Saturday, November 24, 2007

Me, Myself, and I, part 2

{Part one here}

Take this statement by Ayn Rand as paradigmatic of strong ethical egoism:

“the actor must always be the beneficiary of his action and that man must act for his own rational self-interest.” SOURCE


How does ethical egoism account for concern for future generations, then? For long-term concern for the environment?

How does securing the happiness and survival for our posterity make us the beneficiary of this action?

Given that earth will only be around for a blink of the eye, and given that we couldn't destroy the earth due to our environmental bad habits in our life time, why not rape Mommy Nature for all she's worth? Slash and burn, baby.

To reply, "Because it makes me feel good about myself to work for a habitable and safe planet for people generations removed from myself," requires us to ask, "Why?" Why does it make you feel good to do something that allows others to be the beneficiary of your actions? That seems immoral on egoism’s terms. "Because it makes me happy." "Because it allows me to sleep at night." Why?

Ethical egoism seems to imply that we have no obligation to our posterity and our long-term environment. This seems false. Ethical egoism seems false, then.

22 comments:

  1. You seem to be an idiot. This seems to be true. I seem to have finally grasped this fact.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous said...
    You seem to be an idiot. This seems to be true. I seem to have finally grasped this fact.

    ==========

    He says, minus any supporting argument...


    Anyway, I took that argument from atheists I've read on the subject. Glad to know you think they're idiots.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The fact that "those atheists" you read may be idiots has nothing to do with the fact that you also seem to be an idiot.

    2 for 2!

    Idiot

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous (Loftus) said...
    The fact that "those atheists" you read may be idiots has nothing to do with the fact that you also seem to be an idiot.

    2 for 2!

    Idiot

    ===========

    And I said it did where, idiot?

    I wasn't making an argument for my non-idiotness, idiot.

    I made an argument that you must consider them idiots too, idiot.

    I would have thought you knew the difference, idiot.

    So, way to argue ignoratio elenchi, idiot.

    If you could get that hamster turning that rusty wheel you have inside your noggin, you'd have known that I said you didn't make an argument for my non-idiotness, idiot.

    I didn't need to argue against that point, idiot.

    You need to offer an argument before I'm expected to offer a counter-argument, idiot.

    Asserting that I'm an idiot has nothing to do with the fact of whether I am or am not an idiot, idiot.

    I'd have thought you knew the difference between an assertion and an argument, idiot.

    No, run along to bed before I have to tan your hide some more, idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Favela Cranshaw11/25/2007 5:25 AM

    Ayn Rand never made this statement. Try reading some of her books before making your next comment.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Its funny how Jehovah, AKA, "The Big Idiot" has Paul act like a maroon, and has me call Him names like idiot, and then has Paul remove those posts.

    Round and round we go with the "The Big Idiot," Jehovah, and his little idiot puppet creations!

    Jehovah = ass

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous,

    How did I call you names? How did I act like a maroon? I acted LIKE YOU? Are you a maroon? Are you a name caller? If you didn't want to converse that way, why did you? What, you don't like being called an idiot? Then why'd ya do it? And, I didn't erase all your posts, I erased one irrelevant one from "Uncle Jesse," the hillbilly atheist. There goes the atheist again, holding himself to a different intellectual and moral standard that he holds other too.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Favela Cranshaw said...

    Ayn Rand never made this statement. Try reading some of her books before making your next comment.

    ********

    Oh, yeas, she did.

    http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/texts/text%201/rand.html

    Here's another juicy one:

    "Thus the beneficiary of an action is the only criterion of moral value-and so long as that beneficiary is anybody other than oneself, anything goes." (ibid).

    Also, for more proof that this is her quote, see here:

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=the+actor+must+always+be+the+beneficiary+of+his+action+Ayn+Rand

    Looks like the entire world knew she said this besides you, the Randroid, her biggest follower.

    Calm youself down and repeat after me: Existence Exists! Existence Exists!

    Hey, if you didn't see it in her books, that's okay. Your senses are axiomatic, don't let anyone tell you that they were wrong. In doing so you'll be just like your heroin:

    "One day, After Ayn had received a heavy dose of pain medication, she said that she could see the branches of a tree waiving across the window pain. How coud it reach so high, wasn't it on the ninth floor?--she asked, disturbed by the mystery. Joan [Blumenthal] realized she was seeing a reflection of the pole holding her intraveneous equipment. She explained it to Ayn, adding that it was not uncommon to have mild hallucinatory experiences under heavy pain medication. Ayn refused to believe it. She continued to insit that it was a tree, she knew it was a tree..."A number of months later," Joan realled, "she called me to discuss what she said was a serious matter. When I arrived she shouted at me over the issue of the tree. How could I make her doubt her senses?--she demanded. How could I have attempted to undermine her rationality?" [The Passion of Ayn Rand, p. 383).

    So yes, by all means, if you didn't see it there, it must not be there.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Sorry Paul, you weren't reading carefully again...here's what I said:

    "Its funny how Jehovah, AKA, "The Big Idiot" has Paul act like a maroon, and has me call Him names like idiot, and then has Paul remove those posts."

    Jehovah is the "Him" above...God is having me call God names, and then having you delete the posts.

    Hope that helps.

    Idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Aside from the fact that anonymous started the idiot-fest by referring to "you" (i.e. Paul, not Jehovah), there's a reason God allows sinners to mock Him for a time. It shows your wicked heart for what it is, thus removing all possible excuse for you.

    But hey, if you want to keep heaping coals upon your head, don't let me stand in your way.

