Posted on 12/30/2003 10:29:35 AM PST by G. Stolyarov II
One of the most vexing problems that I have encountered in my experiences with Objectivism, is the fact that many people seem deathly afraid of our viewpoint – EVEN people with whom we should have most in common. They just don't seem to be able to understand it, even if we explain it patiently and calmly. Everything we say gets systematically distorted into something horrible. This used to bother me quite a lot, and still does to some degree. But I have come to a conclusion after a VERY long time thinking about it:
When people misunderstand what Objectivism is, and the things for which we stand, many of them are simply ignorant, NOT willfully antagonistic.
Take, for example, a situation that will doubtless be VERY common to most Objectivists: the issue of religion, and atheism. Whenever I would make statements to the effect that I didn't (and still don't), believe the Judeo-Christian mythology, everybody would go into emotional meltdown: their powers of reason would mysteriously disappear.
You can't really blame them, however. Most "Believers" (in whatever religion), simply don't understand, or think about, their religion very deeply. They are "religious" enough that atheism makes them nervous, but actually have very little understanding of the Bible, Koran, or whatever "holy book" they believe.
Most people don't really understand what Christianity means by "God". They have no idea that the concept makes no sense, as their religion teaches it. To them, "God" is somewhere between Santa Claus and Uncle Sam – a benevolent, strong, heroic Father figure "in the sky". Most of them have only a vague notion of heaven, and no interest in hell whatsoever.
When confronted with the works of Thomas Paine, Robert G. Ingersoll, or Ayn Rand, they honestly do not understand how those critiques of religion could apply to them. And can you REALLY blame them? After all, as we all know, most of the Christian Clergy THEMSELVES don't know half of how bloody and evil parts of the Bible are.
Most "Christians" in this country (and others) couldn't care less about the bible. The only parts of it they know halfway clearly are the "Christmas story", and the Easter thing. They understand the "ten commandments" in a very rudimentary, common sense way. They don't CARE that the "thou shalt not steal" thing is an injunction against stealing your neighbor's SLAVE. Most people honestly have no idea what the bible actually says, or what Christianity actually teaches.
They get terrified by "secular humanism" or "Godless atheists" because pretty much the only exposure to such things has been from socialists, communists, and suchlike. Hell, how do you think the destroyers of the United States were able to hoodwink people into putting "Under god" in the pledge of allegiance, in the first place? The sales-pitch was to make us different from the "Godless Commies". In the popular mind (controlled and shaped as it is by the "activists" and their social agendas), the concepts of Communism and Atheism were skillfully and secretly blended, so that the Common man can no longer tell one from the other.
This is part of what makes Conservatives useless, as I said. Most of them have no idea what their Bible teaches; nor will they listen. More often than not, when they DO find out, they get every bit as disgusted as we do, and worse: you ever wonder where all those preachy "born-again atheist" sites come from?
Same thing with capitalism: what most people in this culture mistakenly think of as capitalism is the lukewarm, state-entangled version: government-backed monopolies, licensing, franchises, tariffs, etc. Most of these people have never tried (as I have), to start a business, or create their own wealth. They've all bought into the mediocrity-mentality that says the only way to make it is as somebody else's "employee". The Entrepreneurial spirit is mostly dead in them, and they see "their jobs" as nothing more than a means to continue subsisting at the same mediocre level.
Reason? Too hard. Easier to watch TV, and give a half-hearted appearance of a religion you don't understand, every Sunday.
Purpose? Work, sleep, watch TV, breed the next generation of slaves, and die in a pool of your own urine.
They haven't learned any better. The government-controlled schools specialize in killing off every trace of the heroic impulse. Generations of potential Howard Roarks are systematically processed into docile, conformist Keatings, by schools, families, and 'peer pressure'.
But ask yourself: having never had self-made goals, how can they be expected to be creatures of "self-made soul?"
It's actually rather heartbreaking, to consider the masses of living zombies lock-stepping through life, their only goal to keep up with the Joneses, afraid to stand taller than the crowd because "what will the neighbors think." It's horrifying.
These poor fools equate "Altruism" with goodheartedness, human warmth, and private charity. They've probably never read Comte, Bismarck, Hegel, or Marx, and barely even heard their names.
So what's the answer?
PATIENCE. Those of us who know a better way MUST stand for it, and MUST reach out to them. Otherwise, this entire world is as good as dead.
