Objectivism thread
The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Objectivism thread
No.
>>675505319
>back to >lit
"Everything I say is objective because chemical reactions happen inside my brain and thoughts happen"
-Ayn Rand
>>675506974
she is right but the context she uses cancels what she means.
objectivism is impossible because there is no point of contact between reality and our perception of reality.
I like her as a self help coach but in practice objectivism cannot be universal.
>>675507777
What do you mean no contact
>>675507777
You realize I just made that quote up, right?
Ayn Rand was a penny-ante philosopher -- she basickly just repackaged Nietszche and added a dose of cunty Darwanism. There are many more claimants that are much more worthy of your attention.
>>675508597
>*basically
I don't know why auto-correct went with "basickly"...
>>675508597
no, I didn't know. but it kinda sums up the problem .
>>675508597
Have you act read her yourself? And no she opposed him after her 20s he was a subjevtivist and she very clearly states this in her nonfiction and the beginning of the fountain head
>>675509277
>Have you actually read her?
I wouldn't say that I'm well-versed, but I know enough about Ayn Rand and the gist of her work to know that she isn't worth my time.
Life is too short to waste time with a half-witted woman philosopher
>>675508406
one cannot know reality objectively. we are trapped in the overblown virtual reality that is our brain. we receive faulty information from our senses [wich are adapted for a live we don't live anymore] and the that information is processed with the only purpose of fucking and surviving. there is no point in searching an objective view of life. the only thing you can call objective is an extensive agreement on key issues. but that is all.
>>675507777
Nice quads
>>675509876
So basically you didn't read her because I can say the same shit and lie about any author and discredit them without actually making an argument and just saying she's not worth my time
Who feels like this is a bad idea?
>>675510194
Sure, anon... you win
>>675509884
What if in like 10 years technology allows us to evolve mechanically out of these biological states into permanent no-survival instinct ones ? Would a robot be objective ?
>>675509884
Read her epistemology it would take to long to explain why you are mistaken. Life doesn't have to be confusing man you don't have to feel this way
>>675510457
Come on why give up like that why did you post in the first place then
>>675510585
No
>>675510585
It wouldn't change the facts of reality cause and effect stoll apply to anything in reality the only difference is the robot would not have values because it is immortal
>>675510671
>read her epistemology
>her epistemology
You haven't read much philosophy, have you, anon? Because if you had, there is no fucking way you would site Ayn Rand to tackle your problem with nihilism or Subjectivism or perspectivism or whatever.
>>675511260
That just doesn't make any sense wtf
>>675510585
it doesn't matter. if our memory and thoughts become a processor and a software, you still have the same issue. there is a gap between the reality and the interpretation of trough cameras and sensors, and the logic commands in the software running in it.
>>675511048
But surely by removing the need to fuck and to survive as a species, we also remove the subjective nature of ourselves. Wouldn't that leave us with an objective approach to life ?
>>675510843
explain.
>>675511942
Because you all are just stupid... If I have to explain then you should go back to redfag where you belong.
>>675511467
While I dont agree with the other anons solipsist views, the fact that everything is relatively superfluous to survival and procreation, I would wholeheartedly agree.
Ayn Rand lacked the depth and humility to break down the predicates of her arrogant statements. And so you're left with a clusterfuck of abstract value-judgements that you can't prove, one way or another.
>>675511678
Oh, so that's how you define objectivity. Well by that definition, aren't we all objective, since we exist as cause and effect, and are objectively part of the laws of physics ? I mean if you want to define objectivity this way, you can see it kinda fails in making sense (at least for me) because what you want really, seems to be undefinable, you want an experience that is INSIDE reality, and yet somehow acts as if it's experiencing it from the OUTSIDE, (from an unbiased pov). That is illogical.
>>675505319
Have fun unseeing
>>675511942
What do you mean by subject nature in ourselfs do you mean that there is an objective side and subjective side like reason and emotion? Is emotions are just consequences of choices and thoughts they are a barometer or our reason. Emotions are just past conclusions we came to.
