Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Philosophical justification for Objectivism?

socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:28:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

You can't really take the ethics without the metaphysics, epistemology, and politics. Aesthetics, maybe, but I don't care about that. :P
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:28:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

What exactly are you asking for?
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
meowmixxx
Posts: 68
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:48:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:28:09 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

You can't really take the ethics without the metaphysics, epistemology, and politics. Aesthetics, maybe, but I don't care about that. :P

I was unaware that Objectivists had aesthetics? Is it kind of like a "human triumph" type thing? I know Rand was a fan of Wright.
Debates I'm in:
Emotion is a weakness in decision making.
http://www.debate.org... IN VOTING
It is more likely that we live in a simulated reality than a real reality.
http://www.debate.org... IN VOTING
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:50:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:48:25 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:28:09 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

You can't really take the ethics without the metaphysics, epistemology, and politics. Aesthetics, maybe, but I don't care about that. :P

I was unaware that Objectivists had aesthetics? Is it kind of like a "human triumph" type thing? I know Rand was a fan of Wright.

The Objectivist stance on Aesthetics is that we have control to selectively reproduce the best of reality. Therefore, all art must have a purpose in its creation using that grounded in reality. Rand criticized Andy Warhol for this reason.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
meowmixxx
Posts: 68
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:51:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:50:16 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:48:25 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:28:09 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

You can't really take the ethics without the metaphysics, epistemology, and politics. Aesthetics, maybe, but I don't care about that. :P

I was unaware that Objectivists had aesthetics? Is it kind of like a "human triumph" type thing? I know Rand was a fan of Wright.

The Objectivist stance on Aesthetics is that we have control to selectively reproduce the best of reality. Therefore, all art must have a purpose in its creation using that grounded in reality. Rand criticized Andy Warhol for this reason.

How does an Objectivist define what is "best" about reality? Does it use a teleological best or some sort of normative best?
Debates I'm in:
Emotion is a weakness in decision making.
http://www.debate.org... IN VOTING
It is more likely that we live in a simulated reality than a real reality.
http://www.debate.org... IN VOTING
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:52:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:51:38 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:50:16 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:48:25 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:28:09 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

You can't really take the ethics without the metaphysics, epistemology, and politics. Aesthetics, maybe, but I don't care about that. :P

I was unaware that Objectivists had aesthetics? Is it kind of like a "human triumph" type thing? I know Rand was a fan of Wright.

The Objectivist stance on Aesthetics is that we have control to selectively reproduce the best of reality. Therefore, all art must have a purpose in its creation using that grounded in reality. Rand criticized Andy Warhol for this reason.

How does an Objectivist define what is "best" about reality? Does it use a teleological best or some sort of normative best?

Eh. Bad word choice on my part. Basically saying that all art should assert Objectivist values in their selective creation of art.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
meowmixxx
Posts: 68
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:55:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:52:53 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:51:38 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:50:16 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:48:25 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:28:09 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

You can't really take the ethics without the metaphysics, epistemology, and politics. Aesthetics, maybe, but I don't care about that. :P

I was unaware that Objectivists had aesthetics? Is it kind of like a "human triumph" type thing? I know Rand was a fan of Wright.

The Objectivist stance on Aesthetics is that we have control to selectively reproduce the best of reality. Therefore, all art must have a purpose in its creation using that grounded in reality. Rand criticized Andy Warhol for this reason.

How does an Objectivist define what is "best" about reality? Does it use a teleological best or some sort of normative best?

Eh. Bad word choice on my part. Basically saying that all art should assert Objectivist values in their selective creation of art.

So Objectivist aesthetics is mostly application of Objectivist ethics into some sort of physical form?
Debates I'm in:
Emotion is a weakness in decision making.
http://www.debate.org... IN VOTING
It is more likely that we live in a simulated reality than a real reality.
http://www.debate.org... IN VOTING
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:55:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:28:29 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

What exactly are you asking for?

A logical justification for the meta-ethics of moral cognitivism, ethical naturalism, and then specifically, Objectivism.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:55:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:48:25 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:28:09 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

You can't really take the ethics without the metaphysics, epistemology, and politics. Aesthetics, maybe, but I don't care about that. :P

I was unaware that Objectivists had aesthetics? Is it kind of like a "human triumph" type thing? I know Rand was a fan of Wright.

You might try reading The Romantic Manifesto--by Rand, obviously. Own it myself, but have never read it. :P Even as an Objectivist at one point, Objectivist aesthetics is one area in which I wasn't particularly well-equipped. This might be a primer [http://aynrandlexicon.com...], along with the conceptual index at the bottom of the page. What I do know, however, is that Rand is very heavy on romanticism, and the notion that art ought to be a representation of reality in the sense of being a selective highlight of human values, volition, and the like. In other words, I know very little.
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:55:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:55:09 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:52:53 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:51:38 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:50:16 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:48:25 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:28:09 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

You can't really take the ethics without the metaphysics, epistemology, and politics. Aesthetics, maybe, but I don't care about that. :P

I was unaware that Objectivists had aesthetics? Is it kind of like a "human triumph" type thing? I know Rand was a fan of Wright.

The Objectivist stance on Aesthetics is that we have control to selectively reproduce the best of reality. Therefore, all art must have a purpose in its creation using that grounded in reality. Rand criticized Andy Warhol for this reason.

How does an Objectivist define what is "best" about reality? Does it use a teleological best or some sort of normative best?

Eh. Bad word choice on my part. Basically saying that all art should assert Objectivist values in their selective creation of art.

So Objectivist aesthetics is mostly application of Objectivist ethics into some sort of physical form?

Basically.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
meowmixxx
Posts: 68
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:56:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:55:15 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:28:29 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

What exactly are you asking for?

A logical justification for the meta-ethics of moral cognitivism, ethical naturalism, and then specifically, Objectivism.

Objectivism is not, to my knowledge, a meta-ethical view. It only parasites off of work done in meta-ethics to justify an ethical view.
Debates I'm in:
Emotion is a weakness in decision making.
http://www.debate.org... IN VOTING
It is more likely that we live in a simulated reality than a real reality.
http://www.debate.org... IN VOTING
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:58:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
@ socialpinko

I'll try my best. Rand recognized that reality IS and that there is no refute. All objects that exist are composed by their very own qualities of existence. She then began to assert that, then, PEOPLE exist not for any sort of abstract purpose but for a practical one. For themselves. Therefore, she took an egoist stance that people have a moral obligation to themselves and creating laws and order that allows people to expand their own success. She also agreed that "Reality, to be controlled, must be obeyed." She rejected religion, but also rejected big government and welfare.

Any other questions?
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:59:40 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:55:15 PM, socialpinko wrote:
A logical justification for the meta-ethics of moral cognitivism, ethical naturalism, and then specifically, Objectivism.

lol, take a college course or spend about a year familiarizing yourself with the relevant literature. You aren't going to learn ethical philosophy on a debate site in any depth.

Also, most academics regard Rand's objectivism as pop philosophy.
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 2:59:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:56:05 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:55:15 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:28:29 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

What exactly are you asking for?

A logical justification for the meta-ethics of moral cognitivism, ethical naturalism, and then specifically, Objectivism.

Objectivism is not, to my knowledge, a meta-ethical view. It only parasites off of work done in meta-ethics to justify an ethical view.

Not sure of the difference, seeings as I ain't know dem fanshy shmansy words ye speak!
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 3:01:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:58:54 PM, M.Torres wrote:
I'll try my best. Rand recognized that reality IS and that there is no refute. All objects that exist are composed by their very own qualities of existence. She then began to assert that, then, PEOPLE exist not for any sort of abstract purpose but for a practical one. For themselves. Therefore, she took an egoist stance that people have a moral obligation to themselves and creating laws and order that allows people to expand their own success. She also agreed that "Reality, to be controlled, must be obeyed." She rejected religion, but also rejected big government and welfare.

lol
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 3:02:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 3:01:02 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:58:54 PM, M.Torres wrote:
I'll try my best. Rand recognized that reality IS and that there is no refute. All objects that exist are composed by their very own qualities of existence. She then began to assert that, then, PEOPLE exist not for any sort of abstract purpose but for a practical one. For themselves. Therefore, she took an egoist stance that people have a moral obligation to themselves and creating laws and order that allows people to expand their own success. She also agreed that "Reality, to be controlled, must be obeyed." She rejected religion, but also rejected big government and welfare.

lol

Like I said, not sure what he was looking for. So I just said what I know about it.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
meowmixxx
Posts: 68
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 3:02:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 2:59:48 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:56:05 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:55:15 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:28:29 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

What exactly are you asking for?

A logical justification for the meta-ethics of moral cognitivism, ethical naturalism, and then specifically, Objectivism.

Objectivism is not, to my knowledge, a meta-ethical view. It only parasites off of work done in meta-ethics to justify an ethical view.

Not sure of the difference, seeings as I ain't know dem fanshy shmansy words ye speak!

