Humour

Why did the chicken cross the road ?

My spiritual answer : Tsh, what a silly question. The road is really a construct of the chicken's mind. All that is important is the Tao.

My Objectivist answer : The chicken crossed the road because it was part of its identity ! A is A ! Now stop asking these loaded post-modernist questions !

Another one I remember from a horrible anti-Objectivist site :

Why doesn't Peikoff wear a watch ?
Because he hates second-handers.

Why did Ayn Rand write in all caps ?
Because she was a radical for CAPITALism !

Post 1

Monday, November 4, 2002 - 12:04pm

Mon Dieu Francois! Quel horreur! This one was originally for Arthur Silber's blog. I wanted to include one about Richard Goldstein and his "Attack Queers".

Paranoid about whether or not the chicken crossing the road might just be an "attack queer" in disguise trying to leave the gay community, he preferred to wave his magic fairy wand and turn it into a leftist. Then he choked his chicken! AARRGH! So we'll never know if the chicken might have actually made it across the road. :)

Post 2

Saturday, November 9, 2002 - 1:54pm

Here's my answer: just ask the frigging chicken!

Post 3

Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 11:26am

A (not so) short story by The Lone Rambler
�an experiment with neural circuitry�

Title:
An Evening with Chaos

Scene:
The Political Philosophy Town Meeting got out and the whole group went to the bar.

The Group:
An altruist
A mystic
A linguistic analyst
A communist
A democrat
A fascist
A cynic
An objectivist
A subjectivist
A relativist

The Action:
The Altruist sees that there are many in the group and that the bar is not very large. He decides it would be better for everyone if he sits this one out and just goes home. The Cynic tries to argue with him about whether he can be sure that it�s for the best, but the Subjectivist jumps in and says that it must be true, as long as the Altruist is personally convinced of it.

Inside the bar:
The Mystic steps in front of everyone else to order first (a rude act that she brushes off, considering the infinite pity & forgiveness that the Intelligent Designer must have for her, with her being so imperfect and all) �

Bartender: What�ll it be, Miss?

Mystic: I�ll have a Bloody Mary.

Subjectivist: Whatever floats your boat.

Relativist: Good choice, given the circumstances.

Cynic (thinking): How can she be sure that that�s what she really wants?

Bartender: That�ll be 4 dollars.

Mystic: I spent all my money on �get-rich-quick� books written by a man that claims you can just �astral view� the winning lottery numbers. It has worked for me yet, although I�m sure that there are others that it has worked for, otherwise his book wouldn�t be such a bestseller! He says that, if it hasn�t worked yet, then that�s because you don�t believe in it enough yet. But anyway, I�m broke now and I want you to just have faith that you will create good karma by letting me drink free tonight. It will come back to you somehow, I promise, just have faith (she gives him a rabbit�s foot and a smile and sits down at a booth that �feels� right).

The objectivist, seeing no one ready to order, steps up to the bar. He knows what he wants, knows he can afford it (from years of producing wealth) and gives his order in a style & manner that is fitting to the context at hand: �Good evening, barkeep! I will have a Golden Cadillac, please.�

Subjectivist: Each to his own.

Relativist: Good choice, given the circumstances.

Cynic (thinking): I wouldn�t be too sure about that.

The linguistic analyst, who is a mechanic by day, stares at the drink menu and can�t seem to get past the names of the drinks to picture what they would refer to in reality. In frustration, he breaks down and simply finds the only name that appealed to him in his current frame of mind; he orders a Screwdriver.

Subjectivist: One man�s meat; another man�s poison.

Relativist: Good choice, given the circumstances.

Cynic (thinking): I wouldn�t be too sure about that.

The fascist, who is a Building Inspector by day, steps up to the bar making sure that his Building Inspector badge is seen by the bartender �

Fascist: A Kamikaze sounds good to me

(The Communist looks intrigued by this drink choice)

Subjectivist: I can respect that.

Relativist: Good choice, given the circumstances.

Cynic (thinking): I wouldn�t be too sure about that.