>>675511942
For example when you are in a relationship with a girl and you decide to leave her the emotion is still there but your reason is with leaving her ie a conclusion you came to because she cheated on you or something but after awhile you forget about her your emotions just catch up and the next time you leave your girlfriend you are more tolerant to it because you solidifies your reason with your emotion
>>675512413
No don't listen to that idiot
>>675512437
well yes, I think emotions are the ones being subjective. Since they address reality from a subjective personal point of view, that is limited. Reason on the other hand is pretty much unbiased since it has to accumulate ALL the data in order to reach those conclusions that you mentioned.
>>675509876
>half-witted woman philospher
So what the fuck have you done to prove that you are so much more intelligent and witty?
Op here I realize this isn't the forum for talking about objectivism but if anyone that still has the love of life and reason still left in them I urge you to actually read her works like "philosophy who needs it" is a good start. If you have any actual questions I would really like to answer
>>675513543
Me? Nothin
However, there is an abundance of philosophy that I find to be much more logical and insightful. Not to mention less cunty.
>>675514129
You have no answers, anon. But thanks
>>675512796
hmm but what is actually or SHOULD take control ? I mean if she cheats on you she obviously doesn't give a shit about your feelings. Reason dictates to leave her immediately but emotion has difficulties since it operates on what exactly.. the logic that past experiences were beneficial .. the idea and notion of love ? The idea of sacrifice ? Or of second chance ? None of these seem to work in real life, as we can see that if she cheated once, she will do it again. It's because she doesn't share your values and most likely never will since it has to do with a dogma that she simply doesn't have. So emotions are never really helping any situation. They might as well be just indicators that this is good for you and this is not, but the core decisions should be done by the rational part, even though sometimes those decisions hurt, since if not, they will hurt more in the future. (I learned that the hard way).
>>675512413
sometingh objective is someting that is true without requiring an obsevation. therfore only physics are objective. we cannot acces the realm of physics becaise we are not physical beans. our bodies are, but not out minds. that is why we should not aspire to have an objective perspective of the universe.
even the act of defining what is objective is a subjective exercise of our minds.
>>675514463
Please, anon
Enlighten us with your list of more than worthy philosophers.
I really am curious!
>>675513163
But don't you see emotionless are a reaction to choices based on reality if it was a bad choice you suffer the consequences if you made a good choice then you will feel good either way reality is the arbitar. Just like an argument between two people if one is right them reality will be the judge of it. There is no inate subjective side it's just the consequences of not being objective ie acting according to reason which is the means of survival to a human
>>675508597
Darwin and Nietzsche weren't real intellectuals. Ayn Rand is the only real intellectual other than Adam Smith. Ayn Rand is literally the opposite of Nietzsche.
>>675510457
sure bud
>>675514602
That's not what objective means philosophically
>>675505319
>being a selfish idiot thread
fixed
>>675505319
>>675505319
>objectivism
>base ideals upon a subjective narcissism
Such strong roots in bullshit
>>675514629
Schopenhauer
Nietzsche
Zeno
Karl Popper
Heidegger
Gilles Deleuze
Wittgenstein
Aristotle
Kant: I'm not even a fan, but he's light-years beyond Ayn Rand
That's just off the top of my head
>>675515164
>self sacrifice because muh jesus
Basically anyone who doesn't like Ayn Rand. They are all idiots.
>>675514901
>the only real intellectual other than Adam Smith
>the only intellectual that I'm familiar with other than Adam Smith
Fixed
>>675515010
any definition is a philosophical statement. we cannot agree what objective is objectively because that task it is outside the realm of our experience. we can only get to extensive agreements that will pass for objective because they are practical (as in they allow us to survive and have sex)
>>675505319
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
>>675515259
>Kant
>lightyears beyond Ayn Rand
Yeah, I'm certain that you're a fucking idiot now. You definitely don't know what you're talking about.
>>675515204
>Narcissism
>Implying you're not a retard
Fuck off.
>>675515259
You literally just named all shit-tier philosophers. The only non-shit tier are Ayn Rand, Molyneux, and Smith.
>>675515483
I know
Schopenhauer
Nietzsche
Zeno
Karl Popper
Heidegger
Gilles Deleuze
Wittgenstein
Aristotle
and know they are all shit-tier and stupid.
