A conclusion that I had to kind of tried to compartmentalize awhile ago has resurfaced. People who would self-identify as “conservatives” or “don’t exactly support the Iraq War, but hate ‘liberals’ who won’t follow Goring’s formula”. These individuals from my generation (halfway between X and Y[what I like to call the ‘Nintendo Generation’]) for the most part are pure Objectivists.
Now one of the codified ideas of capitalism is that through selfish self-interest or the economic idea of the “rationally self-interested person” that good things get done. There is a mutually beneficial arrangement created and therefore the self-interest served a purpose that helped the community.
This idea has changed in the modern objectivist. The modern objectivist takes the positiont that “everyone else in the world is self-interested, selfish, and willing to engage in evil to protect their own self-interest”. After this cynical worldview has taken full hold on an individual’s psyche, it makes it far easier to avoid cognitive dissonance. One can justify actions based on immorallity, selfishness, and objectivism because you have now come to the conclusion that “everyone does it and it will never stop”(it has to be said out loud flippantly to get the feel of it).
These people disregard the JFK, MLK, and RFK. They disregard Ghandi and Ernesto. They believe that because the ubermensch are for the most part immoral(because they believe any means are justified by their vastly intelligent and worthwhile ends), this means all the people should be, because it will never stop.
Now lets get something out of the way from an opposite ideology. Altruism does not exist. There is no such thing as Altruism. Altruism is defined as helping purely for helping’s sake, not getting anything in return. Unfortunately it has been proved in pscyhology that when you do take what would generally be considered an “Altruistic action” you get a reward of endorphins. The reward means that one can convince themselves they are not doing it for such a reward, but as long as the reward is there: true altruism does not exist.
So now we are in a world in which our idea of pure moral good is destroyed. There are tinges of rational self-interest in even the most “seemingly” altruistic actions. The only time we can find altruism is when the altruistic act leaves the individual dead immediately afterwards, and they cannot experience the endorphin reward for helping another human.
Now we must understand that Ayn Rand is a dumb bitch. Objectivism is now flawed as well. Helping others is a facet of self-interest. When helping yourself is not the highest good then objectivism is based on false assumptions. Obviously acts of what we used to call altruism are actually acts of self-interest. This also means that IF objectivism is true then helping others is a substantial chunk of what objectivism encourages.
In closing just because some individuals are immoral does not justify it for you. What you are engaging in is still evil, even though there are others doing the same. To all you little messiahs out there, what you’re doing is not altruism, unless you die and do not receive the chemical reward directly following the act. So get past cog dee and deconstruct your own mindset. There are many who don’t constantly engage in evil to perpetuate their own existence.
Now one of the codified ideas of capitalism is that through selfish self-interest or the economic idea of the “rationally self-interested person” that good things get done. There is a mutually beneficial arrangement created and therefore the self-interest served a purpose that helped the community.
This idea has changed in the modern objectivist. The modern objectivist takes the positiont that “everyone else in the world is self-interested, selfish, and willing to engage in evil to protect their own self-interest”. After this cynical worldview has taken full hold on an individual’s psyche, it makes it far easier to avoid cognitive dissonance. One can justify actions based on immorallity, selfishness, and objectivism because you have now come to the conclusion that “everyone does it and it will never stop”(it has to be said out loud flippantly to get the feel of it).
These people disregard the JFK, MLK, and RFK. They disregard Ghandi and Ernesto. They believe that because the ubermensch are for the most part immoral(because they believe any means are justified by their vastly intelligent and worthwhile ends), this means all the people should be, because it will never stop.
Now lets get something out of the way from an opposite ideology. Altruism does not exist. There is no such thing as Altruism. Altruism is defined as helping purely for helping’s sake, not getting anything in return. Unfortunately it has been proved in pscyhology that when you do take what would generally be considered an “Altruistic action” you get a reward of endorphins. The reward means that one can convince themselves they are not doing it for such a reward, but as long as the reward is there: true altruism does not exist.
So now we are in a world in which our idea of pure moral good is destroyed. There are tinges of rational self-interest in even the most “seemingly” altruistic actions. The only time we can find altruism is when the altruistic act leaves the individual dead immediately afterwards, and they cannot experience the endorphin reward for helping another human.
Now we must understand that Ayn Rand is a dumb bitch. Objectivism is now flawed as well. Helping others is a facet of self-interest. When helping yourself is not the highest good then objectivism is based on false assumptions. Obviously acts of what we used to call altruism are actually acts of self-interest. This also means that IF objectivism is true then helping others is a substantial chunk of what objectivism encourages.
In closing just because some individuals are immoral does not justify it for you. What you are engaging in is still evil, even though there are others doing the same. To all you little messiahs out there, what you’re doing is not altruism, unless you die and do not receive the chemical reward directly following the act. So get past cog dee and deconstruct your own mindset. There are many who don’t constantly engage in evil to perpetuate their own existence.
6 comments:
You're premises are based on inaccurate definitions. You mis-define both Objectivism and altruism. Your "essay" has no philosophical merit and serves only as a display of your ignorance of the issue. If you'd like to learn the actual definitions of these concepts, I recommend checking out Wikipedia.
Yes, because Wikipedia is well known for its impeccable factuality.
You have to express more your opinion to attract more readers, because just a video or plain text without any personal approach is not that valuable. But it is just form my point of view
Do you have copy writer for so good articles? If so please give me contacts, because this really rocks! :)
Uhh bro, endorphines are going to shoot up whenever you do something you believe is good or just... so if you believe helping other people out (against your own self-interest) is good, then you'll get a shot of endorphines. That doesn't mean that it is actually the proper thing to do. You can smoke crack and get madd happy for a while but soon enough you'll be burnt out and pissed off, hence smoking madd crack isn't for your own self-interest.. I believe you should look into Objectivism before you go off and say that Ayn Rand is a dumb bitch. . . Start with Aristotle... correct me if this is wrong..
You would have to be awfully mad to intentionally commit moral actions just to get and 'edorphine' high, I believe you are taking the study to an extreme case where you are calling gratitude for doing good a sin, as if it were the same as all out pride. I strongly disagree with your argument on altruism.
Post a Comment