Bartender: That�ll be 4 dollars.

Fascist (opening his jacket to bring his badge in plain view again): This building looks old, is it updated to the new fire codes yet? You�ll need the government to issue you a new permit to stay in business, you know. And the process involved can get either go smoothly or not.

Bartender: This one�s on the house, Mister _____?

Fascist: Floda � Mr. Floda.

Subjectivist: I can respect that.

Relativist: Good choice, given the circumstances.

Cynic (thinking): I wouldn�t be too sure about that.

Bartender (looking at the Communist): And what�ll it be for you, sir?

Communist: Well, while the Kamikaze sounds good to me too, I think I feel more like a Moscow Mule.

Subjectivist: I can respect that.

Relativist: Good choice, given the circumstances.

Cynic (thinking): I wouldn�t be too sure about that.

Bartender: That�ll be 4 dollars.

The Communist looks at the bartender with discontent and before another word is said the Democrat steps in and says �We�re together. The Moscow Mule sounds good to me to, but I�d like mine with a twist.�

Subjectivist: I can respect that.

Relativist: Good choice, given the circumstances.

Cynic (thinking): I wouldn�t be too sure about that.

Bartender: Alright, 8 dollars then.

The Democrat, leaning over the bar so that the others can�t hear, convinces the Bartender to add the charge for him and the Communist to everyone else�s tab in the form of a tax. In this way, the Democrat & Communist can drink more, the Bartender makes more money, and everyone else will never know they were paying for it.

Subjectivist: I feel ready to order now.

Relativist: Good choice, given the circumstances.

Cynic (thinking): I wouldn�t be too sure about that.

Bartender: What�ll it be?

Subjectivist: I fell like a Zombie.

The Bartender, sensing that a majority of this group evades reality & responsibility, leans over to ask: �Are you going to pay for this?�

Subjectivist: I want to have my drink first. I want to make sure that it was worth something to me before I pay you anything for it. If you don�t oblige me, I will sue and I will tell my story the jury, I will tell them my truth. That feels fair to me.

Bartender (just wanting to serve them & get them the hell out, looks at the Subjectivist�s friend, the Relativist): Well, what�ll it be for you then?

Relativist: I feel like a Zombie, too.

The Bartender makes the 2 drinks and hands them over, not expecting to be paid anything. After turning his back, the Subjectivist/Relativist duo has made off with the drinks, but he looks down and sees some foreign currency on the bar. Apparently, the Relativist noticed that the drink prices were printed on the drink menu without a dollar sign to signify the unit of payment. With this in mind, and assuming that all �realities� have equal value, he chose to pay the dollar amount listed as if it were priced in Japanese Yen.

Finally the cynic steps up to the bar (all this time he was struggling with the question of whether he really was in a bar; and whether he, the bar, or the others, even existed).

Cynic (not sure of whether the Bartender is going to hear him, let alone understand him, and even then, whether the Bartender will comply with his request): I�m not absolutely sure, but I think that I would like to try a Head Shrinker.

Bartender (frustrated, hands the drink to the Cynic): And who�s going to pay for this?

Cynic (as he�s turning to leave with his drink): Now we can never really know the answer to that question, at least not with any certainty.

The Bartender sighs and pours himself a Golden Cadillac.

Post 4

Sunday, May 25, 2003 - 9:36am

That was funny.

Here are some excerpts from the book;
Life at the Bottom by Theodore Dalrymple (Buy it!)

Theodore Dalrymple is a psychologist who works in an inner city slum hospital in Britain and has written a book about the mentality and philosophy of his patients. In the book he also examines Left Wing intellectual ideas and how they have been adopted by the british under class and how destructive the ideas are.

' "it just didn't work out", they say, the "it" in question being the relationship that they conceive of having an existence independent of the two people who form it, and that exerts an influence on their lives rather like an astral conjuction. Life is fate. '

' Not a single one of my young patients has known the dates of the Second World War, let alone the first; some have never heard of these wars, though recently one young patient who had heard of the Second World War thought it took place in the 18th century. In the prevailing circumstances of total ignorance, I was impressed that he had heard of the 18th century.'

