| | I see, I see...
What do you want to do? What are your goals?
of course those are "good" questions.
First you should remember that Objectivism offers no magic that will make your life, or your choices in life always correct and perfect. Objectivists make mistakes the same as anyone else. There are probably a few generations now of people who discovered and embraced Rand, but then broke away because they could not "be a John Galt" - felt it was impossible to live up to that ideal.
Thanks:-) I am happy to say that I am far beyond that.
If you are looking for 'that one true value' or a 'true meaning of life' that will allow you to be perfect, you are looking for the wrong thing. Objectivism is about recognizing the inherent value in life, and living in a manner which best promotes one's life. It is about promoting one's own self interest, but more important, I feel, is its promotion of the concept of 'rational self interest'. This requires a broader or longer term view to the consequences of our actions. For example, if we steal, we have condoned the concept of stealing by our actions, and others may then feel justified in stealing from us. That immediate action - stealing - may benefit us in the very short run, but as it invites others to victimize us, it is therefore irrational and destructive. Destructive to what? Destructive to life, to the values of living.
I understand what u are saying. There isn't one thing to "have" which will make a life worth living or purposeful but the essence of all the values and choices one makes.
1) Is it something you want to do, to say, or to support? If not, it is probably the wrong choice for you.
2) Will this decision infringe on anyone else's rights - i.e. does your action essentially include using force against another person? If so, then you are accepting use of the same force against yourself, and the decision is irrational and destructive.
3) Is it something you can see is beneficial to you, but still not what you want to do? Then this is simply a judgement call. The best I might (and would) advise is to go with your gut instinct. That will usually (but no guarantee) be your best choice.
This is a rather over-simplified explanation, but hope this is of some help
This was some help. Without being offensive - I think we are both not very far in that field;-) Those questions are good examples and what I am now looking for are the rules behind efficient question asking. The way I have learned throughout all my life, and the way everybody learns is through interest in something we come across in our life. This interest is connected to emotions of joy or suffering. We could either be disciplined and fight for our good life or watch TV and get dumb and at age 70 be frustrated about all the missed chances. Now what I have come to see is that the way we once were had to change so that we can be the person we are today. The question that comes into my mind is how can I get better - better in my reasoning and my emotional state and whatever. I am trying to reach my full potential and to reach it I have to question myself and the things I do, to improve them. That's the way I have always done it and I think there's no other way and it's good like that. I am just curious if there is a technique or rule or anything similar behind question asking. An Objectivist strives for continual improvement of his situation. To do so I think he must know the right questions. Because nothing is more inefficient than an effort to answer a question that is BS - in turn it's unethical to do so.
What bugs me is that Objectivists have written books about logical reasoning or thinking or arguing "en masse"... but those topics all address the answer to a question, not the question itself.
For me efficient thinking - and I see it as a sport - is in desperate need of " good" questions. Maybe there is literature out there and if there is I would like to get a hold on it more than on a couple - well meant - examples:-)
Thanks to you too, Ed!
Greetings from Berlin
|
|
