To: sitetest
I don't "believe" anything. I like everything subject to constant tests and constant re-evaluation. The objectivist philosophy looks like the one that is most beneficial to man so far, so that is the one that most closely represents my own stance. Actually, and this is hard to explain without getting tagged "relativist" but the fact is, I consider it to be an objective within a relevant relative, if that makes any sense to anyone besides me. What I mean is, if you want what's best for mankind, and if you agree that what is best for mankind is the resources to develop technologically, the responsiblity to develop psychologically, and the motive and freedom to develop in both areas, the objectivist philosophy is the best - objectively - in town. But I'm not required to "believe" this, and take it on faith. I am free to observe cultures that stifle freedom, independence, and creativity, and observe the result.
To: Anamensis
Dear Anamensis,
Okay. Then what you're saying is that if a person prefers the results that you prefer (technological development, etc.), Objectivism is a good way (perhaps the best way - at least that we know) to get there.
But there is nothing that objectively requires one to have these preferences?
sitetest
68 posted on
07/09/2002 1:46:55 PM PDT by
sitetest
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson