On what William Dwyer said

William Dwyer said, “If you're trying to convince us, then you need to demonstrate that you understand Objectivism before presuming to criticize it.”

First, what if one of the criticisms is that it is not capable of being rationally understood?

Second, would William hold Rand and Peikoff to the same standards? Do Rand and Peikoff understand every philosophy they misrepresent, insult, and dismiss? Does anyone here think Rand and Peikoff understand Existentialism and Zen Buddhism? If so, I’d like to see a case supporting that proposition. If not, if people here think Rand and Peikoff don't always understand the philosophies they criticize, is William Dwyer a hypocrite?

If you are an agnostic on the issue, are you what Peikoff would call a coward?

Bis bald,

Nick

Post 1

Tuesday, August 22, 2006 - 4:12pm

Should Rand and Peikoff be masters in the other concepts they dismiss, or is only general knowledge of a concept neecded to dismiss it? I know quite a lot about Islam, but I do not have a masters degree in it. I dismiss it as mystical and false.
(Edited by Dustin
on 8/22, 7:29pm)

Post 2

Tuesday, August 22, 2006 - 6:20pm

Should Rand and Peikoff be masters in the other concepts they dismiss, or is only general knowledge of a concept neecded to dismiss it? I am not a master on Islam, but I do not have a masters degree in it. I dismiss it as mystical and false.

Well, good for you, Dustin, but I don't care what you a master in or not. I asked some questions about what William Dwyer said. Are you going to answer them or not?

Try to stay on topic or start your own thread.

Nick

Post 3

Tuesday, August 22, 2006 - 7:29pm

I raised a relevant question, and provided an example. You're a punk! I'll stay out of your thread since you made it to attack something some other guy said.

Post 4

Tuesday, August 22, 2006 - 9:37pm

To make your question relevant, you have to tie it into the topic. You are talking about being a master of something verses having general knowledge of it as a concept as being good enough to dismiss it. I wasn't talking about being a master of anything. The topic was about understanding Objectivism enough to criticize it verses Rand and Peikoff understanding the topics they criticised.

Whether or not you approve of my attacking what some other guy said, if it deserves to be exposed and denounced, not to do so would be allowing hypocracy free reign. I disapprove of that. It is like watching injustice and allowing it to continue, without doing what you can to expose it and stop it, to try to make things better in the world.

You have an holier than thou atttude toward me, but you are not above calling me a punk.

Feel free to stay away. See if you can keep your word.

bis bald,

Nick

Post 5

Wednesday, August 23, 2006 - 7:33pm

I'll stay out of your thread since you made it to attack something some other guy said.

Actually, William Dwyer posted the quote in question on the Article's board. There are several responses to it there, but I am not allowed to add my responses there, since I am not an Objectivist. This is a segregated site, and I am relegated to this board where other members may boycott me if they wish. So, I have no choice but to add my responses to his statement here.

Let me add that William Dwyer has menioned my name in his article on the Correspondence Theory, and he has mentioned his personal animosty toward me. I am not allowed to respond, and nobody is sticking up for me there or admonishing him for attacking me where I cannot respond. I can respond to his quote here, which I am doing, and I am not voicing any personal feelings toward him. Yet, Dustin, you still accuse me of attacking something some other guy said, as if I am some bad person. William, if he wants, can freely read what I wrote and respond here, but I cannot respond on the Article's board.

bis bald,

Nick

Post 6

Thursday, August 24, 2006 - 12:25pm

You're not allowed on the other forums?

Post 7

Thursday, August 24, 2006 - 12:41pm

I am not allowed to post on the Article's Forum. When I attempt to do so, I get the following message:

This site is for Objectivists. You may continue to post on the Dissent board only.

bis bald,

Nick

Post 8

Thursday, August 24, 2006 - 5:38pm

Guess you have got to start labelling yourself something or other to post there. I think you should be able to see any of the boards, but I guess that is not the status quo.

Post 9

Thursday, August 24, 2006 - 8:07pm

I can see the other boards, just not post on them.

I do label myself, Dustin. I am a Neo-Objectivist. A Neo-Objectivist, however, is not an Objectivist. I do agree with some aspects of Rand's philosophy, but I also disagree with some aspects and criticize it. So-called Objectivists must see me as a threat. They ban me from posting on other places on this site, and they are currently avoiding me here. Do you respect that kind of courage, Dustin?

bis bald,

Nick

(Edited by Mr. Nicholas Neal Otani on 8/24, 8:08pm)

Post 10

Thursday, August 24, 2006 - 8:26pm

I wouldn't label myself an Objectivist, I disagree with Ayn Rand on some points as well. The reason you can't post is because you will argue what you feel is wrong. I am more passive, and will just let my prosecuters argue with themselves as I give them the brush off. I wouldn't mind seeing you being able to argue your point of view in the other forums, honestly. For example, in my "Vegetarianism" post I've basically been slammed by the self proclaimed team of Objectivists. They haven't worked to change my mind a bit, but I've definently gotten exposure to their point of view like I was looking for.

We may have similar or different situations, but my point is that I wouldn't label myself Objectivist either. I hope this does not get me censored on some forums. However, you are a lot more involved in debating your point of view then I am.
(Edited by Dustin
on 8/24, 8:26pm)

(Edited by Dustin
on 8/24, 8:44pm)

Post 11

Friday, August 25, 2006 - 3:45pm