You certainly can. I also wrote a piece on this a short time ago.

http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/22...

value for value :)
I think it's instructive here to remember the scene where Dagny meets Jeff Allen, a tramp, on her train. The conductor is set to throw him off, but Dagny says no. You recognizes that this person has fallen on hard times and is not a "bum" per se. She offers him dinner and then finally, a job. She would not have offered a bum a job because what value would she have gotten? On the other hand, Jeff Allen did not pay to ride the train either, but he had made a choice given his circumstances, that had the chance of offering him an opportunity, which he pursued.

Brrrr.... :)

Premises, principles, fundamentals, corollaries, and axioms—dig into these with ruthless honesty. Many years ago, I used to tell myself that if my 'God' was real, 'he' could handle this kind of intense scrutiny. Then, one evening...*poof*.... I realized the foundation of my belief was flawed when I understood the far reaching implications of "A is A". It was an "Oh...wowww!" moment.

Very interesting. By that definition, you are definitely correct that serving your own self interest can never be considered altuism, even if that service benefits others.

here is the origin of the word and why it came into being. Its roots are evil: "1853, "unselfishness, opposite of egoism," from French altruisme, coined or popularized 1830 by French philosopher Auguste Comte (1798-1857)," Etymology Dictionary

Thanks. I have read your posts and find we have a lot in common. I was asking myself the other day how I arrived at some of the things I have without a lot of classical education. I took a couple of philosophy courses as mandatory non-technical electives but engineers did not have a lot of time to study the classics. My graduate degree was in business and I didn't learn a lot of history or philosophy there either. What I realized is that both disciplines are based on reason. It was an aha moment. Learn to think instead of only learning about the thoughts of others and you come to rational conclusions. I believe this is the major reason our "better educated" Ivy League brothers have been taught to accept altruism to their own detriment.

Good point. I think I did a poor job of separating religion from belief in a creator. I find that most religions gain their power from guilt and self-immolation. You have to have a fear of a bad outcome in order for you to follow someone who walks you down a path that is inherently against your own self interest. So religious organizations pound the fear into you until you are willing to surrender your self interest to their's. That is why I have a very hard time with organized religion.
However, in my search for understanding of my own being, I think it would be unwise to rule out one theory over another until one can be proven. There is no scientific evidence to prove the theory of evolution or the big bang theory, or the theory of a divine creator led to our own creation. Since none can be proven YET, it would be intellectually lazy to rule any of them out simply because their proponents can be evil at times. Look at global warming. Most of the proponents of global warming have evil intentions of securing unearned wealth and power for themselves. However, in that case, there is real science to disprove their theories of man-made climate change, so we can safely reject them. If there weren't real science behind their rejection, we would be putting ourselves at a disadvantage by disregarding them simply because of their motivations.

I am definitely with you there. I agree that altruism in itself usually requires self-immolation to someone else's needs. While serving my own needs, sometimes that overlaps with another's needs, and, by serving myself, I am also helping others. I guess, by a strict definition, that could still be considered altruism, but I do like the way you, and Rand, separate the two.

coal; I can relate very closely with your story, although without the grandfather as a baptist, but he might as well been so. We were raised in the foothills of the Ozarks and church every Sunday was mandatory. Then I began to learn things, mainly in science, that were frowned on by the church's teachers and minister. When I looked at the reasonableness of what I was learning compared to the unreasonableness of the church teachings, it was an awakening and the beginning of a new adventure that I've been on ever since.

I found objectivity a little later and found that it fit me like a glove. It felt so good to finally through off the cloak of guilt put on me by a large part of my family and friends for my denial of church and the religion being taught.

Aah, you've got such a nice way of putting it, nevertheless, true.

This is an excellent point coal. Separating the two out. Studying Objectivism does not mean you give other beliefs up first. The inquiry is the thing. I have read some comments on the site from both Os and people new to Rand who talk about the philosophy like it' s going on a diet. You can 't eat this or this. You can only do this exercise. For me it 's reading philosophy. I don 't pledge anything before I crack into Aristotle's Politics or Locke's Treatise. It 's not so much about being AN objectivist as it is just learning about the most revolutionary work in philosophy in the 20 th century and seeing its importance historically and scientifically.

