About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page


Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Post 0

Monday, August 27, 2007 - 11:35pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Perhaps you have "issues?"

Perhaps you have a soul is more like it. You could see that child's smile even beneath the grimace of the mask that circumstance makes him wear. Not only Randian superheroes with chiseled features and perfect posture deserve happiness, Ed.

Ted

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 1

Tuesday, August 28, 2007 - 2:46amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I saw this story on national news several months ago, and thought it was very sweet.
The technology that finally gave that young man a voice was what made me tear up.

Ed, I'm curious, though. Why was it "quasi-altruist" to you?  Clearly both father and son are getting rewards from this.   Was it the "Don't run alone" at the end?  Even that has several levels of meaning to me, none of which necessarily imply altruism.

Another sanction from me to Ted.


Post 2

Tuesday, August 28, 2007 - 5:47amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ted & Teresa, thank you for your comments.

Perhaps you have a soul is more like it.
I think you're right about that, Ted.   ;-)

Not only Randian superheroes with chiseled features and perfect posture deserve happiness, Ed.
Too true, Ted, too true.


The technology that finally gave that young man a voice was what made me tear up.
If I ever watched a video of this, Teresa, the 'forecast' for the day would be: 'torrential tearstorm approaching'.   ;-)

Ed, I'm curious, though. Why was it "quasi-altruist" to you?
It isn't REALLY quasi-("in some sense or degree") altruist FOR ME, but I was hoping to receive comment from those for whom it is such a thing. I am hoping to engage them in order to understand their mindsets better.

Was it the "Don't run alone" at the end?  Even that has several levels of meaning to me, none of which necessarily imply altruism.
Teresa, trust me, we're on the same page here. And to borrow a quip from the vid, "TOGETHER IS POWERFUL" (because man is a freely contractual being).

;-)

Ed


Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Post 3

Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 4:42amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
There is no such thing as "DESERVING HAPPINESS". That principle is an open pit, effectively making someone's claimed need into your obligation. There is NO problem with giving or helping out of your own free will, but there cannot be a claim of deserved happiness.

Few responded here, but if you think there is such a thing as "DESERVING HAPPINESS", well yes, you have an "issue" with Objectivism.

Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Post 4

Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 3:19pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The video suggests that the boy would be unable to compete without the help of his father.  Yet this isn't true.  The boy has the ability to think, which means he has the ability to compete as a writer, philosopher, scientist, novelist, or poet.  With all the possibilities open to him, the least inspiring is this false idea that he is competing athletically.  It's a lie.  The father may be competing, the boy is just being pushed along. 

The video suggests that the father is the body and the son is the heart.  Does this mean, somehow, that the father is only a partial human being, devoid of a soul?  It seems to insinuate that without the child perched in front of him, the father would unable to compete.  Had this child never been born, wouldn't it still have been possible for the man to become an excellent athlete?  Why must the realization of this man's potential be achieved second-hand?

I think it's beautiful that this father brings enjoyment to his son.  I just don't buy the conclusions that the video makes about it.

Never run alone?  Why not? 


Post 5

Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 4:58pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hi, Jan, welcome to the forum.

I think you're over interpreting what I said. Rather than attack my statement, maybe you could come up with a better word for me to have used than deserve? I certainly did not mean to imply that one has a claim on others - and I don't think that's how happiness really works either. Would you object to my saying that everyone should feel that he is entitled to pursue his own happiness? I think that's a reasonable claim. Unfortunately, I know too many people who don't think it applies to them.

Ted

Sanction: 2, No Sanction: 0
Post 6

Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 6:00pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Why must the realization of this man's potential be achieved second-hand?

Is it, Eric?  I don't think it is. There are a whole lot of things I do now that I probably never would have done if I never had children. Something as simple as making the best pot of Cocoa Wheats you ever tasted in your life, is one. The absolute best breakfast cereal in the whole damn world would have been lost on me, if my kids hadn't encouraged me to make them.

Are you saying that this father is just faking the whole thing for the sake of his son?  Do you think this father raised a soul sucking moocher?  Do you think this son is so stupid, he wouldn't know that his father wasn't happy with the activity?  

It's a "love" thing.  Taking joy in a loved one's joy isn't a "second hand" venture.  To say it is so sadly cynical, I don't want to comment on it at all.

Lone wolves run "alone."  No one cheers them on, either.



Post 7

Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 6:55pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hi Jan,

I cannot help but to notice that your English really cleared up in 2 posts! Now that's just amazing. Your other 2 posts (one this morning and one last month) used a broken-type of English appropriate for someone just learning the language. This one, however (which is longer and more verbose than the others), is written quite well -- with no hint of English as a second language. This makes me curious to ask you 2 questions:

(1) Did you take a crash-course in English writing between your post at 4:35am this morning and your post at 4:42am this morning (Pacific Time)?

(2) Are you hiding behind a fake identity?


