Adrian Selby

If you're not sure what you are, chances are you're pretty much with the rest of us. There are few certainties around here, except that its certain we're uncertain....although if I say that.....aaahhh.

I think that when I say I'm for this or that philosophically, I appreciate I've set my bag there, by the side of the road, perhaps pitched a tent. Then I've gone exploring (to places like this) where I can talk about where I've pitched my tent, and how nice it is there, but the road still stretches on, and occasionally I follow it further.

Adrian

Blake

In a sense, I suppose so. The Randian is explicitly an objectivist on account of asserting a belief in an objective reality, but perhaps not a consistent objectivist to the degree that s/he asserts beliefs in these other non-objectively-determinable things.

That's better than a lot of other things ....

Blake

Seth K

I think you're a little off here in the sense that a Randian/Objectivist claims that such things are objectively determinable. In other words, "the virtue of selfishness and the need for a pure capitalism" are objective truths along the lines of "the sky is blue" to Rand and her followers. She even went as far to claim that there are objective standards for aesthetics, with the Romantic genere being the superior form of art, music, and literature. (Must resist "Rand is the uber-hack" rant...)

[ April 08, 2002: Message edited by: Seth K ]</p>

Automaton

Nietszche hated anti-semitism and nazism. It's like trying to link Darwin to Communist Russia.

Someone7

Not to hijack this thread, but Nietzsche was a Lamarckian, at least according to Kaufmann in his Nietzsche.

He cites some references to this, but I am unable to find them online. They are The Gay Science 99, and some notes from the Gesammelte Werke (XVI,9 and IX,14). This is from page 294 of Kaufmann's Nietzsche, fourth edition.

pug846

I was going to stay quiet on the issue, but I think Nietzsche was a Lamarckian. He liked Darwin’s link of humans to other animals, but not his mechanism of natural selection. The idea behind natural selection, that animals struggle for there mere existence, was incompatible with the will-to-power.

This seems to be the view of most Nietzsche scholars. (Most, aka, scholars who I read ).

RandomGuy

The epistemology of Objectivism is essentially a form of foundationalism. They start thier philosophy based on a starting axiom "existence exists." I'm not a big fan of foundationalism, but whatever.

I know a few select Objectivists, and to be blunt they are your village atheists. This apparently is somewhat of a trend I've been told. But honestly, there are much better books to read than reading on Objectivism. For instance, reading a book from someone with some actual philosophical training would be a start.

(yes I'm being a tad mean, sorry... )