' I have come to see the uncovering of this dishonesty and self-deception as an essential part of my work. When a man tells me, in explanation of his anti-social behavior, that he is easily led, I ask him whether he was ever easily led to study mathematics or the subjunctives of French verbs. '

Post 5

Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 1:42pm

The Lone Rambler strikes again (ACT II in Reasonville)
�neural circuitry gone awry�

Title:
Chaos Continued

Scene:
Reasonville � the morning after

The Action:
The town political philosophers woke up after a night of drinking at the bar. Many attempt to escape the consequences of overindulgence with aspirin, some attempt "hangover cures" such as fatty foods, which they had heard about or read somewhere, but they just can't remember where. They have to get back to work at the Town Hall (Reason Hall) early because a couple of brothers who work for the government are going to present a new ordinance to be voted on by the philosophers.

At the Hall, everyone is grumbling (except for the cynic, who can't believe this is all happening; and the objectivist, who successfully predicted the degree of a hangover that he would get, and had carefully calculated this against the amount of fun he would have had if he had drank less - or if he had drank more, for that matter). There is a knock at the door. It is the Parker Brothers from the government.

The Parker Brothers begin to make their presentation/proposal for a new government ordinance in the town. They explain that the government ordinance (which they shorten up to just "GO" for convenience) would be good for Reasonville because it includes a government loan for economic growth in the town. In addition, if the voters eventually pass GO, they would each collect $200 and be allowed to enter partnerships with the government on the housing developments that would ensue, such as houses and hotels. However, the government would retain control over the railroads and utilities, and the people of the town would lose their free parking.

What follows is the transcript of a roundtable discussion between the philosophers regarding the proposed economic growth & government ordinance "package-deal". Each party's input is followed by the name of the party proposing it, in order to cast a vote either for, or against, the ordinance:

An objectivist in the group speaks up first, in an effort to set the precedent:
"I don't think we should pass GO. It sounds like a scam and the government makes out with more than half of all the profit. Economically, we are growing just fine without special privileges from the government. Do we really need this?" � Y. Sackrofyce

A quick rebuttal by a republican who's certain that he is in a moral majority:
"If we really want to know what the right thing to do is, then we had better consult the highest authority. The Bible says something like 'Give to Caesar what is rightfully Caeser's and pay your taxes when they are due, because God wouldn't allow corrupt governing, every authority under God is a right authority'. So we should pass GO if we want to make it to heaven. Its as simple as that" - E.Z. Nolledge

A quick agreement from a "true believer":
I agree. Ever since Adam sinned, we have been trying to make up for it. C'mon you guys, this is our chance for redemption" - O. Ridgenelson

A rebuttal from a liberal who considers himself a really deep thinker:
"I disagree. There is no such thing as an absolute. This is especially true ("absolutely true" he's thinking) for morality & ethics & "doing good" (as if these 3 are entirely distinct issues). In short, we can't know whether our choice is right or not" - A. Morril (notice that he doesn't answer the question or solve any problems, but at least he does get "something" across to the bleeding hearts of the group)

A knee-jerk response as if it was a true Eureka moment:
"Mr. Morril is absolutely right about morality! You can't know it! Come to think of it, you might not be able to truly know anything." - M.T. Hedd

A condescending rebuttal:
"You are wrong about that. Not only can you know things, but you don't even have to experience the world in order to know things! Can't you see it now? It's all in your head! All that you need is already all in your head!" - N.L. Littickle

A startled defense:
"It's not in MY head. I don't have any special knowledge. I don't have any special knowledge from the outside world either, regarding the issue at hand. I will have to refrain from voting on this subject. Sorry guys, I've got other things to do now. Hope you guys work it out for us!" - E. Vader

A moral judgement:
"Mr. Vader, you can't just leave. None of us have special knowledge of this kind. Besides, philosophy is EVERYONE's business and you are part of this community. You are attempting to rationalize that we can simply drop this issue because we are fallible and do not have omniscience." - U.R. Rong

