Rebirth of Reason

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread

Post 0

Monday, March 10, 2003 - 7:19pmSanction this postReply
What is your purpose? To promote Objectivism?

I have no interest in promoting Objectivism. By this I do not mean that I am opposed to promoting Objectivism. Those who want to promote Objectivism, more power to them. It's just not my own personal interest.

My interest is in APPLYING Objectivism to my own life. (By the way, if you can show how people can apply Objectivism in concrete detail in their lives, that might contribute toward promoting it.)

The Dewey Decimal system used in libraries makes a distinction between pure mathematics and applied mathematics, also between pure science and applied science. Perhaps a similar distinction can be made between pure philosophy and applied philosophy.

Most writings about Objectivism are full of abstractions and have few concrete applications, to the point where I get disgusted with philosophy as most Objectivists teach it. Is there any hope?

By the way, do you know why Dr. Laura is so popular? It is largely because she applies philosophic principles to CONCRETES. Objectivists could learn much from her. Objectivists tend to think that once the principles are in place, then the applications are obvious and trivial. There are not. Or if they are, then show us!

I have interest in philosophy ONLY to the extent that I can APPLY it CONCRETELY to my DAILY life. No more.

Perhaps "A Day In the Life of an Objectivist" would help.


Wake up with the alarm clock. Whoa!!! That's already irrational; waking up with an alarm clock is proof of not enough sleep.

Not fully awake until after coffee. Whoa again!! Again proof of not enough sleep.

Besides, the active ingredient in coffee is caffeine, which blocks adenosine which induces sleep. I go out of my way to avoid everything that interferes with sleep. I literally sleep as much as I can. I do certain excercises (which I'm supposed to do anyway for ALS) to induce sleep (because I learned by experience that they induce sleep). Sleep energizes motor neurons, plus other benefits. ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) means motor neurons die. When motor neurons die, muscles connected to the brain die. The heart is not affected because it is not connected to the brain. I found by experience (and it makes sense in theory) that sleep reduces symptoms of this disease, even down to zero. Therefore I quite literally sleep as much as I can, and I do stuff to be able to sleep more, because sleep is beneficial to my health.

I guess I would make a lousy Objectivist.

I do have a coffee grinder, but I use it for grinding flaxseed.

Post 1

Wednesday, March 12, 2003 - 7:58pmSanction this postReply
If this little diatribe were to be catalogued in a library that follows the Dewey Decimal system, it would first have to be broken into at least two seperate parts, each of which would be filed in an entirely seperate part of the building from the other.

What the hell objectivism has to do with coffee (other than the latter helping one to grasp the former) is beyond me.

Post 2

Tuesday, March 18, 2003 - 5:08pmSanction this postReply

About what Objectivism has to do with coffee: To me Objectivism is a philosophy for living life on this earth here and now. Therefore I attempt to connect it to everything to do with my life. The connection between Objectivism and coffee (and a great many things) is obvious to me, and I don't understand why it is not equally obvious to everyone else.

Post 3

Thursday, March 20, 2003 - 11:13amSanction this postReply
It's funny that you bring up the objectivist/coffee issue as I am polishing off the final chapters of my latest book, Atlas Chugged.

What's obvious about the connection between objectivism and coffee is that I selfishly consume as much coffee as I can...although I make no attempt to interfere with the selfish rights of others to secure their own cup of joe.

I might also add that coffee, as it exists in reality, is "really good." This is objectively true (practically axiomatic) and necessarily negates any subjective opinions to the contrary.

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 4

Saturday, December 30, 2017 - 3:08pmSanction this postReply

This came up as a Random Past Article.  I found it ironic, first for the nay-saying and lack cogent of response.  The past 14 years saw SOLO blossom. Then Lindsay went his way with his share and, frankly, something was missing. I visited his site a few times, and did not like the tone at all. So, I did much of my writing about Objectivism here. But that said, this site was definitely less vibrant. And now here we all, all six of us. 


One perspective I offer is the City as a paradigm. Cities brought together people from disparate places, often they would have been mutually antagonistic. But in the city, they got along well enough by necessity. In fact, they left their own tribes and joined new ones: guilds, clubs, beneficial societies, and political parties among others. Conformity was a destroyer. Detroit was the home to Burroughs Comptometer when it became the automotive capital of the world, and one of the many nails in that coffin was Burroughs leaving town. In The Economy of Cities Jane Jacobs contrasts Birmingham with Manchester. Manchester (the home of Friedrich Engels) was dedicated to textiles while Birmingham was not dedicated to any one craft.


A couple of weeks ago, I went to post my annual Newtonmas message on two Google Groups boards, Rec.Collecting.Coins and Sci.Physics. Both were cluttered wtih obnoxious spam. So, I appreciate the need to keep some sense of propriety. I do most of my writing on GaltsGulchOnline. Conservatives are there, also, and religion comes up once too often too often, as does Islamophobia (but not Christianophobia), homophobia, and much else. But as annoying as they can be, the regular contributors do provide a steady in-flow of interesting articles to discuss. And we tend to agree more often than not because we share many common values, even if they are sadly weak on the actual content of Objectivism.

Post 5

Friday, January 12, 2018 - 6:25pmSanction this postReply

Michael -- I wish that the old SoloHQ group still existed. Dividing people up into Rebirth of Reason, Solo Passion, Objectivist Living, etc. is sad. It hugely hurts the neo-Objectivist conversation and debate. Why can't neo-Objectivists get along? There's certainly more to modern Randian thought, lifestyle, and community than The Atlas Society and The Ayn Rand Institute

Post to this thread

User ID Password or create a free account.