So "professional philosophers" don't take Objectivism or Rand very seriously? Screw 'em. It's not ABOUT winning over Academia, in the long run. It's about reclaiming the Human Spirit from its destroyers, and getting people do understand that they DO have a right to exist, and they DO have a right to resist their Masters. We are a slave rebellion, friends: an "Underground railroad" of the Human Spirit.
Academia is a joke. Most so-called "philosophers" have deteriorated into gibbering wordplay, or convinced themselves they don't even exist. To think we're actually going to make headway there is wishful thinking at least, and suicidal at most.
The philosophical gangrene set in several centuries ago. We must ask ourselves: do we have 200 years to wait? Can we afford to let the wheels of history turn, and hope against all evidence that that the inhabitants of that time will still even be recognizably human in spirit and mind?
No. We don't have the time for that.
Even a cursory examination of history will reveal a pivotal fact; namely, that "paradigm shifts" – massive changes of gestalt thinking NEVER originate from WITHIN the old paradigm. In other words, history supports Miss Rand's premise that the "Mavericks" – the Roarks and Galts of the world – are the Atlas's who make the world turn.
So do not despair, friends. We must take up the torch, fight for all that is good and genuine and beautiful and true, and NEVER submit. "Second Renaissance" is eminently appropriate for an Objectivist bookstore's name, but it is ALSO – MUST be – our credo.
WE, and those of like mind, must be the heralds of a "new birth of freedom".
There's no other choice.
FMCDH
Sadly, this is true. For example, most of those who call themselves Objectivists have never even read, Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, a pivotal book in Rand's philosophy. Most are only familiar with the political aspects of her philosophy, her novels, and some of her ethics; but beyond that, they are completely ignorant of the more important philosophical aspects of her work.
However, most Christians have never read the entire Bible, even once. (Any of the George Barna reports.) As soon as I begin a discussion with most Christians and quote Augustine, or Calvin, or Luther, or Wesley, or any of the Church Fathers, or even the Bible, most go limp, and have no idea what I am talking about. Ask any Christian (except those who post here or have been to a Christian school, not exactly a majority) what ex nihilo, original sin, atonement, transubstantiation (Catholics), apologetics, or eschatology mean. None has any idea. (However, the answers are always fun.)
The easiest repudiation of religion, all religion, is that, to most people it is the most important set of beliefs they have, (because it is the one, after personal considerations, they are most likely to kill or die for), and they are either all wrong (because they all contradict each other), or they are all wrong but one. (Of course they all believe the latter and that their religion is the one that is not wrong.)
The only real difference between an Objectivist's view of religion, and a religious person's view of religion is just this, a religious person can see that all the other religions are wrong, and why they are wrong; an Objectivist can see that all religions are wrong, and why.
(By the way, the commandment is, Thou shalt not steal, period. Exodus 20:15.)
Hank
So you did not see the blue laws and a restriction on business?
Hank
No they can't. Their disbelief is in itself a religion. As I alluded to in #4.
So disbelief is now religion? That's amazing.
Now I do not know this for certain, but I suspect you disbelieve in Santa Claus and do not worship him, and I suspect you disbelieve in the phoenix and do not worship it, and I'm certain you disbelieve in phlemics and do not worship them. So that must mean you have at least three religions, disbelief in Santa Claus, disbelief in phoenix, and disbelief in phlemics, as well as the religions of whatever else you do not believe in. If disbelief is religion, this must be so.
Hank
From a purely logical perspective any correct religion must be wrong because G-d is infinite and our ability to comprehend Him is finite. The best any religion can be, therefore, is incomplete which is still wrong.
That said, there are two points of view that are mutually exclusive at their core. One is that there is some form of spiritual world, the other is that there is not. Since both points of view have what amounts to doctrines, acceptable practices, and an understanding of the chief end of man, then both may be considered a religion.
That said, your sentence above is better stated:
an Objectivist can see that all other religions are wrong, and why.
Shalom.
So may you be!
Do you know what the word, "truth," means?
Are you free? From what?
Hank
Before there were any blue laws business accepted the behavior voluntarily.
They were a restriction, but not a violation of rights.
I would not advocate their return. However, America would be better off if the nation took a single day for reflection and recreation rather than working seven days. This must be voluntary for it to be valuable, but it would be valuable.
Shalom.
Kleenex ;-D.
Do you contend that man can know the truth?
Shalom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.