RE: Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism
July 17, 2016 at 9:56 pm
(This post was last modified: July 17, 2016 at 9:57 pm by bennyboy.)
(July 17, 2016 at 9:48 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: I'm really done arguing with you about this - the fact that we have socialized programs that give everyone clean water, that we're working towards socialized health care, that we have public roads and public education, etc, etc - this is not about "creature comforts". Plenty of people have those things and still live ridiculously hard lives. But those things have also improved their lives - as imperfect as those systems are, they're still better than we were 100 years ago. And a magnitude higher than 500 years ago. This isn't arbitrary it's statistics .
You don't find your family and life exciting? TFB for you - I'm really sorry to hear that. But there are plenty of people who manage to acknowledge how good they have it AND take delight in their life and family and other things. They don't have to go live a scrappy life to do so. I would suggest a counselor to talk about these things.
Shouting "it's statistics" doesn't make it less arbitrary. You are sending a real mixed signal: "Who the fuck are YOU to tell US what a good life is? And by the way. . . a quality life is _______, and agree or get shouted at!"
Either you think we should drop arbitrary definitions of subjective terms, or you do not. You can't have it both ways. I'm saying that what YOU define as "quality of life" is so by your perspective, not intrinsically so, and was able to provide a personal example that it's a matter of your perspective, not something that is inherently true.
But through all this, Rand looks less and less silly. If we are going to allow arbitrary definitions, like mine OR YOURS, of what is good or not good in life, then her voice is going to have to stand as a valid perspective on the human experience.