Haha, I'm a grad student focusing in formal epistemology and meta-ethics. Meta-ethics is basically the questions: What do we mean when we say something is X, where X is a normative term? What does it mean to deserve something? Where do moral intuitions come from? It's basically a study of what people do, when they do ethics. From my understanding, Objectivism gives prescriptive accounts of things: You should act in this way or that way. Meta-ethics is designed to say what Objectivism is doing, not necessarily make any judgments about the message.
Debates I'm in:
Emotion is a weakness in decision making.
http://www.debate.org... IN VOTING
It is more likely that we live in a simulated reality than a real reality.
http://www.debate.org... IN VOTING
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 3:05:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 3:02:51 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:59:48 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:56:05 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:55:15 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:28:29 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

What exactly are you asking for?

A logical justification for the meta-ethics of moral cognitivism, ethical naturalism, and then specifically, Objectivism.

Objectivism is not, to my knowledge, a meta-ethical view. It only parasites off of work done in meta-ethics to justify an ethical view.

Not sure of the difference, seeings as I ain't know dem fanshy shmansy words ye speak!

Haha, I'm a grad student focusing in formal epistemology and meta-ethics. Meta-ethics is basically the questions: What do we mean when we say something is X, where X is a normative term? What does it mean to deserve something? Where do moral intuitions come from? It's basically a study of what people do, when they do ethics. From my understanding, Objectivism gives prescriptive accounts of things: You should act in this way or that way. Meta-ethics is designed to say what Objectivism is doing, not necessarily make any judgments about the message.

Like..... "A is A"?
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 3:07:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 3:05:05 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 3:02:51 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:59:48 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:56:05 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:55:15 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:28:29 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

What exactly are you asking for?

A logical justification for the meta-ethics of moral cognitivism, ethical naturalism, and then specifically, Objectivism.

Objectivism is not, to my knowledge, a meta-ethical view. It only parasites off of work done in meta-ethics to justify an ethical view.

Not sure of the difference, seeings as I ain't know dem fanshy shmansy words ye speak!

Haha, I'm a grad student focusing in formal epistemology and meta-ethics. Meta-ethics is basically the questions: What do we mean when we say something is X, where X is a normative term? What does it mean to deserve something? Where do moral intuitions come from? It's basically a study of what people do, when they do ethics. From my understanding, Objectivism gives prescriptive accounts of things: You should act in this way or that way. Meta-ethics is designed to say what Objectivism is doing, not necessarily make any judgments about the message.

Like..... "A is A"?

The way Objectivists frame their meta-ethics is more "What are values, where do they come from, and who should benefit from them?"
meowmixxx
Posts: 68
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 3:08:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/8/2011 3:05:05 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 3:02:51 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:59:48 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:56:05 PM, meowmixxx wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:55:15 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:28:29 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 5/8/2011 2:25:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
I know there are a lot of people on DDO who fancy themselves Objectivists and I think it's definitely an interesting type of moral philosophy. I've been researching it quite a lot but haven't seen any sort of philosophical or logical justification for it. Does anyone have a philosophical or logical justification for Objectivism?

What exactly are you asking for?

A logical justification for the meta-ethics of moral cognitivism, ethical naturalism, and then specifically, Objectivism.

Objectivism is not, to my knowledge, a meta-ethical view. It only parasites off of work done in meta-ethics to justify an ethical view.

Not sure of the difference, seeings as I ain't know dem fanshy shmansy words ye speak!

Haha, I'm a grad student focusing in formal epistemology and meta-ethics. Meta-ethics is basically the questions: What do we mean when we say something is X, where X is a normative term? What does it mean to deserve something? Where do moral intuitions come from? It's basically a study of what people do, when they do ethics. From my understanding, Objectivism gives prescriptive accounts of things: You should act in this way or that way. Meta-ethics is designed to say what Objectivism is doing, not necessarily make any judgments about the message.

Like..... "A is A"?

I'm not sure what you mean by that. For example, a philosopher called Ayer (funny guy, dead now) said that when we say things about ethics, we aren't making statements, we are only emoting. So when I say "Drugs are bad", all I'm really saying is "Drugs: Boo!" But I'm not making any judgement about "Drugs are bad" as far as the content of it, I'm only talking about the action of saying "drugs are bad". An ethicist would talk about whether or not drugs are bad.
Debates I'm in:
Emotion is a weakness in decision making.
http://www.debate.org... IN VOTING
It is more likely that we live in a simulated reality than a real reality.
http://www.debate.org... IN VOTING
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 3:10:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I guess a link might help. I know people condone links, but come on. Info is info.

http://www.mondopolitico.com...
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2011 3:31:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Objectivism, or any other philosophy, is a great big pile of philosophical justifications for things. "That car needs a car."
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2011 3:38:27 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I made a thread similar to this 11 months ago. I asked for good arguments against Objectivism.

http://www.debate.org...
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat