problem) I realized that for God to create the Universe, he had to be in it.  That was silly.  So I became an Atheist.  Away went any social conservatism (though I am pro-Life because I believe fetuses to have some degree of sapience, and to be similar to infanticide.  Government regulations on abortion, therefore, would be like government illegalizing murder).  I am now a strong Libertarian & proud of realizing the truth.  Fun ancedote: influential to me is my friend, an Atheist liberal.  Now I'm Atheist, and he's Capitalist; we took the best parts from each other's philosophy.

     
    Chx.
     

    Filed under:
  • 09-14-2007 9:29 PM In reply to

    • Chx
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on 09-15-2007
    • Posts 38

    Re: Chx

    Reply to Steph: 

    I found myself banned from the board.  The admin was arguing that Branden was expelled because he was an irrationalist.

    My reply: What a "co-incidence" that Branden was exposed at the exact moment Rand found out that he was cheating on her.

    I guess that Objectivists are still hostile about the schism.   And I made the word "paleo-Objectivism" up.  I figured that it corresponded to "neo-Objectivism."

     
    Wow!  Stephan himself communicated with me! (<- I'm quite a fan.)

     

    "And - sure, disagree with me all you want. My opinions don't count - only the truth!Big Smile"
     -I'm glad that I joined.

Page 1 of 1 (5 items)
Copyright 2005-2008 By Stefan Molyneux
Powered by Community Server (Non-Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems