Protest against public schools!!!!!!

[Peter Parka]

What is your definition of a human being?
And what do you mean, it's not related to rights? You're claiming that they have an intrinsic right to the vaccine, and I am holding it form them. The thing that I want to know is - what right is that? They must have some right to it if it belongs to them and I'm holding it from them. Just answer me, please - what right?

Holding back something from someone when doing so willl kill them, at no risk to yourself is just disgusting. You are seriously fucked up in the head if you cant understand that.

 

[Tim]

First of all - compassion is shown to those whom I believe I have something to gain from. Example, my mom. I show her compassion because I expect to gain love from her. But other people's suffering is not on my hands. It's their own fault, and if I have absolutely nothing to gain from them, I will give them nothing. See what I posted above about beggars.
Compassion is just as much a trade as money for food. I don't feel compassion linked to absolutely nothing. It defies the law of causality. For almost all people, I feel some compassion as a form of species solidarity. But not enough to give them all a very valuable vaccine for free.

After reading this I have to ask the question... Since you are so strong in your belief about showing zero compassion to others, since you are only about yourself in your selfishness, do you accept compassion from others? Do you partake in the numerous everyday benefits generously given by others?

And if you think for one second that living a selfish life will give you everything you need, then you are sadly mistaken. You will live a very sad and lonely life indeed. You might want to talk to your mother about compassion. It's not at all like you portray in your posts, parents know the true definition of compassion when it comes to their kids.

 

[Carthage]

k....

have you ever heard of the concept of synchronicity
i don't think it violates any of the precepts of rand's philosophy, but it includes the value of "coincidence" in one's life

in our example, it could be argued that saving a stranger's live could end up providing something of value to your self interest....it could be something estoteric, like compassion, or love, or something material, like money or a job

one of the reasons that i've modified my perception of rand's "individualism" so heavily is because i've come to understand that there are no coinky-dinks (i'm not talking about some divine plan here, just to be clear)

and the taking of risk is not about analyzing the results before hand, imo....certainly, some critical thought is valuable -some risks are stupid....but the essence of risk is that you can't know how it will turn out.

you may die protecting your self interest (your mom)....you both may live
you may protect your self interest and refuse to risk your own life for a atranger, and let the guy who is THIS CLOSE to a cure for aids die....and then die of aids.

it is the nature of risk to be open to possibilities
it is also the nature of self-interest, imo.

I think I understand what your saying here. The answer to this is that one must distinguish between the potential and the actual. While the imaginary stranger who is dying of aids is potentially of value to me, he isn't in the actual, existing, time and place.
In addition, I don't know if he is, and I can't act on what I don't know. As I don't know weather or not he is of value to me, I can't take the risk that he is, unless the risk involved is very small (in the case of the vaccine, this would be saving just a few people for free, as the financial loss of giving it away to millions of strangers would be much greater).
I think that explains what I'm trying to get across...

 

[gLing]

No, not if I give them something. It's a trade. It's just called compassion, instead of trade, because it's a kind of trade involving spirit, not materials.

Nope that is using somebody. Wheter it be a trade or not that is still using somebody.

Actually, more on weather or not I have something to lose. If I don't stand to lose anything, then I'll help them, but it won't be an especially moral or courageous action. It won't be anymore moral then taking a rock off a park path.

You just admitted to what I said. You would help somebody based solely on what you have to gain. You always stand to lose something when helping other. Whether that be your time, money or even your life.
If you don't know the moral difference of saving somebody's life to moving a rock off of a path then you have no morals.

Not always, but often enough. There are times, yes, when it isn't their fault, but 90-odd percent of the time, it is.

Mighty big assumption you have there. You are obviously not aware of the state of living for most people in the world.

No, you misread the post. I said, "For almost all people, I feel some compassion as a form of species solidarity." This means that almost all human life is of some value to me, because they are humans. But when it comes to people I don't know, the value isn't that high.
BTW - how do you define compassion?

No I read you perfectly. You don't give a shit about anybody unless you have something to gain from them.
Compassion is sympathy for others as well as helping despite the fact you may have nothing to gain and can stand to lose something. It can go hand and hand with selflessness.

 

[Carthage]

After reading this I have to ask the question... Since you are so strong in your belief about showing zero compassion to others, since you are only about yourself in your selfishness, do you accept compassion from others? Do you partake in the numerous everyday benefits generously given by others?

Give an example, because I really don't think we understand each other here. I believe that compassionate acts are acts given to someone whom you find value in. The greater the compassionate act, the greater the value. So I would accept someone I don't know giving me a pencil at school (something I would do, as well), because of the whole 'species solidarity' thing I mentioned earlier. However, wouldn't accept a 20 dollar bill from them, just as I wouldn't give them one.

And if you think for one second that living a selfish life will give you everything you need, then you are sadly mistaken. You will live a very sad and lonely life indeed. You might want to talk to your mother about compassion. It's not at all like you portray in your posts, parents know the true definition of compassion when it comes to their kids.

How on earth can I be lonely if I am surrounded by people I find a selfish interest in? Coincidentally, how can living a selfless life give you anything, if you are expected to find no special value in any one particular person? How can you possibly get married and show that person you find a selfish interest in them over their cousin, your best friend's sister, or the whore down the street?

Holding back something from someone when doing so willl kill them, at no risk to yourself is just disgusting. You are seriously fucked up in the head if you cant understand that.

Why is it disgusting? You have yet to give a solid, concrete, defined answer to that or to the question of right.

 

[Peter Parka]

Why is it disgusting? You have yet to give a solid, concrete, defined answer to that or to the question of right.

Are you serious??? I guess you really are fucked up in the head!

I agree with Tim, if that is your philosophy, you are going to live a very sad and lonely life!

 

[skyblue]

The lives of people I don't know, who have no bearing on my life, whom I've never met and never will - I won't disgrace them by treating them as beggars and giving them my work for free. I'll treat them as real people and trade with them. The proper relationships among people is trade. The people whom I love and care for - they've given me their love and are important to me, they've traded with me already. I'd give them the cure for free. But if it's someone whom I don't know and haven't traded with - to give them the vaccine for free is to treat them as a completely helpless beggar, and I won't disgrace them by doing that.

how is this treating them as beggers?....you claim to go to public school......well guess what,its the tax paying public that payed for that school to be built........and guess what,its the tax paying public that pays the teachers that educate you.......in all your days of education these so called beggers have been paying you,you would have no education if it weren't for them

 

[Peter Parka]

how is this treating them as beggers?....you claim to go to public school......well guess what,its the tax paying public that payed for that school to be built........and guess what,its the tax paying public that pays the teachers that educate you.......in all your days of education these so called beggers have been paying you,you would have no education if it weren't for them

Fucking owned!!!

wned::laughat::nuts:

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

HOLY SELFISH SOLIDARITY BATMAN...

I just read that Alan Greenspan was an Objectivist follower:unsure:

I knew there was something about that beady eyed bastard:ninja

Oh and Carthage....By your own philosophy (or at least the one you claim which was started a million years ago and worked so well it collapsed after the death of Rands husband) by that philosophy.

We don't owe you shit either

Better hope you never need anything

 

[skyblue]

i just hope he never needs a state educated nurse or doctor......or an emergency medic thats paid by the state.......if it was me it'd be cash up front

 

[Carthage]

Nope that is using somebody. Wheter it be a trade or not that is still using somebody.

How do you define using somebody? I define it as getting a value from them and giving nothing in return.

You just admitted to what I said. You would help somebody based solely on what you have to gain. You always stand to lose something when helping other. Whether that be your time, money or even your life.
If you don't know the moral difference of saving somebody's life to moving a rock off of a path then you have no morals.

Time usually isn't as important to me as life. So while I might be losing some time that isn't really that important to me anyways, I will have saved someones life. That persons life has a value to me because they are a person, and that value is usually more important then time. That's the smallest thing I think I could lose. The money - a persons life is worth more then a few hundred bucks. I'd save it if that was all I stood to loose. The potential value of the person is worth the loss.
I jumped the gun on the rock-path-saving-life sentence, my mistake. Although saving a life does have some morality attached to it, (more then moving a rock), I still don't believe it's a huge moral thing that you need to be praised for.