    ReplyDelete
  11. That is SOOOOOOO scary Peter Pike...

    whatever shall I do?

    If only the good Lord would soften my heart, but alas, it is not destined to be.

    So sad.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Annoyingmouse, that matters how?

    God also had you act like an idiot, had me turn your post into rubble, and still has you failing to back up assertions. Guess God wants you to look like an idiot, idiot.

    And, your post implicitly implies that it is some kind of a "problem" that God determines that you act like an idiot, and determines that I deleted one idiotic post, and this is supposedly "funny."

    I didn't laugh. I don't know anyone who did. If that's your idea of "funny" then you need to keep your day job. No "HAW HAW HAW" knee slapping in your future.

    If you meant "funny" as in "that's a problem" then it's not clear at all. Why not back up the argument?

    Or, is God predestining you to make more assertions and look like an idiot some more, idiot.

    Go slam your finger with a hammer. That's got to be more fun that this beating you're taking. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Paul,

    If God decrees that I go slam my finger with a hammer, than it will be done.

    So let it be written, so let it be done.

    HAW HAW HAW!!!

    Isn't it just a tad far-fetched to imagine the omnipotent creator of all lowering "Him"self to the retarded antics going on here?

    That is the point....

    ReplyDelete
  14. It certainly is far-fetched to imagine an anonywuss atheist would actually present an argument sometime.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous said...
    Paul,

    If God decrees that I go slam my finger with a hammer, than it will be done.

    So let it be written, so let it be done.

    ===============

    That's right, it will. What's the problem?

    Kind of just like if the laws of Mammy Nature determined that you would slam your finger, you would. So what?

    Or, does nothing determine those things? They just happen by accident? For no reason at all? No wonder you're the Hillbilly atheist, you have about as many brain cells as you do teeth. I mean, tooth.

    ===============

    "Isn't it just a tad far-fetched to imagine the omnipotent creator of all lowering "Him"self to the retarded antics going on here?"

    ===============

    You must think that if X determines A, then X is the actor who A-ed.

    And, there were no retarded antics until you posted, retard.

    Is it a tad far fetched to think you're of normal intelligence when you act like a retard, retard?

    And, how is determining a situation in terms of which yet another atheists makes himself look like a hack and a maroon, "lowering himself?"

    Lastly, if you think saying something "stupid" implies that God is stupid for determining the situation then don't you, to be consistent, think all the brilliant ideas of philosophers, mathematicians, scientists, &c., serve to show how intelligent God is? How come when one of your buddies over at ex-zithead professing Christian dot net says something "smart" you don't say the same thing? Or, is offering arbitrary and selective critiques all you have, idiot?

    What's the point?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Look at the love of Christ flowing from the words of Manata!

    HAW HAW HAW!!!

    Dear Jesus, Master of the Universe,
    I have been moved by the loving words that the Holy Spirit has uttered through your humble servant, Paul Manata.

    Please forgive me my sins, and cleanse me from all unrighteousness, and make me clean.

    I love you dearest Jesus, thank you for deciding to save me, from the foundations of the world!

    Boo yeah!

    Paul, my brother, now we will spend ETERNITY together! Whoo hoo!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Annoyingmouse,

    I'm replying in disinterested fashion. I'm simply speaking to you like you spoke to me. If you thought it was "unloving," "idiotic," "retarded," "mean," "name-calling," and "neener neener" type behavior, why engage in it?

    I actually think you should get a life. Patrolling comboxes and commmenting for the mere purpose to call people idiots seems like you lead a pretty pitiful existence. Offering absurd charicatures of another's position doesn't strike me as intellectually virtuous. Making assertions minus arguments doesn't strike me as exhibiting desireable intellectual traits. rather than waste time posting irrelevant material in people's comboxes, why don't you use the brain God gave you and read some books on critical thinking and argument theory? Seems like a better use of your time, no? Don't shoot the messanger.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Paul,

    I agree 100%

    I'm with you now, brother! I'm saved, just like you.

    The Lord of Hosts used your powerful words inject the Holy Spirit into my soul and TRANSFORM me into a new creature.

    Jesus Rules!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Its funny how Jehovah, AKA, "The Big Idiot" has Paul act like a maroon, and has me call Him[self] names like idiot, and then has Paul remove those posts."

    ...

    Isn't it just a tad far-fetched to imagine the omnipotent creator of all lowering "Him"self to the retarded antics going on here?


    Your words are but a remarkably ironic instance in which God is making known the riches of His glory. If nothing else, they have moved me to give thanks, for I am reminded of things I've said about God -- things that make your mockeries here look almost tame by comparison -- and how that, apart from God's undeserved mercy, there is simply no reason why I am not still saying such things.

    I am at once crushed, amazed, and grateful...

    ReplyDelete
  20. anonymous = zit headed teenager

    ReplyDelete
  21. Zit Headed Teenagers are God's creation too!

    God Don't Make No Junk!

    Boo yeah!

    ReplyDelete
  22. "Isn't it just a tad far-fetched to imagine the omnipotent creator of all lowering 'Him'self to the retarded antics going on here?"

    The one you call Zit Headed Teenager has a point. Paul says that "God is not the author of confusion," but in that Calvislam holds him to have predetermined our actions it makes him out to be the author of confusion. If he fated the Calvinist to teach his dribble and the Catholic to teach his dribble and the Muslim to teach his dribble, etc. etc. then he is verily the author of confusion. So, either determinism is false, or Paul is a liar and the Bible a book of lies.

    ReplyDelete