I'm not at all politically correct, haven't been for longer than I can remember.
I write science fiction. My reality is the same as your except that I do not rule out the possibility of there being more than what we can see, touch, taste, and smell. In order words my sense of what could be is much wider than what I've seen here on this site (and I've been around a while). I respect everyone's views and discuss them without insulting them or being condescending simply because its impossible for us to know whats next. My approach on this matter can hardly be seen as reciprocated by many of the folks here.I consider those encounters, those bumps, the toll I pay to associate. Again, I've been here a good while and I don't shoot off the cuff very often nor do I throw around words without reason.

Objectivists are not “faith based” in the sense you are trying to claim. Objectivists are confident in their ability to reason, to abstract truth from the evidence of their senses. This is the opposite of the religious definition of belief without evidence. (John 20:29 is an example of this.)

An Objectivist is a very faith-based person because he is trusting his ability to rationalize and that the conclusions from such are truth of the highest value. Every thought you have goes back to a point where you have to believe something empirically has not been proven. Scientists do this all the time in their search for understanding the natural world.

We would agree that love exists, but how do you replicate that in the science lab? They won't touch it in those terms because you would have to trust that 1) it is there (as a general definition, 2) it comes from a non-material source (and don't tell me it is a survival mechanism that animals also have....animals do not love (as I define love).

I don't think you have truly absorbed my argument and the subtexts.

If rationalizing from Objectivism could mean believing anything, then I could rationalize that Objectivism is defunct, which in that case where do you go? Is this not a contradiction? It is like saying Christianity tells me not to be a Christian.

"Beyond the narrow scope of Objectivism..."

Well, taking this statement, that would seem to say (I could be mistaken) that we should discuss how Objectivism works, but not the conclusions we draw from it in terms of consequences. This would seem to say, think but don't share what you are thinking. Can someone say "political correctness?"

And having done so, Christianity is the only answer. Those that arrive at another answer, I would question their ability to Objectively rationalize.

What about it goes against Christian "teachings?" Educate me.

"D's are entirely fear mongers, its how they keep their base"
Yes. It's just more obvious when the other party does it. Fear gets attention.

Fear of failure. D's are entirely fear mongers, its how they keep their base. Fear is a great motivator for most everything in life.

"Re: "Fear motivates everything." Seriously?"
Sometimes I think fear motivates everything for Republicans. lol j/k, but only a little.

Haven't you seen the South Park episode?? Obviously once you convert to Mormonism, you will soon be playing scrabble in heaven with Mormons. Good luck not killing yourself.

Agreed.

My 2-cents. I think we each need to decide what, if anything, we will take on faith alone. Then, enjoy life while not imposing your will on others.

Cheers...

I didn't say fear motivates everyone to the same conclusions. You choose a different path to quell uncertainty, a path that empowers you as an individual and validates every decision you make. Other people choose other ways to resolve those uncertainties and thats well and good. Until they transgress into my life I have no issue with just about anything anyone else believes or wants to believe. The dominion of my beliefs in every aspect of how I believe is my own. Objectivism is part of my beliefs but not the totality of it. If that makes me inconsistent thats my business and I can live with it.

Incidentally, I don't understand how people with faith fear death. You'd think the better place would be more appealing...go figure, life mystery.

Okay, if fear motivates everything, how does it motivate me and many others to be atheists? It certainly cannot be fear of the afterlife.

pride is certainly a factor...fear of failure. Love - fear of loneness, isolation, dying alone. Shame - fear of losing face around those you.

Fear need not only represent death. Failure is huge as well, but that does tie into the ability to care for one's self or others and how that degrades love, pride, etc.

I do appreciate this conversation even if we can't agree. :)

Re: "Fear motivates everything." Seriously? What about pride, love, anger or any other emotion? If man's only emotion of any consequence was fear, life would not be worth living. Death is the absence of life, life is not the absence of death.

If we're playin' that game...I call, "bullshit".

Fear motivates everything...lack of food = death, lack of warmth = death, too much heat=death, lack of shelter=death, not enough money> lack of? = death

One could even say Objectivism, like other systems of belief, provide structure in life, a code to provide surety, validate actions and stave off death (by being successful).

Re: “Of course anyone has the right to do what they please as long as they don’t violate the rights of others. This does make it subjective no?”

No. It simply defines the limits of one’s moral actions in respect to the rights of others. It does not determine whether such actions will be in the person’s self-interest. You said earlier that “self preservation, even believing in something/someone who is beyond that which we perceive as reality, is self-interest and a rational action no?” Not if such belief is motivated by fear, as in “believe this or you will burn for all eternity.” Such belief (if it can even be called that) undercuts reason at its root and ultimately destroys one’s means of perceiving reality.

sadly far too many don't see this as you and I do
"Of course anyone has the right to do what they please as long as they don’t violate the rights of others." This does make it subjective no? What if they do not acknowledge our rights or laws? What if they live by their own laws and define (and assign) their own rights in our society?

If we did we'd not have murder, taxes, theft, etc..

How is believing in something beyond our 120 years on this earth, after the objectivity totality of existence, considered surrender or an infringement on Objectivism? Is Objectivism requiring fidelity in the life after the death it refuses to acknowledge (I am being a bit sarcastic here)?

I'm still not a mormon Khalling :P

Of course anyone has the right to do what they please as long as they don’t violate the rights of others. That’s not the same as saying self-interest is subjective. Individuals can value different concretes and pursue their particular self-interest accordingly. But they cannot change their nature as rational beings, or the necessity of using their reason to achieve their self-interest as human beings. People can survive for a while at the level of animals by doing the minimal thinking necessary to satisfy their short-term needs, but stopping there and surrendering reason to faith or fear, at any higher levels of abstract thought, means that they are no longer truly functioning at the human level and are no longer promoting their self-interest. It’s actually worse than living as lower animals, because animals typically function in a manner and to the extent that their nature permits, and do not live in fear of what awaits them beyond the grave.

Sorry, it absolutely is.

What you value and what I value, what you determine you need and what I determine I need can be two entirely different things, and the extent to which you and I would go to obtain what we feel we need (value) is different as well. You don't need reason to physically determine you need food, shelter and clothing. You don't need reason to know your stomach is grumbling and that you need food, that you're cold and need clothes, or that you wish to rest and need safe shelter to do so. You can rationalize theft or murder if you had to in order to provide personal justification in obtaining any or all of those things because, in your depleted condition, see those needs as priority in your own personal self interest.

A hermit ran reason abduction, imprisonment and rape of another with his/her reason.

While you and I may mostly agree to what is and isn't rational there are many who do not agree and live differently. Thats a Constitutional right that must be respected.

Re: "Self-interest is subjective to each individual." No it isn't. Rational self-interest consists of living a life appropriate to a rational being. Reason is man's means of survival and flourishing. Basing one's beliefs on fear of the unknown (and unknowable) means abandoning one's rational faculty as a means of knowledge and a guide to living one's life. That can never be in anyone's self-interest.