>>675514901
>Rand
>Intellectual
literally noone takes this jewess serious except some retarded neo-cons from burgerstan
>>675515204
No I base it on reality you idiot
>>675508597
>>675515164
Ayn rand advocated rational self interest not subjective do what ever I feel whim worship like you say
>>675515186
No I am forcing anything
>>675515700
>Anyone but Rand
>intellectual
Literally no one considers anyone but Rand worthy except for neo-cons/communists.
>>675514901
There we go someone who is rational for once
>>675515567
In terms of scope and magnitude, yes, Kant is lightyears beyond Ayn Rand.
But I guess since you said that I'm an idiot and stuff...
>>675515575
>all shit-tier philosophers
Lol. Usually when I type lol, I don't actually laugh out loud, but that's a good one.
>>675514901
>Ayn Rand is the only real intellectual other than Adam Smith.
Philo freshmen piss me off
>>675515860
>implying self interest isn't subjective
>>675506237
>implying objectivists actually read other books
>>675515505
So then why do anything at all oh let me guess you advocate we go by feelings and live in the moment
>>675509884
This exact school of thought is addressed in Atlas shrugged, and completely destroyed.
>>675505319
Eurofag here and who the fuck is Ayn Rand ?
>>675515262
>anyone who doesn't like Ayn Rand
has common sense
>>675515700
the one philosphical truth in the entire thread
>>675516264
I said rational self interest please don't be this dense
>>675516267
That's not even an argument and just using your lack of understanding of statistics to make us think objectivism as a whole is a cult
Ayn Rand advocated behaviour that is typical for a psychopathic personality disorder.
I know you edgy autists like that.
>>675505319
OK I'll bite.
How would objectivism address man-made climate change?
>>675507777
>there is no point of contact between reality and our perception of reality
Are you retarded? Don't read the koran please.
>>675516369
Someone who advocated freedom and capitalism. People are just mad because she didn't donate to charity.
>>675516081
LOL you're really funny. Thinking any of those retards are even half is smart as Ayn Rand.
>>675516838
>capitalism
>freedom
Incompatible.
>>675516962
You can't have freedom without capitalism.
>>675516838
>Advocated for capitalism
Thanks that's enough for me to hate her.
>>675517096
MA nigga
>>675517162
So you hate freedom?
>>675516838
>>675517162
Go. Donate all your money to. Charity then
>>675505319
No relevant philosopher/scholar/intellectual has ever cited Ayn Rand unless they're mocking her or explaining why her philosophy is wrongheaded.
>>675516758
No she didn't advocate that behavior. She only advocated the fact that everybody wants to secretly be one.
>>675517524
Like there were any after Rand.
>>675517524
That's because there has never been a philosopher/scholar/intellectual that hasn't been Ayn Rand or lived before Ayn Rand. If you're not an objectivist you're a moron and can never be considered an intellectual.
>>675517096
Your perception of freedom is contingent on your privileged economic position in the world. My proof is that the second you uneducated proles feel economic insecurity you all become fascists and vote for Trump to "make America great again" (i.e., restore our economic privilege that depends on the exploitation of the global poor).
You are not free if you do not control the means to produce the necessities of life. The basic material requirements to survive will compel you to obey the owners of capital.
>>675516838
>>675517096
>>675517277
>>675517713
>>675517729
You guys must be real smart
>>675517898
You're so uneducated. How am I exploiting the global poor? If you're referring to American Imperialism or corporate sweatshops that hurts Americans more than it benefits them.
>>675518326
Well, it's easy to be the smartest person in the room if you lock yourself in the basement.
>>675518326
sure bud ur sure smart.
Oh look, amusing thread about would be philosopher who lacked talent, insight and education, but for some reason is praised by some teenagers and few mentally underdeveloped adult individuals.
>>675518804
>for some reason is praised by some teenagers and few mentally underdeveloped adult individuals
Don't you get it anon? That's the final proof that's she's THE GREATEST PHILOSOPHER OF ALL TIME.
>>675518804
LOL. Anyone who doesn't read and agree with Ayn Rand is mentally underdeveloped. You're a freak I'm sorry to tell you. Oh and don't say "a philosopher", she is "the philosopher" because no one but Rand is a real philosopher.
