[RJCogburn]

Can one be a Catholic and not abstain from birth control ? Can one be a Jew and not be Kosher? Can one be a Protestant and not tithe?

I think that for all but the very most orthodox, the answer is yes.

Similarly, can one appreciate objectivist thought and not be an atheist? Again, I would say, except for the most orthodox, the answer is yes.

As before, for those interested in the subject of Objectivism click on the link above.

[Cultural Jihad]

Jim, these daily Objectivist threads are becoming soapboxes for the malicious slamming of Christianity and conservatism, and are of interest to only a tiny fraction of the News forum. Shouldn't these types of threads appear in a philosophy, religion, chat, or RLC forum rather than in the News/Activism?

[gcruse]

A religious Objectivist does some industrial strength compartmentalizing, I would think. If one truly follows where reason leads, I don't see how the destination can be anything but existentialism.

[onedoug]

One God. One morality for all humanity. Decency toward others. Deed over creed.

[joesnuffy]

The problem with so called "objectivism" is it is anything but objective that is....
Ignoring the eye wittness testimony of thousands of objective eye witnesses...and millions more whose lives
have been miracuoulsy changed...
Instead this so called objectivism seeks to prove its own already established conclusion
that it wont accept certain "kinds of proof"

[Hank Kerchief]

Is Objectivism compatible with religion?

PHILOSOPHY PING

(If you want on or off this list please freepmail me.)

Hank

[HumanaeVitae]

Objectivism is also incompatible with non-arbitrary ethics.

[longshadow]

popular thread placemarker

[PatrickHenry]

I enjoy these threads. But I wish they could be spaced out a bit more. It's somewhat hectic to have more than one lively discussion going on at the same time.

[Grut]

From what I remember of Atlas Shrugged, Objectivism isn't even compatible with children!

[Hank Kerchief]

Is Objectivism compatible with religion?

(If you want on or off this list please freepmail me.)

(Second Try)

Hank

[Byron_the_Aussie]

..is Objectivism compatible with religion?...

Objectivism is a religion, RJ: self-worship.

[SubSailor]

If I were born blind, should I therefore conclude that it is impossible for a human being to see because I cannot personally see? A living faith in the one true God and a personal relationship with Him that is real and life changing (as opposed to mere "religion") is something that can only be experienced personally. The paradox is that one will never find the proof until he stops looking for it and simply surrenders himself to his faith. It is only then that the proof is freely given. In other words, "I once was lost, but now am found; was blind, but now I see." Just because you're blind, don't tell me I can't see.

[Taft in '52]

In 1957, Whittaker Chambers wrote a scathing review of Atlas Shrugged, entitled "Big Sister is Watching You." This article was originally published in National Review and is available online at http://www.potomac-inc.org/aynrand.html.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

"...What, then, is their source or referent in reality? It is the entire emotional realm of man's dedication to a moral ideal."

Dedication to a "moral ideal" is idolatry.

Plato's Euthyphro is a great illustration.

Socrates advances the argument to Euthyphro that, piety to the gods, who all want conflicting devotions and/or actions from humans, is impossible.

Likewise, morals are such a construction of idols, used most often by the Left as a rationale for them to demand compliance to their wishes in politics, which are a skewed mess of fallacies in logic. Morals are a deceptive replacement for the avoidance of sin. If a person believes in a God, it is the conviction of the Holy Ghost by which they are guided and not by the idolatrous vanities of morals constructed by others...

"...to worship for gods those appearances that remain in the brain from the impression of external bodies upon the organs of their senses, which are commonly called ideas, idols, phantasms, conceits, as being representations of those external bodies which cause them, and have nothing in them of reality, no more than there is in the things that seem to stand before us in a dream.

"...the thing which they honored or feared in the image, and held for a god, was a mere figment, without place, habitation, motion, or existence, but in the motions of the brain. (Hobbes)

While I agree with much of what Ayn Rand said, she got a lot of her philosophy from Thomas Hobbes, she was just too obstinate and polemic to talk about it in Biblical terms, unlike Hobbes.

There are three ways people are influenced according to the school of behavioral psychology - - visual (sight), auditory (sound), kinesthetic (emotion). The kinesthetic or 'feeling' is also based on olfactory and tactile sense, much like Pavlov's salivating dogs. Visual images and sound portrayed can be used to anchor emotional and/or conditioned responses desired by those that present them, which in the case of television, is the Leftist television media, actors who create phantastical images in film, and Leftist politicians who pander to symbolism over substance (like Rush always says about them).

Considering that 90% of people tend to be more influenced by the visual, television has become a new religion. It is analagous to Plato's cave allegory. Television as a propaganda tool helps create visual phantasms (or as Thomas Hobbes called them, 'phantastical images') of the brain.

Like the necromancy of the Wellstone funerally, the use of Martin Luther King Day, or constantly invoking the "spirit of the '60's," the Left attempts to raise spirits of the dead as a totem for worship.