I mean this respectfully, Have you considered, you are experiencing yourself and you are labeling that experience "god " because it 's easy to do. I mean it 's part of our growing up, our traditions and culture. And can have a very positive influence. For myself, I looked back over my life and connected all the doubts -something in religion you are not only discouraged from doing but are also accused of taking a negative action against God. Growing up this way causes one to negate those feelings as incorrect. Yet in science, we are never encouraged to dismiss our doubts, we are encouraged to test and exploit them in searches for knowledge and truth. Pretty simplistic here, but wanted to be part of the discussion.

You need to get comfortable enough with the selfishness part to drop the altruism part. Altruism is always about removing the "self" from the equation.

I wish you well with that. It's been the goal of my life to learn everything I can possible stuff into this old head. Some days it kind of feels like a 2gal bucket that I'm trying to put 3gal in. It seems to just runner.

Haha. Well at least I am committed to lifetime learning.

As a young boy I was told that "you have to go to church." I resented the "have to" part and as all young boys do, I asked "why?"

My grandfather was a Baptist minister in North Carolina. He was a farmer and a builder which I admired very much. I thought his religious pronouncements were somehow embarrassing.

Independently, I came to a conclusion that there is a rational explanation for everything if you have the knowledge. Obtaining knowledge is man's key to his understanding of existence and filling in the blanks by faith is intellectual laziness and a surrender to ignorance. That which we do not yet know is the challenge that fuels our progress as a species and anything that skips over the "why" with a substitute for knowledge is evil.

I am not religious because I have arrived at that conclusion rationally. I am an objectivist because I arrived at that conclusion rationally. While the two conclusions have reason as the common denominator, one is not because of the other.

You're getting colder, very cold.

I think the premise you are trying to get me to is that Objectivism isn't necessarily anti-religous. But rather anti-blindly following a religion without using reason and logic to confirm the beliefs of that religion in our own minds and confirming those beliefs with our own daily experiences. Am I getting warmer or colder?

Keep at it, you're getting close.

What a great comment. 30 years of persistent learning. Wow +1

I agree that it is a very in depth topic, and difficult to type into this little box. I really do appreciate your initial response. I think it is a reconciliation that everyone must come to on their own. Furthermore, I'm not sure it really matters. The Objectivist in me asks, does it really matter? In my normal day to day existence and pursuit of happiness, if there is no real way to prove it either way, and it doesn't have much of an impact anyway, it becomes less important.

I definitely appreciate the Objectivist belief in the power of greed. Greed encourages something like selfish altruism. I don't help others because of some feeling of guilt or religious fervor, I help people in my pursuit of my own needs. If giving someone a job brings benefits to me, then my greed has helped others. If the person brings no benefit to me, than it is not altruism but consensual looting to give them a job.

One of my favorite possessions is a copper dollar with the D'Anconia Copper logo on one side, and the phrase "Greed is the Root of all Good" on the other. I use it as a ball marker whenever I play golf, and love the conversations it starts.

KS; There's not enough room on this site nor do I have the time to answer what you raise in your response. All I can say is investigate and learn. This site, we that are on it, the AS movies and book, all of AR's writings and everything else Objectivist can only stir an interest in a person. You must translate that into your own life and find your own desire to live rationally and logically with reason in order to experience the utmost of the limited little time of life that exists for you. No one can give that to you. Otherwise, you're only hitting the high-spots rather than the depths and fullness of an Objectivist life. It is after all totally your choice.

He has a habit of that....

Well said, Zen. Over 30 years ago, my thinking was similar to KS. My concept of 'God' was...big and specific. As I learned more from non-fiction Objectivist writing, and I was more honest in my thinking about 'God', well 'he' became smaller and more broadly defined. Eventually, I realized that I was intellectually struggling to retain a belief in 'something'...that was nothing.

Keep learning, KS.

Thanks for the tip. That looks right up my alley.