> "Objectivism is objectively the greatest system of Philosophy ever put together up until now."
Please.
Objectivism draws no clear distinction between self-interest and self-worship. Its followers are some of the most unbearable narcissists I have ever had the misfortune of talking to. Many of their arguments can be boiled down to "My pre-packaged belief system says its logical, therefore I must be logical!"
No one who "really knows what Philosophy is" takes Ayn Rand seriously. Actually, taking Ayn Rand seriously is a pretty good sign you don't really know what Philosophy is... or at least that understanding is 80 years out of date.
Yes, I do -- it's an area of human thought where you can say absolutely anything, and coming to a testable conclusion is regarded as extremely bad form.
Scientists focus on what and how, and sometimes arrive at a conclusion. Philosophers focus on why, and never arrive at a conclusion. Both are doing exactly what they were trained to do.
If you think my outlook on philosophers and philosophy is bleak, you should read Richard Feynman's:
You're right. That is exactly what most philosophy is considered today. Sad but true.
While I highly admire Feynman in innumerable ways I don't agree with an opinion of his just because it came from him. This is essentially the same as an argument from authority on your part.
[+] [-] qubot|13 years ago|reply
Please.
Objectivism draws no clear distinction between self-interest and self-worship. Its followers are some of the most unbearable narcissists I have ever had the misfortune of talking to. Many of their arguments can be boiled down to "My pre-packaged belief system says its logical, therefore I must be logical!"
[+] [-] jgrant27|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andy_herbert|13 years ago|reply
I wish this post spent less time concentrating on revealed truths, and instead supported assertions like this one with reason and argument.
[+] [-] jgrant27|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sdm|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] lutusp|13 years ago|reply
Yes, I do -- it's an area of human thought where you can say absolutely anything, and coming to a testable conclusion is regarded as extremely bad form.
Scientists focus on what and how, and sometimes arrive at a conclusion. Philosophers focus on why, and never arrive at a conclusion. Both are doing exactly what they were trained to do.
If you think my outlook on philosophers and philosophy is bleak, you should read Richard Feynman's:
http://physicshead.blogspot.com/2008/03/feynman-philosophy-i...
[+] [-] jgrant27|13 years ago|reply
While I highly admire Feynman in innumerable ways I don't agree with an opinion of his just because it came from him. This is essentially the same as an argument from authority on your part.