Ed
[and not answering will, of course, be taken as an answer]

;-)
(Edited by Ed Thompson on 8/30, 7:29pm)


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 8

Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 6:58pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
... everyone should feel that he is entitled to pursue his own happiness ...
Right!

Ed


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 9

Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 7:23pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Eric,

The boy has the ability to think, which means he has the ability to compete as a writer, philosopher, scientist, novelist, or poet.  With all the possibilities open to him, the least inspiring is this false idea that he is competing athletically.  It's a lie.
Good point. The kid's got a lot of potential, I'll give you that. And the video does give the impression that the boy's competing (when it's really only his father pushing/pulling him). And if that was all one should take away from the video -- then the video sucks.

But are these races just time-fillers for the moments in his life which the son could be using for other, more-fulfilling adventures? The son chose a benefit-race (for another paralyzed kid) as the first race -- I think that that choice matters. I think the son got something special out of that. But that's still second-hand, you say?

But, to "get there" (where you get to morally judge another's character) requires knowing at least 3 things:

(1) the other's experience
(2) the other's actions
(3) the other's outlook

On this immediate -- and the previous -- point, I see that I must now "break-out" in a series of quotes (for those who don't know me, it's something I just do -- you know, when I get to feeling that the time is right, and all) ...

"Ask not what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive... then go do it. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive."

"Yes, there is a Santa Claus, someone who distributes unconditional joy, and every day is Christmas. And Santa Claus is you."

"Morality gains all of its ground out of the actualization of individual life. Only by reference to this individual actualization can moral judgment gain prescriptive ground."

"Human motivation occurs when folks think themselves competent, to gain or keep things thought valuable, by methods thought efficient."

"There is in a man an upwelling spring of life, energy, love, whatever you like to call it. If a course is not cut for it, it turns the ground round it into a swamp."

Ed
[now THAT'S the spirit (i.e., the right sense of life)!]

;-)

(Edited by Ed Thompson on 8/30, 7:26pm)


Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Post 10

Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 7:46pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ed and Teresa,

There's been a bit of a misunderstanding here. I think what this parent has done to bring some joy to his son is terrific.  I do not think it is at all second-handed, as clearly the child's happiness is one of the father's highest values.

It is the commentary in the video that I have problems with.  It demeans this authentic act of love by suggesting that the father isn't a whole person, that he is only a heartless body reliant on his son to provide a heart.  This is nonsense.  He is obviously a talented runner and generous and loving father.  The video, in order to promote the idea that the achievement is shared, attributes the "heart" to the son, leaving the father to be the "body." 

Seems to me that this man not only has a heart, but one full of love. 


Post 11

Thursday, August 30, 2007 - 8:04pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
No misunderstandings there, Eric.

:-)

Ed


Post 12

Friday, August 31, 2007 - 3:13amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
It is the commentary in the video that I have problems with.  It demeans this authentic act of love by suggesting that the father isn't a whole person, that he is only a heartless body reliant on his son to provide a heart.

Got it. Very well said!


Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Post 13

Friday, August 31, 2007 - 6:59amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hi, all.

Sorry in advance to be a spoilsport here, since so many of you seemed to get so much out of this video. I just wasn't feeling it, and I'll try to explain why.

First of all, Ed wanted to know if anyone thought the video was quasi-altruistic. It isn't. There isn't anything in the actual video clip to suggest anything like that.
But in the description of the video (which has information about this family's story in much greater detail) on Youtube, you will find that the goal of Team Hoyt is not just father and son bonding, but
to integrate the physically challenged into everyday life. One way to accomplish this is to educate the able-bodied, making them more aware of the issues that the disabled face every day. Another is by actively helping the disabled to participate in activities that would otherwise be inaccessible to them. Team Hoyt targets both of these areas. (Youtube description)
I suppose someone could consider that fact altruistic; devoting your life to educating the able-bodied in order to help the disabled. (Of course if they're getting paid for their time and effort, then it's not.) In either case, these people are free to do whatever makes them happy. I don't find this offensive or anything. But I don't weep in admiration, either.

Mr. Rockwell said,
The video suggests that the boy would be unable to compete without the help of his father. Yet this isn't true. The boy has the ability to think, which means he has the ability to compete as a writer, philosopher, scientist, novelist, or poet. With all the possibilities open to him, the least inspiring is this false idea that he is competing athletically. It's a lie. The father may be competing, the boy is just being pushed along.
Amen! Perfectly sums up my point of view, which I am all to happy to admit is a totally subjective one. It's just my personal taste, and that's all. If this father were helping his son become the next Stephen Hawking, I'd be falling all over myself with admiration. Marathoners, and triathletes don't really impress me. (I mean, of course their achievement is outstanding, because it pushes the limits of human physical endurance.) I'm just more into people who choose to push the limits of human mental and intellectual endurance instead, and as Mr. Rockwell pointed out, that is something the kid actually could do on his own, and it would be just as amazing, and even more inspiring. (Well, to me, anyway. But again, that's just me.)

Then again, if the purpose of the Team Hoyt's existence at this point is to make lives better for other physically disabled people, then it would be terribly selfish of them to focus only nurturing and honing their son's intellectual talents. They need to do these public races, to send the message, in order to benefit handicapped people around the world. Right?
The video suggests that the father is the body and the son is the heart. (Eric Rockwell)
This may offend Objectivists, but I seriously doubt it offends the Hoyts. They probably thought of that slogan themselves; and NO, I'm NOT being cynical...it's catchy, heartwarming (unless you're an O'ist) and it helps their cause. 

On the other hand, the following was a line I would have thought would definitely offend Objectivists, but for some reason, in this thread, it doesn't:

"Never Run Alone."
Never run alone?  Why not? (Eric Rockwell)
Indeed!

Teresa, sorry, but what did you mean by this statement?
Lone wolves run "alone."  No one cheers them on, either.
Hey, I don't mind not having a cheering section...(Peter Keating minds not having a cheering section...  :-) And I'm certainly not going to earn one in this crowd with this post, that's for sure.

And on that note, let me say, before the stones start pelting me:

I do believe that the father loves his son very much and that they both derive joy from this. And for that reason, so they should continue to do so for the rest of their lives. Obviously, their labor of love athletic venture has mushroomed into something else besides a bonding time for father and son, it has now become a way to help enrich the lives of other disabled people. If that is what they want to spend their time doing, that's great for them, and any they may assist. I'm happy for them, and wish them well.

But the story just didn't inspire me the way it did others, and it certainly didn't reduce me to a ball of tears. (Not even close. In fact, I rolled my eyes whenever the line "Because of TOGETHER..." came on the screen. "Because of TOGETHER?" What?)

I know, I know...I'm a terrible person.
Bury me up to my neck and let the stones fly.

Erica



Post 14

Friday, August 31, 2007 - 4:41pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hey, I don't mind not having a cheering section...

I know, I know, but I'm thinking about those people who can't even define what they like or why, because they can't relate to anyone.  You know, those hopeless anti social types, not just secure "loners."   They live in their own heads, day in, day out.  

Nothing to like about them, or admire, or cheer, in my opinion.  


Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 15

Friday, August 31, 2007 - 5:19pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Eric, thanks for you comments.  You helped me identify my own feelings about this.

I can totally appreciate the father doing this to make his boy happy, and being able to provide sheer joy to your son must be rewarding.

But I had mixed feelings about the video.  The boy wasn't running.  He wasn't an athlete.  He wasn't achieving anything himself.  The father playing along with this delusion that he was an athlete brought to my mind a question.  If the boy was horribly retarded, and had no ability to have the kinds of achievements possible for a rational human being, then happiness at that level might make sense.  I don't try to get Liberty Dog to try to write a book, or learn physics, or strive to accomplish something in life.  She lives at the range of the moment.  If I want to make her happy, I give her some food or a bone.  Maybe some dog treats.  I'm rewarded by her response, and I know I'm not robbing her of anything better in life.

If the boy was retarded enough to be somewhere close to that level, where everything is fun and games, then the video would be touching.  But what if the boy is perfectly fine mentally and it's just the body that's the problem.  Then the father would be faking reality for him, treating him like I treat a dog, acting as if he can provide his son's happiness directly.  Instead of treating him like an adult or someone moving towards adulthood, he would be sabotaging his son's grasp of reality and life.

So much hinges on the state of his mind.  I didn't watch the whole video...I skipped around a little.  I don't know what it ended up being.  But for me, the video left me wondering if the father was a great man, or a disgusting human being.  Given the lack of information, I didn't feel strongly either way.


Post 16

Friday, August 31, 2007 - 6:05pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

There's a take that made my head hit the ground.  Ouch.


Post 17

Saturday, September 1, 2007 - 6:42pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Most times (and in this case) when I am exposed to this sort of portrayal of handicapped people I am somewhat ill at ease and don't bother to dig deeper within myself as to why. I just slough it off and move on to something else. My hat is off to both Erica and Joe for identifying and clarifying for me what exactly the issue is in this case.

Sam


Post 18

Saturday, September 1, 2007 - 7:24pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Consider this. The boy is a child. Kids love to be carried piggy-back, be tossed in the air, and so forth. If the father were pushing his 35 year-old son around in a wheel chair, I'd be perturbed. All I saw here was a kid having fun. (Let's hope his father is not as deluded as we might think, and is finding appropriate outlets for him where he doesn't need a "body" to serve him.)

Ted Keer

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 19

Sunday, September 2, 2007 - 10:57pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
According to their web site, Rick (the kid) was born in 1962.

Post to this threadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.