>>675517096
>>675517898
Freedom is a construct of the imagination, and doesn't exist at all.
Freedom is an absolute, and therefore there can't be varying degrees of it, only varying degrees of "difficulty of will". "Autonomy of will" is impossible, as we're under a maelstrom of constraints (genetic, environmental, the laws of nature).
I realize the practical nature of using the term "freedom" as it pertains to jurisprudence, but it all comes down to the postulation that we have "free will", which I'm comfortable with stating that we do not.
>>675516575
Any self-interest is subjective
there is no "objectivity" there
Mrs. I Just Repacked Nietszche
>>675516278
how was it destroyed? by stating ideas codified in a language and convincing other subjective minds like yours? all that did was it created a practical agreement between a few humans. that doesn't address the issue of objective reality in any way.
in the end Rand wants a specific set of human ideals to be accepted as "objective". not gonna happen.
>>675519165
It's objectively for the interest of the self.
>>675519075
Roku?
Who is John Galt?
>>675519392
that makes no sense
you are still interjecting your own personal philosophy
you are not taking in the needs of the whole
My perfect philosophical system that explains the world:
(1) A
(2) A -> Capitalism
(3) Capitalism
Note that the first two premises are self-evident. If you disagree you are obviously irrational because I used logic.
>>675519109
>we don't have free will
oh not this fucking shit
>>675505319
>Politics for 13 year olds thread
This is now officially a leftism thread.
Unable-to-grasp-social-relations-inherent-to-humanity punks fuck off
>>675516799
how am I retarded for saying that? please explain
>>675519973
seriously faggot
why do you want to make our side look stupid
Rand was a fucking Russian kike that didn't have jewgold or product to sell, so she made up a bunch of horseshit, wrote it down, and sold it to a bunch of richfags that felt guilty about ripping off the proletariat.
Fucking kike sow.
>>675519392
>objectively for the interest of the self.
So...subjective?
>>675519973
Fun fact: All political extremists are retarded.
>>675519752
Yes, this fucking shit. Perhaps if you cared to look beneath the surface of perfunctory judgements about "rights" and value and freedom, you'd see that they often don't hold up.
>>675520123
You sound like the world's most butthurt redneck.
>>675519109
It doesn't make sense to assume we don't have free will. If we don't have free will it doesn't matter. If we do then we can actually hold people accountable for their shit.
>>675519973
>>675520263
>free will doesn't exist
So who's controlling you to say the shit you're posting? Just wondering.
>>675520217
>>>>>Ignorant niggerland
>>675520347
10/1 he's from Alberta
>>675514901
just a reminder that the invisible hand of capitalism has been re-branded from a collection of conscious patriotic investments to a tongue-in-cheek moniker for consumerism
>>675520420
say some more shit about the jews so we can laugh at what a massive faggot you are
>>675520347
You sound like another butthurt sheeny
>>675512422
there is literally no fucking similarities at all
>>675520599
What the fuck is a Sheeny?
>>675514901
At least Nietzsche could write.
>>675520643
Kek
>>675520391
>>675514901
>intellectual
>stupid selfish dipshit like Rand
pick one
Trains and hatefucking
>>675520599
something new he learned over at Stormfag
>>675514901
anon confirmed for b8
>>675514901
>intellectual
>woman
Can you guys please stop doing 4chan memes and baiting and just make an argument or actually read ayn rand
Socialist America confirmed for best America
>>675520123
lol this
>mfw idiots still believe capitalism and communism aren't two sides of the same shekel
and the only true alternative includes neither
>>675521263
>implying people who disagree with Ayn Rand haven't read her garbage
For a summary, see >>675519749
>>675505319
Objectivism is the philosophy of rational individualism founded by Ayn Rand (1905-1982). In novels such as The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged , Rand dramatized her ideal man, the producer who lives by his own effort and does not give or receive the undeserved, who honors achievement and rejects envy.
In other words, an asshole.
>>675520388
>assuming we DON'T have free will
"Free will" is the assumption. An assumption that fails to acknowledge causality, and the fact that every event, thought, action, is predicated on a hodgepodge of other causal events.