The Duckshon brothers chime in:
"I think that we should look at particular instances, and see if they fit into a cohesive framework for our decision-making." - N. Duckshon

"I think that we should just look at the big picture and derive a choice for this particular instance that follows from what is already given." - D. Duckshon

An altruist (who's let many go ahead of him) speaks up:
"I think that we should do whatever the government says is best for the people. We need to take responsibility for everyone's happiness and realize that we are a cog in the wheel of society." - I.M. Justameens
Rebutted:
"Cogs or not, this cog wants what he earned. This cog deserves what he rightfully earned. Life is a necessary condition for the existence of values." - I.M. Annend

And the mud starts slinging:
"Mr. Justameens is right. We all exist for society's sake. We should each get an equal share of the pie." - E. Gallitarion

"We can't know that! All we can do is pick some values and believe in them. We have to co-create our reality! Can't you see that?!" - X.S. Tenshalist

"Even when we do make a choice, we can never know anything about whether it's right/wrong, good, or bad. I am absolutely sure about this." - R.U. Sertan

"You're an idiot for choosing to say that. Don't you know that we can't make any choices?! Stop choosing to believe that way, because you don't have free will." - D. Turmonizzum

"I'd just like to say that we should be done with this by now, I'm sure of it." - R.B. Trarry

"We should have been tracking how many of us are being put out by this discussion, how long to speak for on it, and the potential gain that we receive in terms of cost to benefits for the greatest number of people!" - U. Tillatareon

And finally, a voice from the corner calls to wrap up the discussion and call for a vote:
"You guys, we are all here right now. We have a vote in front of us. A vote that has consequences. That is our reality. Let's move forward and take responsibility for our lives & happiness" - X.S. Stanzists

Post 6

Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 2:44pm

Correction on the message above:
The surname for the last speaker should be Tensagzists (X.S. Tensagzists)!

Post 7

Tuesday, June 3, 2003 - 3:10pm

More from the Rambler (ACT III, Contemporary-style Chaos)
�cautiously dedicated to Lindsay Perigo, who is 'particular' to certain contemporary themes�

Title:
Straight out ah' Reasonville

Scene:
The political philosophers of Reasonville decided that it would be wise if they do not pass GO, do not collect their $200, and go directly to jail if they have to in order to stand up for their sovereignty. Apparently, reason rules the roost as long as men keep their minds active (active, to be differentiated from open; as in "wide open"; so "wide open" that your brains fall out). But a critical turning point is ahead �

The Action:
The political philosophers were just about to end their meeting when they heard the roar of about a dozen motorcycle engines approaching the town of Reasonville. It was Hegel's Angels. They are coming to enforce a compromise on Reasonville: They will agree to recognize that they are not the rulers of the town but, at the same time and in the same respect, that they are (just a "coincidence of opposites", they will say), and so therefore, they will accept a synthesis between these 2 opposites and rule half the town from now on.

An objectivist looks out the window and recognizes the Hegel's Angels (he has developed an eye for anyone riding on false premises). "We're going to need ARI, somebody call ARI" (ARI is the code name for a New York gang that doesn't take crap from anyone, including Hegel's Angels). Another objectivist (who has the number on speed-dial) makes the call, and the rest is history in the making:

The Leader of the Hegel's Angels, Carl Marks, busts through the back door of Reason Hall: "Listen up, bourgeoisie. There's a new order in town. We'll start by splittin' up yer' gold (in Reasonville, every penny is backed by a gold standard). Your PLATE-O-gold CAN'T be just yours anymore, so don't try to HAGGLE with me over the MARKS I put on it."

An objectivist stalls for time until the ARI gang can get there (the non-objectivists are speechless; they just seem eager to make some sort of synthesis out of this opposition). The stalling works (the objectivist used a dialectical method to draw out the argument, something that the Hegel's Angels just couldn't turn away from). Just 3 of the ARI gang make it, but that's enough to stop a dozen Hegel's Angels in their tracks (the ARI gang is from Spanish Harlem, and they don't mess around). The 3 members of the gang are: Alicia Rosenbaumarulli, Leonardo Peikoffernando, and Harry Binswanguini.

