The Atlas Shrugged sequence is actually happening

Quote from ScottD:

Greenspan was an objectivist at one time. However, by the time he became Fed Chair he no longer applied the principles in a full and integrated way. It's not an accident that he had been shunned by objectivists for years.

Besides, the ability to raise and lower interest rates and blab doublespeak to congress is hardly the main driver of our economic system -- little things like the legislature, SEC, executive branch, courts, tax code, overall strength of our entrepreneurs, quality of our business managers, have far greater impact.
More...

that's a cop out

greenspan wasnt 'an objectivist', on economic matters, he was *THE* objectivist, and the fact that for whatever reason, he couldnt stick to this philosophy in real life is a relevant detail

you cant just toss out details that dont fit - i had a perfect strategy this week, if you toss out my losing trades

this philosophy was road tested in the grandest scale

and it's practitioner ended up being the most brutal 'collectist' of all time

Objectivism has as a component, an indifference to others. Nobody has more indifference to savers, than greenspan - he detroyed them 'in search of his own ideals'

my take is that greenspan slid down objectism's slippery slope of snearing at anyone who cares about anyone but themselves
 
Just to explain my views on "things" and an allegory to my philosophy.

We have integrity to secure ourselves as persons, with the integrity of our knowledge and belief systems that we use. Some systems are more innate than others - but we all learn and evolve.

We might think of ourselves as dustbunnies blowing around with our internal structure making sure we are not mere leaves in the wind. We also interact with our surroundings - interacting with others. However we all start with ourselves as our reference point - as we know obnoxiously self-centred as teenagers in rebellion against parenthood's authority.

But we all cling on to others and form societies, we develop external structures of organizations and participate in strengthening and expanding their integrity and structure. We are all developing and interacting, learning and adapting. Through communication we share knowledge and information, structures that also affect our internal belief systems and memory. There is also a side to our genes giving us some tools and processes to evolve.

But we cannot force something to be universally absolute or true, because we are not at any absolute point in the universe and neither are our systems that we develop. Otherwise would be strongly aggressive and authoritarian thinking. We cannot align the rest of the universe to our thinking - we can only view it through our eyes and reasoning. Even though we think something to be true - that does not guarantee that it is true for everyone, in every situation. I have already pointed this out with an example of the physics gas models. There are numerous other examples that we are already aware of - this is undeniable information for us.

However, Objectivism extrapolates from the parenting into adulthood by thinking that the authoritarian power is now in their hands. They use logic to try and englobe the rest of society into their way of thinking - accepting their axioms and logics for everything. They are thus attempting to contain a system by strict logical rules - in contradiction with Gödel's incompleteness theorem. They strongly and aggressively try to influence their surroundings. There are probably psychological connections in there somewhere that can shed more light on this phenomenon in the future.

The Neocons are much worse - they see themselves as elites who have a right to align their surroundings - because others are beneath them and do not understand.

Both Objectivism and Neoconservatism continues the authoritarian dimensions of Abrahamic religions - really reverberating the inequalities from believing in something divine into believing in something absolute and axiomatic to the universe. This is a common radicalism that they all share - not accepting or respecting individuals but wanting to get inside each of every individual's integral person and force them into alignment with themselves.

I find this extremely deplorable. Integrity and trust is developed through mutually beneficial growth - of social structures between individuals - in business commoditization and society alike.

We cannot get on the path of social Darwinism - because it is ultimately not sustainable. It is ultimately a corruption of any ecosystem. Of course we consume others in an ecosystem, but we are not cannibals. We need sustainable growth and show respect to be able to fuel our common growth, as well as individual growth. We strengthen consensual external structures so that we do trust in the integrity of these social structures - just like we do with knowledge itself - reproving and testing it to confirm its validity.

If we eat all the animals, it will be high time to become a vegan. When we have no plants - we can turn into cannibals. But eventually Darwinism leads to extinction and we all perish.

That is why aggressive and authoritarian philosophies like Objectivism, Neoconservatism, elite theories and Abrahamic religions are all harmful when they are allowed to extend beyond strengthening an individual - but extrapolating that egocentric radicalization onto their surroundings. It is ultimately not sustainable. Sure it can be managed - and Neocons talk of the "managerial state" and "cognitive elite", but that means keeping a corrupt system with a strong bias. Just like much of US society - and other societies around the world - are involved in hierarchical pyramid schemes with individuals in a rat-race towards the top while cannibalizing each others.

We need need sustainable development and growth through systems with consensual and strong integrity of trust. We all depend on ecosystems in some form, and although it is possible to live by managing these ecosystems in a hierarchy - that is not efficient in evolving our societies faster and into stronger growth. This has to do with self-similarity in both mathematics and nature - like Bernoulli numbers repeating themselves in nature - and seeing systems that have similarities from atomic into molecular and biological systems and then society and universe.


Through the Internet and computers we are extending our intellectual and mind structures - our memory capacity is no longer limited to the inside of our Skull-and-bones - but liberated into an explosion of new impulses, stored information, quick searching and referencing. Just like books and languages before - but more efficient and faster expanding nowadays through these important tools to help us evolve and adapt further.


It all means we are getting a better democracy and increasingly interwoven growth; an expansion of society, economy and knowledge that will propel us faster into the future - where we will see some of the earlier systems repeat themselves. In 1000 years, when we have personal spaceships and free stations we will see the old warring and Darwinism rice again - before it turns into stronger integral trust.

But this isn't socialism at all; because you are a always going to be a free individual to do as you choose, go where you want - just that you can trust the integrity and structure of those that you meet - i.e respect them and they respect you. The reason for this unstoppable evolution is that we are capable of designing systems that are not even possible to corrupt - like Laissez-faire markets.

The problem today is that we involve humans in too much of the loop - and are not properly structured with our new advanced tools - that are extending our personal integrity into consensual interaction with society - other individuals. As we all know there is something called "human error", and that is why a pilot does not pull wires or pull levers in an Airbus 380 or a Boeing 747. We trust these systems because they are an extension of ourselves - just like when we press the remote on the TV we trust the TV to react to our command - and just like when we hammer a nail into a wooden object we trust and know what will happen. These are tools that we command - and they extend what we are capable of doing. That is why we trust these - and that is because these systems of tools are not intelligent - they are just mechanical - just like opening your hands or lifting your finger - an extension of our capabilities and at our command.
 
The failure that we are seeing today with the US is the enormous cancerous society of elites being allowed to suck the rest of the US, née the world, by corrupting every system that they are in contact with - and those who admire them - aligning themselves into the hierarchical pyramid schemes and partake in the rat-race to overthrow those above them. That is the basic Darwinism and cannibalism inside societal systems that we can see - and that is the very reason for corruption itself. The aggressive systems that are proposed by Abrahamic religions, Objectivism, Neoconservatism - they try to "balance the system" by saying there are absolutes - good and evil - "us and them" - the principle of bivalence applied to everything - when in nature there are degrees of truth and degrees of hypocrisy as a scale to our actions between egoism and altruism - between personal needs and the needs of others.


The basic flaw in Abrahamic religion, Neoconservative elitists and authoritarian Objectivism - Socialism - Marxism - Troskyism - Nationalsocialism - Zionism ... they are ALL alike in this characteristic of an hierarchical forced structure on individuals and society. They are all alike in their thinking of aligning each and everyone into their constructed theoretical systems - when what we are all part of is actually evolution breaking those limits by letting us evolve strong integrity and trust over sustainable growth that is balanced into an ecosystem. Sure we consume - but we evolve and build on what we already have by ensuring the equilibrium and trust - not by consuming and turning on ourselves in these systems.


So, in the end there are no external absolutes like 2+2=4 ... no universal truths like that, but we have self-similarity which is recurring all over the universe - and we do find these truths in many of these systems - but it is NOT "one single system" which aligns it all - there are in fact many evolving, adpating and interwoven systems - sometimes individual dustbunnies blowing in the wind without any anchor - that are acting on each other. That is the fundamental of chaos theory, and that is how and why the Occam's razor does not work for "the universe" - but only by highlighting the INTERNAL structure of ONE SINGLE system.

The 2+2=4 is for us mostly relevant to axiomatic set theory and its derivatives, and then the self-similar systems in nature - but not every system - because it is not a radical one system that of 2+2=4 that was the origin of the universe - it was the evolutionary system that is at the center - and we are all revolving around in this ever expanding universe.

The universe - even the milky way - are NOT absolutes - they are drifting and expanding. Energy systems are not perfect - but we can theorize into close approximations of perfectly contained systems. We have background radiation, energy levels shifting throughout the systems and quantum theories finding ever new systems and quantities. We do not understand fully the wave-particle duality; it is not fully developed yet and the same goes for other sciences like thermodynamics.


We as humans are still evolving and instead of Darwinistic nations, we are evolving and adapting into the common sense of reaching out and creating common world structures. What some call "justice" is just isomorph to the stability, integrity and trust of the systems.

Period! Now, someone try to debunk the history of evolution... Objectivism and other authoritarian systems are just temporary corrupt systems that have been found on the way of the evolutionary path, but we are expanding by ridding ourselves of these corrupt regimes, opening our systems by shedding the old lies and forced illusions of smoke-and-mirrors, pie-in-the-sky promises of egocentrical thinking into the understanding that respect and individual freedom comes through the integrity of the trust structures that we are able to create in consensus with other individuals and surround ourselves with.

Just like the failure and collapse of Greenspan shows - not even he can fight evolution. He realized that Objectivism is a dead end - and impossible - at least in practical terms. They just are not sustainable - the cancerous corruption of ourselves... you can even see this on personal levels, with regret etc. Abrahamic religions try and regulate this flaw by a theory of "forgiveness".

If you guys listen to the speeches of the United Nations counsel - you will understand a lot more - instead of closing your minds and trying to force your personal views onto everyone and everything around you. This is evolution speaking to you pigheaded ostriches on every level - and you are still involved in your personal corruption - fanatical to your own bitter ends. You guys are fighting against Gödel's incompleteness inherent with all systems - with your delusional theories...

You guys have totally warped opinions of what freedom and individuality is in the context of evolution and sustainable development. You believe in authoritarian management - through universal axioms, religion, imperialism or other elitist rights to claim your absolute reference in the universe. You want to force this hierarchical thinking and alignment on everyone and everything with your closed-mind reductionist thinking. You are therefore intertwined in a repeating cycle of conflict through greatness in domination and the utter destruction. But evolution and nature always break free in the end - and YOU CAN'T FIGHT EVOLUTION!

Donald Rumsfeld talked of a "war of ideas" - well, newsflash: YOU LOST! He is a loser and so is the US in this conflict.
James Burnham, Irving Kristol, Charles Murray, Project for New American Century, all the Neocons and Ayn Rand as well...
ultimately losers all of them.
www.anglospherechallenge.com , www.newamericancentury.org , www.pbs.org , en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managerial_state

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_bivalence en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_science
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_evolutionary_synthesis


I think my philosophy and view on the universe is consistent - in contrast to the aggressive and authoritarian philosophies. Bah!
Try arguing against me... hehe.
:p
 
Quote from swtrader:

that's a cop out

greenspan wasnt 'an objectivist', on economic matters, he was *THE* objectivist, and the fact that for whatever reason, he couldnt stick to this philosophy in real life is a relevant detail

you cant just toss out details that dont fit - i had a perfect strategy this week, if you toss out my losing trades

this philosophy was road tested in the grandest scale

and it's practitioner ended up being the most brutal 'collectist' of all time

Objectivism has as a component, an indifference to others. Nobody has more indifference to savers, than greenspan - he detroyed them 'in search of his own ideals'

my take is that greenspan slid down objectism's slippery slope of snearing at anyone who cares about anyone but themselves
More...

1) Objectivists are completely opposed to the Federal Reserve System as an egregious violation of the principles of capitalism -- as is any governmental manipulation of the money supply. Greenspan was in a position that is anathema to objectivists. Not sure anyone can make it much clearer to you.

2) For objectivism, Greenspan is not now nor has even been the authority on economic matters. Not even close. Rather I would refer you to Ludwig von Mises.

3) The Fed Reserve Chair controls interest rates and the money supply. As I describe earlier, there are more influencial entities in the economy.

It doesn't appear that you have a good grasp of objectivism.
 
Quote from ScottD:

...
It doesn't appear that you have a good grasp of Objectivism.
More...

But I have for more than 12 years known Objectivism ... try me! Me! Me! Me!
:p
 
Quote from Gringinho:

But I have for more than 12 years known Objectivism ... try me! Me! Me! Me!
:p
More...

My precocious little Brazil Nut, it appears you have fallen down a mental rabbit hole. As a suggestion: spend less time stroking yourself with arcane academic topics such as Schrodinger's Cat paradox and various "logics" that tell you that A=A and at the same time A = not A....that 2+2=22 and that sort of thing. You have wasted "two decades on philosophical forums" debating all sorts of arcane minutiae and "keeping yourself oriented" to the latest wind change in arcana. You are practicing the intellectual equivalent of sudoko -- at best, an utter waste of time. At worst, a perversion of one's mind.

As a result, perhaps you can see why most folks will decline your invitation to your 20 year circle jerk of discussing utter nonsense.

Developing an effective philosophy for one's life is not nearly as complex as you have led yourself to believe.

Giving credit where due: your use of English as a second language is very good.
 
Quote from ScottD:

...
At worst, a perversion of one's mind.

Apologies for the 'aggressive' response but you need some tough love -- perhaps now see why most folks will decline your invitation to your 20 year circle jerk of discussing nonsense.
...
More...

Thanks, but no thanks!
I'm not that kind of "guy" - you can find other Brazilians to play with though... there are thousands of them here.
I am not into any kind of "tough loving", and you won't be able to sneak up on me. I'm from Europe and not Brazilian.

Also, I speak, read and write 8 languages fluently while I am pretty ok in 4 more languages and numerous programming languages.

If you don't understand "2+2=22", then that is not my fault - blame your parents.
I was top of my class in both school, military education, and founded 5 companies as well as being an instructor/administrator/chairman of several martial arts clubs.

Now, try and go through my view on philosophy and Objectivism to try and find ANY hole in my view.
Then we can see who the pissant is.
:p
 
Quote from ScottD:

1
2) For objectivism, Greenspan is not now nor has even been the authority on economic matters. Not even close. Rather I would refer you to Ludwig von Mises.

It doesn't appear that you have a good grasp of objectivism.
More...

BULLSHIT!!!!!!

Greenspan was the economics editor of the Objectivist newsletter
 
Another little "secret" about Internet debating and valid here on ET as well...

Just like ScottD is refusing to engage in any intellectual retort or debate with me, others end up in the same psychological regression of "acting out." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acting_out

What happens is that they see no angles where they can get in a "successful attack" in the debate, so they regress down to a more primate level of personal attacks by slinging insults ... and that's when it's all over and easy to "get them". I think user "a_person" even have me on ignore now - he incessantly regressed in this way. Of course I sling back or even spice up my own posts sometimes to provoke a reply - but I'm interested in the intelligent argumentation, so that is what is key anyway.

Well, news for the thinking-on-their-feet-challenged out there: personal attacks is the road to Loserville.

The "trick" to successful debating is to always be right. Hehe, sounds kind of obvious - but that is also what works... If you are wrong - admit it immediately and there are no "chinks in your armor".

Well, I think I have presented a pretty long-wound case for my reasoning of the flaws of Objectivism - but fanatical, radical, indoctrinated cult-followers have one thing in common: they rather commit mass-suicide, torch their homes and babies than admit that they are wrong... The "natural reason" for this is that they have invested so much of their brain tissue and social relations into this warped belief - that they rather commit suicide than change opinion.

And there is something intelligent in nature about that... I can elaborate a lot on this mechanism of self-destruction in systems.
:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top