There are consequences for your actions whether we like it or not. Why can't we hold people accountable for their actions? I'd say that determinism could lead one to be wiser when it comes to making value-judgements, but as far as accountability, I fail to see the correlation.
>>675520404
We are responsible for making choices and decisions, but my entire life (genes, environment) has lead up to this little shitposting session, and it would be illogical to think that it could have gone any other direction, as time is transient, and we live life in the rear-view.
>>675521297
I'm OK with this
>>675521436
What you believe is irrelevant because you haven't even begun to understand socialism. You do realize that your beliefs about communism are exactly what "the Jews" want you to believe, right?
>>675521714
>We are responsible for making choices and decisions,
um, that is the very definition of "free will"
>>675521832
why the fuck do you have to mention the Jews all the fucking time
>>675522039
The quotes were there to indicate that I was making fun of that fascist's mythological worldview in which the shadowy Jewish conspiracy is the antagonist.
>>675521832
>Under Communism, workers have complete, immediate and free access to the abundance of socialized production.
Not in any Communist country I've ever heard of.
>>675521528
>in other words, an asshole
>>WAT
>>675515575
>only non-shit tier philosophers are Rand, Molyneux, and Smith
I challenge you to go into any well respected philosophy department and make this statement. They will laugh in your face at the first two, and hastily ship you off to an econ 101 class for the 3rd
>>675522324
Truth hurts faggot
>>675515662
>>675522419
I'm sure anon can't do that in 8th grade
>>675521849
No, the assertion that we are capable of making AUTONOMOUS decisions that are independent of the rest of nature is what constitutes "free will"
>>675505319
>>675522571
your entire premise is based on assumption
reality tells us we make choices and there are consequences to those actions
we have free will
>>675521487
Jesus Christ enough with the implying meme it's so retarded because you can twist it to mean whatever you want like for example I can reply to this by saying implying logic exists like wtf is wrong with you people you are so intellilectially lazy
>>675522457
Explain why he's an asshole
>>675523040
We have a will, but when you add the concept of freedom to it, it just conflates and confounds the issue.
>>675522313
Because - wait for it - those "communist" countries were never communist at all. Turns out that you can't go from pre-industrial feudalism directly to stateless post-industrial democracy. So those "communist" countries were always state capitalist nations just trying to industrialize. And like all capitalist nations, they created a corrupt ruling class.
I could call myself the emperor of China and it wouldn't make it true. And Stalin can call the Soviet Union communist, but it doesn't make that true either. Now we can discuss why that happened, the history, etc. but that won't change the fact that the actual definitions of capitalism, socialism, and communism are as shown in that guide. If you can't engage with those definitions and have to rely on Cold War strawman Communism to defend your ideology - well, that certainly says something, doesn't it?
>>675523116
not that anon, but I've to be convinced here why objectivism is a good thing, or even a realistic premise.
>>675521832
are you fucking retarded?
the socialistic/communistic idea was brought up by Heschel Marx Levi Mordechai and later put into effect by Lenin who were both of jewish descent.
>>675523116
>wtf is wrong with you people you are so intellilectially lazy
Uh oh, babby's getting mad! He's as grumpy as Ayn Rand when she collected social security checks!
>>675523311
It's just selfish bullshit I'd expect from some stingy rich bastard
>>675523360
You can have free will and recognize your limits as a corporal finite being. I really don't get where you're coming from, it's not only based on assumption but what is the end goal of believing it?
>>675523438
I agree with your post, but you certainly can't deny the whole "we just haven't tried the absolutely perfect kind of communism" problem.
>>675523749
Nice argument dude 10/10
>>675523700
If you were more intelligent, you'd realize that the mythological world you've created for yourself merely gives you the illusion of control while rendering your anger entirely impotent. You know why men in suits haven't come to take you away yet? Because nothing you have ever done, said, or believed has posed a real threat to any real person with power.
>16 year old virgins thread
>>675524180
"Communism" isn't even a single fixed method or system. Neither is "democracy" or "capitalism" for that matter. These are just ideals, and in that context "we haven't found the right implementation of an ideal" is a perfectly reasonable thing to say.