To be continued �

Post 8

Friday, June 6, 2003 - 12:49pm

Lone Rambler ramblin' on (ACT III, Contemporary-style Chaos)
�Warning: this one is admitted "over-the-top", and I apologize to any who are necessarily offended by either the subject matter, or by the manner in which it is displayed�

Title:
Straight out ah' Reasonville (continued from above) �

First, some basic definitions:

A G-thing (acceptable; above objective moral judgement)

G-MONEY (a radical for capitalism; used to identify a common allegiance to this principle when greeting other like-minded individuals)

KEEPIN IT ON THE REAL (a conscious, volitional process of cognition that involves relating conceptual abstractions to objects that are objectively & verifiably existent inside the totality of the phenomena of human existence known as the "real world" or, to economize language, as "reality")

MOTHERFACT (an irreducible primary)

PITCH (to utter glibly and insincerely; to present or advertise for sale especially in a high-pressure way)

TRICK (e.g. fraud; intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value or to surrender a legal right)

WHAZZUP? (Hello)

WHAZZUP! (Hello, would you be interested in collaborating in the process of developing the prerequisites required to initiate an engagement with me in the form of some type of physical altercation? Starting now?)

And now on to the Action:
The front door of Reason Hall swings open and 2 heavily-muscled, lightly-groomed men, wearing muscle shirts and gold chains around their necks, stand in the doorway. Their stature and posture all but demand the attention of everyone in the room.

The slightly larger one, Leonardo, in a loud and bold voice, proclaims: "ARI is in the motherfact'ing house!" [translation � a New York gang, known in certain circles as ARI, has entered this establishment, an establishment wherein the diplomatic process of reducing down and relating sometimes difficult, contemptuous issues of daily life to their corresponding irreducible primary axioms in order for man to conceptualize an evidence-based solution, occurs)]

An outburst from one of the objectivist philosophers: "Whazzup, G-Money?!" [translation � Hello, fellow objectivist thinkers!]

There is what appears to be a floating cigarette smoking in between the 2 muscle-bound visitors. Closer inspection reveals a third party, this one a female, is standing directly behind the 2 behemoths and is somewhat blocked from view, although it becomes evident that she is wearing a black cape, as if for battle. The cigarette was merely being suspended by a long cigarette holder that traveled back to the mysterious third party's mouth, a mouth that may be likened to a razor sharp battle sword that commands respect or demands fear, depending on how it is invoked.

The leader of Hegel's Angels, Carl Marks, responds: "Whazzup, Motherfact'ers?" [translation � Hello, visiting individuals who base all of your thinking and its consequent validation upon whether it stems from, and therefore can be reduced back to, irreducible primary axioms or their corollaries]

The slightly less muscled man, "Harry B." they call him, aggressively shouts: "Y'all ain't nuthin' but a bunch o' pitches & tricks!" [translation � you finite group of individuals, in fact and in total are, and only are, fraudulent persons]

The woman behind the 2 muscle men steps forward toward Carl. She advances calmly and confidently, and without breaking the intense focus of her piercing eyes on his, as if she is staring into his soul to see what he is made of. She pulls the long cigarette holder out of her mouth and again, without so much as a blink, stares into him and replies: "Whazzup, TrickDaddy?" [translation � Hello, father of lies]

A cold chill comes over Carl. He realizes that he is absolutely terrified. Never before has he witnessed an embodiment of such seemingly fierce confidence and unerring resolve.

