Sorry, that ~still~ makes little sense.
Well, I certainly can't make you understand...
And, of course, you can't try, either. Its just pretencious 'intellectual' bafflegab.
----------------------------
As I said earlier, which you couldn't refute, we learn rational self interest at our mothers breast.
The fact that I haven't refuted it is not proof that it's true.
Of course it isn't. Restating the obvious has become your favorite 'argument' ploy, of late.. Sad.
If it's objectively true, you should be able to prove it. Of course, your response to that was, and I quote, "whatever"...
I did 'prove it'. -- "Don't bit the tit that feeds you" is ample proof.
'True' or not self interest works.
Heyyyyyyy, we're finally making progress! I agree - it works. So who cares if it's objectively true or not? Who gives a damn that Rand claims it to be objectively true, but can't possibly prove it to be objectively true? We're finally past all that Randian self-contradiction, and we're finally finding a real basis in reason here. See? You just ditch Rand as the be-all and end-all of rational systems of morality and ethics, and you can actually get somewhere useful ;)
Your feeble straw man ridicule makes a fool of you, not Rand, or my take on rand. I have nothing too 'ditch', as she is hardly my "be-all and end-all"..
----------------------------
Until a better idea comes along, a philosophy that says that everything is knowable and rationally accessible, trumps your mysticism, in my book.
Even if you can't know that premise to be true itself? That kind of self-contradiction doesn't bother you, even a little bit?
You seem to think everyone here has your own weird concept of "self-contradiction". Get a grip on your ego.
Whether I'm successful or not, I don't think anyone can fault me for not trying, after hanging on for 300+ posts ;)
I did 'prove it'. -- "Don't bit the tit that feeds you" is ample proof.
No, it's an anecdote, not a proof that the proposition that self-interest is inherently rational is universally true. Collect lots more anecdotes like that, and you'll have an inductive argument to present, at least.
You seem to think everyone here has your own weird concept of "self-contradiction".
Well, okay. Personally, I don't think it's all that weird to regard the fact that the proposition that "everything is knowable and rationally accessible" is itself not knowable or rationally accessible as being self-contradictory, but there you go.
And I don't "style" myself as anything, BTW ;)