Mighty big assumption you have there. You are obviously not aware of the state of living for most people in the world.

Name an instance in which a person doesn't have control over their lives. You'll find that, aside from medical problems, there aren't many.

No I read you perfectly. You don't give a shit about anybody unless you have something to gain from them.
Compassion is sympathy for others as well as helping despite the fact you may have nothing to gain and can stand to lose something. It can go hand and hand with selflessness.

No, I give a shit. I just am not going to sacrifice for them.
Your definition is irrational - if you care about someone, you don't have much you can lose. You may lose stuff, but it's made up for by the existence of someone you care for (value) . If that person is incredibly important to you, you can't lose. Whatever you may lose is made up for by their continued existence and happiness.

 

[Tim]

Do you partake in the numerous everyday benefits generously given by others?

Give an example, because I really don't think we understand each other here.

Here is one example...

Why are you posting here? Do you realize that this site collects zero revenue? Do you know that it is a gift to everyone that posts here from Veronica and everyone that donates their time to keep it running everyday? Do you know who pays the server fees?

So either
1. Start paying for your membership here
2. Be true to your beliefs and don't accept this free ride we are offering and leave
3. Accept that their are numerous things that benefit your life everyday that were freely given by others.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

LEMME PICK

 

[Peter Parka]

:24::24::24: This thread is exactly the reason I stopped posting in this section for a while, the stupidity of some people in this section is just beyond me! This thread crosses over the stupidity border though into a whole new level!:24::24::surrender

 

[Carthage]

how is this treating them as beggers?....you claim to go to public school......well guess what,its the tax paying public that payed for that school to be built........and guess what,its the tax paying public that pays the teachers that educate you.......in all your days of education these so called beggers have been paying you,you would have no education if it weren't for them

A beggar is someone who is unable to help themselves and depends on other for their very existence. It's an insult, and very, very few people on this planet are beggars. 90-odd percent of them are not completely dependent on the rest of humanity.
And yes, I go to pubic school. No, I'm not happy about it. It was built using slave labor (taxes), and I'm forced to go there. I don't have a choice, it's mandatory. And my parent's cant afford private school. Have you noticed the title of the thread, by any chance?

 

[Peter Parka]

Oh, it dosent stop! :24:
Are you going to answer Tims last point, Carthage? :24:

 

[Peter Parka]

. And my parent's cant afford private school. Have you noticed the title of the thread, by any chance?

So by your reasoning, it's out of order that you should recieve any education then, maybe you should just stop digging yourself further and further into a hole, dude. :24::24::24:

 

[wednesday]

The thing is...no matter how hard anyone trys to make carthage see the ethical reasoning...it wont matter, the seed has been planted, and its a sad thing to see in someone so young...what supprises me is that from my understanding, your parents are not financially privallidged either?...so do they agree with all your beliefs?

 

[Carthage]

Here is one example...

Why are you posting here? Do you realize that this site collects zero revenue? Do you know that it is a gift to everyone that posts here from Veronica and everyone that donates their time to keep it running everyday? Do you know who pays the server fees?

So either
1. Start paying for your membership here
2. Be true to your beliefs and don't accept this free ride we are offering and leave
3. Accept that their are numerous things that benefit your life everyday that were freely given by others.

First of all - I imagine that they all find more value in having a free posting site then in having a paid one (although, if they did decide to make it a pay one, I would have no qualm with it. I'd just have to stop coming).

HOLY SELFISH SOLIDARITY BATMAN...

I just read that Alan Greenspan was an Objectivist follower:unsure:

I knew there was something about that beady eyed bastard:ninja

Oh and Carthage....By your own philosophy (or at least the one you claim which was started a million years ago and worked so well it collapsed after the death of Rands husband) by that philosophy.

We don't owe you shit either

Better hope you never need anything

Alan Greenspan WAS an objectivist. Not any more.
Yeah, it might have collapsed, but that doesn't mean it isn't true.
No, you don't owe me anything. I'd never demand anything from you.

 

[wednesday]

"First of all - I imagine that they all find more value in having a free posting site then in having a paid one (although, if they did decide to make it a pay one, I would have no qualm with it. I'd just have to stop coming)."

Yay...hypocrisy is still alive