3 ms·

Oh grow up. You sound like you're 14.

unalone 18y ago
I am aware that neither Rand nor her philosophy is perfect. That said: I think that Rand talks about her ideas in a way that make them very accessible and attractive to people, and I think that her philosophical beliefs are worthy of discussion at the very least. I agree with her statement that it is better to be selfish - in the sense that you act primarily for your own good - than it is to be altruistic. I don't think she is the end-all be-all. I voted Obama, who will expand the government in many ways and demand some altruism from everybody. But I think that compromise is a necessity: that altruism is a necessary evil rather than an end unto itself. The immature one is the one who dismisses somebody's argument because they choose to support a flawed person. Frankly, I'd much rather talk with an Objectivist than a Nihilist - that despite Nietzche's being a much more influential and agreed-with writer. I'm trying to argue my points expressively, and to respond to people who disagree. You're either being immature or a troll.
RobertHenderson 18y ago
Agreed. He's being a jerk.
- unalone 18y ago
  How? By attempting to clarify my thoughts? I'm not the one here that's using name-calling.
  - Huxley78 18y ago
    Oh yes you are. You are being a rude asshole. Is that what they teach you in the Rand Club?
    - unalone 18y ago
      At least I'm not a Huxleyite. :-P But seriously. What am I doing that's rude? I said that I thought that Rand was misread, and that I thought it wasn't necessarily bad that she writes in black-and-white terms. I also said that I think it's a mistake of the people who follow her more seriously to assume that the world really is black-and-white. I don't think I was being rude or an asshole. Am I wrong?
      - zasz 18y ago
        The SkylerNovak and Robert something accounts have been created only a couple hours ago. They're just trolling. I think you're being perfectly courteous and upmodded you accordingly.
        unalone 18y ago
        Them, and AVC, and HugotheMongoose, and KimStarr, and Huxley78. It's baffling. I've never seen something like that happen before.
        Nerdlinger 18y ago
        So what? I signed up to post.
        unalone 18y ago
        I didn't mention your name, so entering right now is only slightly suspicious. :-) The fact that you use similar phrasing in all your posts, comment in unsimilar threads with quick, brief responses, and have similar disregards for things like two-way, interesting debates, tend to make me a little suspicious. I could be wrong, but with all due respect, at this point I rather doubt I am. My question is: why? Are you the blog's author/submitter? I've noticed junk accounts pop up more when I mention my distaste for the article this was written about. You make similar comments to KrisZolar, who submitted this article. Every single response defending this post appears to be made from a spam account: KeshRivya also seems to be in this category. And every single one has the same anti-Rand stance as the original post, and writes in the same style. The one thing that fascinates me is that a lot of these seems to have been made months-if-not-years ago. That takes a lot of effort. And I wonder why go to all the effort. I'm sorry if it does turn out I'm raving and wrong, but I flagged this post. I don't know if there's a way of matching IPs, but the evidence all seems to point to a massive amount of throwaway accounts.
        zasz 18y ago
dgordon 18y ago
You know, you just proved their point about people who talk like Rand's villains. Is there anyone here who has read Rand's novels and can't imagine those words coming from James Taggart, Floyd Ferris, or Ellsworth Toohey? (Maybe not Ellsworth Toohey. He was more subtle.)

I am aware that neither Rand nor her philosophy is perfect. That said: I think that Rand talks about her ideas in a way that make them very accessible and attractive to people, and I think that her philosophical beliefs are worthy of discussion at the very least. I agree with her statement that it is better to be selfish - in the sense that you act primarily for your own good - than it is to be altruistic. I don't think she is the end-all be-all. I voted Obama, who will expand the government in many ways and demand some altruism from everybody. But I think that compromise is a necessity: that altruism is a necessary evil rather than an end unto itself. The immature one is the one who dismisses somebody's argument because they choose to support a flawed person. Frankly, I'd much rather talk with an Objectivist than a Nihilist - that despite Nietzche's being a much more influential and agreed-with writer. I'm trying to argue my points expressively, and to respond to people who disagree. You're either being immature or a troll.

RobertHenderson 18y ago

Agreed. He's being a jerk.

unalone 18y ago
How? By attempting to clarify my thoughts? I'm not the one here that's using name-calling.
- Huxley78 18y ago
  Oh yes you are. You are being a rude asshole. Is that what they teach you in the Rand Club?
  - unalone 18y ago
    At least I'm not a Huxleyite. :-P But seriously. What am I doing that's rude? I said that I thought that Rand was misread, and that I thought it wasn't necessarily bad that she writes in black-and-white terms. I also said that I think it's a mistake of the people who follow her more seriously to assume that the world really is black-and-white. I don't think I was being rude or an asshole. Am I wrong?
    - zasz 18y ago
      The SkylerNovak and Robert something accounts have been created only a couple hours ago. They're just trolling. I think you're being perfectly courteous and upmodded you accordingly.
      - unalone 18y ago
        Them, and AVC, and HugotheMongoose, and KimStarr, and Huxley78. It's baffling. I've never seen something like that happen before.
        Nerdlinger 18y ago
        So what? I signed up to post.
        unalone 18y ago
        I didn't mention your name, so entering right now is only slightly suspicious. :-) The fact that you use similar phrasing in all your posts, comment in unsimilar threads with quick, brief responses, and have similar disregards for things like two-way, interesting debates, tend to make me a little suspicious. I could be wrong, but with all due respect, at this point I rather doubt I am. My question is: why? Are you the blog's author/submitter? I've noticed junk accounts pop up more when I mention my distaste for the article this was written about. You make similar comments to KrisZolar, who submitted this article. Every single response defending this post appears to be made from a spam account: KeshRivya also seems to be in this category. And every single one has the same anti-Rand stance as the original post, and writes in the same style. The one thing that fascinates me is that a lot of these seems to have been made months-if-not-years ago. That takes a lot of effort. And I wonder why go to all the effort. I'm sorry if it does turn out I'm raving and wrong, but I flagged this post. I don't know if there's a way of matching IPs, but the evidence all seems to point to a massive amount of throwaway accounts.
        zasz 18y ago

dgordon 18y ago

You know, you just proved their point about people who talk like Rand's villains. Is there anyone here who has read Rand's novels and can't imagine those words coming from James Taggart, Floyd Ferris, or Ellsworth Toohey? (Maybe not Ellsworth Toohey. He was more subtle.)