Marxism and their forms of Cultural Marxism are a religion, a collection of cults. In many cases they worship a dead Karl Marx like some (and I stress some) Christians worship a dead Jesus, and not a living God. This is no more apparent than in the practice of enshrinement and regular grooming of Lenin's corpse in the former Soviet Union.

It is the religious fervor associated with the pro-abortion advocacy. The societal practice of abortion is ritual mass murder upon the altars dedicated to idolatrous vanities, a collective human sacrifice to pagan idols. It has a similitude to the Teutonic paganism of Adolph Hitler, whose idolatry was the idea of a "master race." In effect, this genocide was a mass human sacrifice to those pagan idols.

The Left is properly identified with a 'confederacy of decievers that, to obtain dominion over men in this present world, endeavour, by obscure and erroneous doctrines.'

Now, I will also say again, I really like Ayn Rand's philosophy.

I just don't buy into the cult of personality that has arisen around it...

[Bob J]

---

UNSPUN! With AnnaZ and Guest Co-host FINESWINESUKSASS!

ON NOW! Listen while you Freep!

Join Anna and Finey as they talk with Larry Pratt from the Gun Owners of America! Also, CRBs and Bone-Headed Lie-Beral Quotes

 

Click the ON AIR sign or here at broadcast time to start listening live!

Click here for the broadband feed (when and where available)

Click here for the Radio Freerepublic Chat Room

Radio FreeRepublic shows archives are available here!

---

To be notified of upcoming shows and announcements, join the Radio FreeRepublic mailing list!

To Subscribe to this list send a blank email to:

RadioFreeRepublic-Subscribe@radioactive.kicks-ass.net

To Unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:

RadioFreeRepublic-Unsubscribe@radioactive.kicks-ass.net

---

[SubSailor]

Objectivism holds that "spiritual values" can be defined in secular terms, and on that basis agrees that they are of vital importance to fulfillment and happiness. Spiritual values are those pertaining to the needs of human consciousness, arising from the human capacity for reason, creativity, free will, and self-awareness.

Where did the author get this list of "spiritual values" from? Fulfillment and happiness? These are selfish pursuits that are totally contrary to the unselfishness called for by my God.

"He who loves his life will lose it..."

"I am crucified with Christ..."

"I must decrease that he may increase"

"Take up your cross and follow me..."

A peace that surpasses all understanding is the reward for a faithful and righteous life. Happiness is not the goal, but it is the result.

[Theophilus]

Objectivists, the Anarchists' Mensheviks

If the Revolution Without A Cause ever happened, their throats would be cut first. You ask why? Why not?

[Prov3456]

"If we accept reason as a method...."

"These needs include self-esteem, love, art, and philosophy...."

Whose "reason?" Who is to say what "reason" is? Who decides: the ruler, the Congress, a toss of the dice, you?

And who decided that the needs are those stated? A hermit may say he/she doesn't need love or art or philosophy, for example. What is self-esteem, and according to whom? Again, according to whom?

It seems to me that the entire article/discussion comes at religion/objectivist thinking from a "religious" perspective all your own. I simply reject your religion.

[beckett]

Similarly, can one appreciate objectivist thought and not be an atheist? Again, I would say, except for the most orthodox, the answer is yes.

Question from the audience at the Nathaniel Branden Institute circa 1965, a place where the word "God," pronounced aloud, provoked paroxysms of laughter, the only humor in and otherwise humorless lecture hall:

Audience Member: "Might not religious faith play a useful role in helping one endure tribulations?"
Rand: "What sort of inadequate and corrupt psychology would lead someone to ask that?"

Had Rand had children and stayed off pills, she might have experienced real human connection, enjoyed better mental health and therefore had something interesting to contribute to philosophy. As it is, her hopelessly stunted and paranoid worldview and unwarranted boundless faith in reason make her only a thinker of minor interest, not the "greatest philosopher since Aristotle" her cult followers make her out to be.

[bereanway]

What does the Objectivist turn to when reality and reason break down? I'm not very familiar with Rand but from what little I've read there appear to be some real problems with her adherents worship of reason.

For instance reality appears to break down in the sub-atomic world. We can't explain how sub-atomic particles exhibit the characteristics of both a particle and wave, however, this is well documented and remains a real paradox. Or how particles appear to communicate at speeds exceeding that of the speed of light which results in numerous problems with our understanding of reality.

Niels Bohr stated that anyone who isn't troubled by the findings of quantum mechanics hasn't understood these findings. Daivd Boehm (a protege of Einsteins) who did a great deal of work in plasma physics at the University of London and later at Princeton went so far as to state that the dimensions we exist in are actually a reflection of a deeper and more primal reality. BTW we can prove these other dimensions (at least 4) exist.

My purpose in all of this is to point out that exalting reason as the final arbiter of truth is very risky business. Reality may not at all be what it appears to our tactile senses.