>>675523438
Actually more like when it came down to putting communism (small "c") into practice, Communists (big "C" --just like your example btw) didn't share the power after all.
>>675523845
He was a creative genius who everyone envys and try to destroy him for just pursuing his ultimate passion he doesn't hurt anybody or commits fraud he treats a character which is supposed to represent a decent normal person with respect because he loves his live and human life
>>675524617
>what the fuck am I reading
>>675523749
http://www.aynrandmyths.com/
>>675524797
nooooooooooooo
>>675524723
A description of Howard roark
>>675524797
The Myth - She was selfish.
The Truth:
kek
Rand was a shortsighted fool who lived her formative years in russia/ukraine and then much of her adult life in the constant fear of corrupt communism and nazism, thus creating an irrational belief that any group of people working towards a common goal was necessarily evil/corrupt.
She refused to believe that anything she accomplished in her life was with the help of the entirety of a nation/nations and the history of work, invention and political ideologies that came before her.
When one agrees with Ayn Rand's "philosophy" one is actually agreeing with her psychosis.
>>675524907
whether you "hurt anybody" or not, you have basic obligations to society, like voting, taxes and obeying the Rule of Law.
>>675524077
>recognize your limitations
Then your "will" is not very "free", is it? Anyway, it's not just about the limitations that you're aware of, but rather the infinite amount of limitations that you're not.
>what is the goal of believing it
There is no goal, and it's not a belief. This is akin to a religious person making a bold, supernatural claim that isn't supported by any evidence, and then asserting that the burden of proof is on the person who refutes that claim.
>>675524797
The Myth
Ayn Rand's ethics are anti-American.
The Truth:
See Fox News' opinion piece Does America Need Ayn Rand or Jesus?
MAXIMUM ZOZ
>>675524583
>putting communism into practice
And communism is a theoretical, future stateless society. One does not "put communism into practice". People who think that believe communism = socialism = "state owns all businesses", but that's just factually incorrect.
>Communists didn't share power
This is exactly what indicates that the Russian revolution entirely failed to implement socialism (much less communism). It was for understandable reasons, but the USSR was never socialist. They simply had state capitalism - capitalism in which bureaucrats took the place of private owners of capital. Of course it created a corrupt ruling class - that's what capitalism always does. And that is pretty much the opposite of what socialism is about. The purpose of socialism is to emancipate the people by getting rid of all ruling classes. And you get rid of the ruling classes by eliminating their base of power - the ability to own capital.
>>675525305
>Then your "will" is not very "free", is it?
actually you are making the fallacy that we have to have control over everything in nature in order to think for ourselves
>>675525560
Then you need to take those hammers and sickles out of your chart, because are tenets of Soviet Communism.
inb4 they stole them for their twisted agenda
you're kind of a faggot, actually
I really enjoyed atlas shrugged, but the idea of objectivism is flawed from the get-go
>>675525117
>implying objectivism isn't a psychosis
>>675525888
checked
>>675525706
The fallacy lies in the claim that we can be free, in the face of thongs that we have absolutely no control over.
"We can think for ourselves" is only an abstract manner of speaking, and when you break down the predicates of that statement, you should end up realizing that it doesn't make much sense.
>>675526484
>The fallacy lies in the claim that we can be free,
we are free
there is no fallacy there
you can think and move about freely while recognizing your limits as a biological corporeal being
you just keep forgetting to consider this
>>675526156
Too bad George Lucas didn't make a trilogy out of it
>>675526764
You keep parroting the same simpleminded lines, but they still don't make sense, anon. As a result, we're going in circles.
I'm certainly not saying anything new, so I'd encourage you to research determanism, and Nietzsches thoughts on the concept -- and then, if you're not a complete idiot, you should at least be less inclined to use the term with such conviction.
>>675526243
This isn't an argument
>>675527665
>As a result, we're going in circles.
no we aren't
you have these absurd parameters you insist on putting on reality
You might as well say we can't prove there's a teapot orbiting Neptune
>>675527777
waste of quads
>>675525362
At least you read some of the things on the website and I don't agree with them sitting fox news as proof I agree
>>675527857
Lol. Don't blame ME for nature's parameters
>>675526156
Why is objectivism flawed please make an actual argument
>>675527665
>Nietzsches thoughts on the concept --
btw Nietzsche was basically a pre-Internet troll
all his writings provoke thought and discussion, but shouldn't be taken as absolute
>>675528158
Your biggest problem is that you think free will is all or nothing, actually.
