| | Okay okay. It'd be swerving off-topic to discuss the validity of the Super Cheese Theory. (S.C. is what I call god, since it may as well be a hyper-intelligent hunk of fermented milk)
So I'll just constrain my post to your very, very last statement.
"But those Objectivists who are serious about seeing their principles winning broader support in society need to either remove from Objectivism that which excludes its acceptability to the vast majority of the population..."
Why? That's really all I can ask. The vast majority of the population also believes communism is good in theory, if not practice. Should we toss the idea that any subservience to a collective or State is just plain evil? Should we also accept Kant's noumenal reality simply because the majority of the population possesses very little certainty about their place in the universe, or that we exist in a real, fathomable reality? (For more on Kant see Prof. Ed Younkins great article on the main page.)
I have always understood why people seek to explain complicated matters with a self-deprecating shrug and a smug, "God works in mysterious ways". But because some people are willing to submit before something they can't see, hear, touch, feel or fathom doesn't mean Objectivism should compromise the most basic axiom within: reality is real. This will, of course, evoke a "well, that's just a religious truth claim" or "that has to be taken on faith just as much as the idea of Super Cheese". In fact, no. Since Man began rubbing sticks together to make flame, to when we tossed Neil Armstrong onto the moon, all the way till today, this very second, Man has been grasping, smelling, hearing, feeling, seeing and fathoming the material universe. All evidence, for hundreds of thousands of years, points to: Yes, we do in fact live in a real, fathomable, causal universe, that through time and trial has been tested and can be tested today. I have yet to hear tell such a vast array of actual, perceptible, proven acts of "God". This leaves the Super Cheese far behind in the race for the minds of rational men. That's why It's one compromise Objectivism can't afford to make. If Objectivism can open the door for "God" simply to get a following, it can also open the doors to many things pervading our culture. See: drug use as an accepted, lauded recreation, sport sex, gore flicks, Democrats, purple dragons, Islamists, noumenal realities, and MTV. I don't see it happening, and I don't see anyone agreeing with you any time soon. The idea of "God" is not necessary. Why even entertain the idea? Ah well. That's enough for today. Gotta run!
J
|
|