He attempts to evade the reality of the situation by artificially setting up 2 opposites and hoping for an impending synthesis that absolves him of objective judgement: "Ah, it ain't nuthin' but a G-thing. We all up in here jus' keepin' it on the real! Showin' a brother sum' love, -n- getting' a hit o' them Benjamins. Don't be hatin'!" [translation � There's no need to be concerned about any injustice here, as we have the best of intentions. We are attempting to check our premises against the ordered background provided by reality. We are attempting to act within the confines, and on the premise of, benevolence as our moral guide. And we were also going to take just a few of the dollars in the town bank vault, that's all. And our benevolent efforts are apparently being thwarted by your savage, unjust protection of these people's money]

Just then the woman, Alicia, reaches into her cape and pulls out a G.L.O.C.K. [translation � G.L.O.C.K.; a premise that she carries around with her to help out in such situations; it states that the GOAL of LOGIC is to afford man with OBJECTIVE CERTAINTY of his KNOWLEDGE]

The Hegel's Angels are frightened by such a premise (they would rather deal with a New Logic of the Concrete, than something so obviously grounded in "observables").

With the G.L.O.C.K. firmly in her grasp, she takes off the "safety" and, staring at the 12 Hegel's Angels with those piercing eyes of hers, asserts herself: "Are you down with O.P.P.?" [translation � are you aware of the necessary implications of objective perceptual primaries?]

Knowing that she is about to fire the GLOCK premise straight into their heads (her clip is loaded with at least a dozen corollaries, one for each Angel), and realizing the impending collapse of mental comfort which they have attained by relaxing their minds to the "real", they all run for their motorcycles (which rational men built).

They frantically hop on their motorcycles proclaiming: "We outta' here!" [translation � irrationality will only get you so far in life, and only by looting and mooching off of unsuspecting others. If these "others" happen to practice rationality, then the evil that we attempt to get away with will become powerless in this non-malevolent world. So let's get the hell out of here]

Post 9

Saturday, June 7, 2003 - 10:48pm

Very funny, Ed. That last one was my favorite.

Post 10

Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 2:52pm

I'm a Ramblin' Man, I make a lot of stops, all over the world (Real Chaos)
"A special thanks to "my boy", Joe (G-Money) Rowlands, for the kind words"

Title:
All over the world

Scene:
Highly-intelligent, overly-curious alien life forms come into orbit around planet Earth. They are curious to find out to what extent humans beings depend on logic for survival and happiness. They develop an "anti-logic" ray gun that specifically disrupts the brain waves that are required for "logic" as a brain function. Before pointing it to planet Earth, they take a quick inventory on how non-disrupted ("wild-type") humans survive and function together on this small, blue planet. After recording the relevant conditions and responses for a baseline reference, they turn on the ray gun and observe �

Action:
The alien life forms turn their focus to 2 areas: the West, and the Middle East. Their observations are recorded below:

Observations in the West:
Government gets bigger
Government starts to control even more of the economy and science and philosophy
In this situation, people don't feel they could trust others, so they increase police control Police can't be trusted, so they increase state control of local police
States can't be trusted, so they increase government control of states
Government can't be trusted, so they increase United Nations control of government
The UN can't be trusted, so they form a super-government to watch the UN

In this entire process, individual achievement is stifled as the governing bodies trick citizens into an altruist morality (sacrifice for more government controls is the greatest good)

Since stifled individuals necessarily grow bitter and resentful, they turn to organized religion for something to "live for" (to ease the "pain" of existence in this "cruel" world that they are now powerless to change for the better). The government actively promotes the shift toward religion because it distracts the "minds of the masses" from the daily increases in taxes and controls

Some religious zealots attempt to become "alpha male" (only "might" makes "right" in this society) and gather many followers for strength in numbers and for more "lobbying groups" in Congress; eventually, they threaten others in order to get what they want, culminating in suicide bombers who were tricked into believing that everlasting happiness (not to mention about 72 virgins) would be waiting for them in the "next life" if they just perform (for the benefit of the "righteous") this vicious act of monstrous evil in "this life"

Observations in the Middle East:
Nothing changes

At this point, the aliens turn off the ray gun and fly away to the next inhabited planet saying in their telepathic signals to each other "this one has to ripen a little longer before harvest, it's still much to green to pick"

Post 11

Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 3:15pm

Tuesday, October 7, 2003 - 7:28pm