As long as I can type these words to you, I have the free will to do so. That's what's provable here.
>>675528201
butthurt faggot
>>675528671
thanks for remembering me from such films as
>Calling All Quakers
and
>The Erotic Adventures of Hercules
>>675528293
>all his writings provoke thought and discussion, but shouldn't be taken as absolute
For the most part, I think he would agree. He pretty much stated this in his Ecce Homo
As for the "pre-internet troll" thing, I don't really know what you're talking about... and I don't think you do either.
>>675528201
how about
>Good-Time Slim, Uncle Doobie, and the Great 'Frisco Freak-Out'
or maybe the
>Preacher With a Shovel
>>675528201
well, I'm not a philosopher, I just like reading. But, one thing that bothers me is that everyone's imperfect, including those who are deemed 'good' under the umbrella of objectivism.
I think the idea is definitely interesting, but it's too optimistic in it's assertion of goodness in human nature. There'll always be conflicts, no matter how honorable the people.
>>675529098
>and I don't think you do either.
reading books and having salons where people discussed reading books is akin to what we do on the Internet
only Nietzsche realized he could do it for the lulz
which is what trolls do
>>675529290
inb4
>Hydro, the Man With the Hydraulic arms
>>675528482
Freedom is an absolute. You did not have the freedom to resist typing that statement because you did... and you can't take it back. Because of your ego, your education (or lack thereof), your parents, your demographics etc etc etc, you're in this thread making posts about the nature of freedom.
... and you think you're free
>>675529608
>>675529098
>>675529290
lirk more faggots
>>675529670
Actually I made provable statements throughout this exchange, and you've done nothing but speculate.
You're a house of cards, dude.
>>675529608
>Nietzsche realized he could do it for the lulz
>>675529670
>>675529925
yeah because ylyl, porn, loli and objectivism are the most common threads on /b/
>>675530030
Well gee, don't bother citing your profound proofs then, dude
>>675530030
>>675530034
god you must have one bitchy philosophy coffee klutch you go to Mumford
>>675530249
My simple logic trumps (oops) your flowery wannabe reality
>>675530296
can you please fuck off
>>675530237
>>675530601
askme anything
>>675530601
>>675530462
But... I don't know what that means
>>675530555
Heh. I think we're done here
Great talk, anon
>>675530769
when did your faggotry increase to maximum?
>>675530909
I'm glad you found a suitable outlet to share your make-believe XD
>>675530462
>>675530896
did you finally figure out where your mom hid your copy
>>675521297
This is... interesting to say the very least. Also, as a future resident of Nickajack, I had to check wikipedia to figure out what the fuck Nickajack means.
>>675531450
must get a lot of rain
>>675531050
when did you forget to mention you enjoyed such films as
>The Muppets Go Medieval
and
>Sorry, Wrong Closet
fcuking newfag
gtfih
>>675531931
stop it
you're gonna get malware on mommy's computer
>>675531450
>Great Smoky Mountains national park
Beautiful. Have you ever been?
>>675532135
>implying it would take more than one poster to call you a huge faggot
>>675532115
I'm only trying to meme like everyone else
just coz I'm good at it people getting upset
>>675532506
>cringing this hard
>not lurking moar
>>675531450
Got it from /r/socialistamerica - they're pretty into this stuff
>>675532649
Ah... that board sounds gay tho
>>675532479
green text implying green cook please rate what would you do to my furry trap racist peinis if you eventually rolled trips?
>>675532649
you do realize that Republicans consider places like that "locked up resources?"
>>675532916
>implying I need to roll trips to witness your massive faggotry
>>675533101
shccchelll hallammm eccchcniii feiizel
>gypsy curse
>get rekt
?
>check benis in the morning (not on internet)
yFW
>>675533724
yup
colossal faggotry
colossal
>>675533724
>>675534093
