I am sorry...

(Apologize)



It is sad to suddenly discover that I was somewhat stupid most of my life.
Almos all my existence I was close to Objectivism in some basic vital attitudes and thoughts, specially those concerning to Metaphysics (Objective Reality) and Epistemology (Reason), but when it came to Ethics and Politics my mind was a strange mixture that I now regret and even when it could be quite worthless I have to confess my sin: I was more close to the "left wing" in most political and ethical points of view when I was young and even later. I have to say however in my defense that they were inherited ideas and concepts from my family and not from my own intellectual harvest, which doesn't necessarily redeem me from my responsibility anyway.

Over the time I questioned those ideas more and more and my points of view were gradually moving to a more realistic perspective, as long as I confronted myself with questions like: Why being rich "has" to be bad? Why socialist countries were falling one after other? Why the masses "have" to be always right? Where come the wealth from? How I would like to live? Who am I in reality and what I want as values?

So for all that I did and said wrong before, for al the ideas I repeated without deeper researching or getting more first-hand information, for all the people I despised and blamed, for all the thing I "thought" without really thinking: I apologize

But then some day, some time ago, it came to my hands a book from Ayn Rand (Thanks to my friend Daniel for this) and since then I finally found myself reflected in a coherent philosophy, my soul found a home.

But a question still arises inside me:
If I am now Objectivist, but I come from a family (and a country) very far from this philosophy, if I am a typical product of a "mixed" quite socialized economy and I have to be grateful to the public education and health systems of my country without which my middle-low class family probably couldn't have had the possibility to afford my education when I was a child...
What about totally laissez-faire capitalism as the ideal political system for a country? It would have been possible for "me" to exist in such a context? If I deny my roots and totally support Ayn Rand's thought in this particular matter (even when she herself said that it has not been yet fully implemented in any country) Would I be in contradiction with the basic principle of Objectivism that is defending my own personal survival as living organism? Including of course my mind?

I will analyze this in my next post about "Politics: Capitalism" the last remaining of the four basic principles of Objectivism stated by Rand "while standing on one foot"
Stay in tune! :-)

Ethics: Self-interest.

("Man is an end in himself.")



In the following post I will analyze some concept/s of the essentials of the classical Objectivism as published in the ARI pages proposing expansions, complements and/or new thoughts about them.

Traditional Objectivism:

Ethics

"Reason is man's only proper judge of values and his only proper guide to action. The proper standard of ethics is: man's survival qua man—i.e., that which is required by man's nature for his survival as a rational being (not his momentary physical survival as a mindless brute). Rationality is man's basic virtue, and his three fundamental values are: reason, purpose, self-esteem. Man—every man—is an end in himself, not a means to the ends of others; he must live for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself; he must work for his rational self-interest, with the achievement of his own happiness as the highest moral purpose of his life." Thus Objectivism rejects any form of altruism—the claim that morality consists in living for others or for society.


Expanding the concept:

No doubt Rand's ideal of man is high and man's reason has the most value in the modern-western-civilized society of the 21th century (please see Nathaniel Branden's article "The Objectivist Ethics in an Information Age Economy" about this subject)
It always seems to me that Ayn Rand made her philosophy thinking in an ideal man living in an quite ideal society, as she said "How things ought to be"
But what happens when you grew & live in a place where these values are not so "valued" by society, where irrationality is the rule and not the exception, where it is not so easy to stand for your objectivistic principles? Or at least not that easy to follow the "rules" (1) derived from them?
Easy: you think more, you put your reason to work even harder to analyze much more carefully your choices in order to find the best possible way to live even when it is not so perfect as it "ought" to be
You try to live in a manner that allows you to reach a whiter degree of gray in a society where the gray context slowly tends to black everyday, if we take the metaphor used by Ayn Rand herself in her essay "The Cult of Moral Grayness" from the book "The Virtue of Selfishness"

My contribution in some practical advices:

1-How you defend your personal rights in a quite collectivized society barely floating in the midst between the chaos of the jungle law and some light forms of socialism, where the opinion and laws of the majority is far stronger than your right to live as you want and even to defend yourself from external aggressions?
By example:
You have no real right to self-defense because you are not allowed to have arms but the bad guys always manage to get one and kill you in any corner where the police never appear to protect you
Or angry groups of "poor" people cut the street protesting for some alleged injustice or claiming for undeserved privileges or money while you have to be always alert to turn back your car without any protest because they have the "right" to assault you if they want
The answer is simple:
Keep a low profile because your are basically outnumbered. And try to walk over the thin red line between legal an illegal if you need to, and look for some way to defend yourself because nobody will care of your dead body if you not.
Stay out of trouble specially if there is some camera of the news around because journalists will only try to make you the public bad story of the day, specially if you think in some way different from the masses.
Conlcussion: If the law is against your rights then try to stay as far from the law as you can

2-How do you participate in the global culture when your country lives near the stone age in technology, ideology and market strategies?
By example:
It is almost impossible to get even a decent internet connection, or products that are not consumed by the majority who are mostly advocates of the local low-quality goods and folklore and hate everything from central countries because they are "imperialists" and it is not possible to buy things from these countries because the borders and customs are closed in order to force you to buy only national bad products or nothing at all.
The answer is also simple:
Never give up in growing, in try to keep yourself in tune with the global pulse, the World is far bigger than your little town. You should always try first the "right" way, but when the society where you live doesn't allow you to do so, then feel free to try alternative options in order to learn new things, to enjoy the culture, to expand your mind. Nobody will refund your life if you waste them remaining an ignorant fool only for keeping irrational laws that you didn't made. It is risky (as everything worthy in life) but remember the example of Hank Rearden in "Atlas Shrugged" when he didn't have problems in evading the law when the law it self was illegal.
Conlcussion: Rationality is always the best option, and it become more essential in directly proportional form with the irrationality of the context

3-Keep your principles as your most valuable treasure but avoid falling into fanaticism or extreme dogmatism and most of all always try to be happy.
Ayn Rand's Objectivism is a goal, is the lighthouse in the night, is the horizon to head to, but never sacrifice your own happiness to follow her teachings so strictly that you get suffocated by your own desire of perfection, take the Objectivistic path step by step and eventually allow yourself a break, because otherwise you will end hating and dropping Objectivism as any other dogmatic religion that puts your freedom in a cage.
Objectivism is meant to be a lifelong commitment but because you like them, because it is good for you and helps you to enjoy better your life, and not because you have to comply with some sort of new "Objectivistic ten commandments" (Please see Nathaniel Branden's article "The Benefits and Hazards of the Philosophy of Ayn Rand" about this topic).
The driving idea behid this analysis is that practical application of philosophy to your real life has to be evaluated both in quality and quantity, and when you speak in the real World about "quantity" about measurement, it appears immediately the concept of "tolerance" which is the margin of error allowed according to your quality requirements.

Conlcussion: I think that even when Ayn Rand herself wouldn't have approved some part of your particular life or actions, I am sure that she would have approved an approach to her philosophy based on individuals as free, analytic protagonists of their own lives, and not "intellectual lambs" that follow another prophet. Because she was a free soul before anything else.
As she said: "Reality confronts man with a great many "musts," but all of them are conditional; the formula of realistic necessity is: "You must, if " and the "if" stands for man's choice...."

---

(1) There is a very interesting analysis of rules vs principles in the David Kelley's article published in the Atlas Society's site "Ruled -- Or Principled?" where I extracted the following concept:
"We do need objective standards. But objectivity requires principles, not rules. The choice is to be principled, acting on one's own understanding of reality, or to be ruled-by an explicit authority or by the cramped and encrusted dictates of tradition. For anyone who values his own life and his own autonomy, that's an easy choice."

Mr. Kelley

Haikus for the Objectivist Warrior - Part two

(Poem)



A battle that can not be lost
is not a battle
A battle that can not be won
is a waste of time

If your wonder was suddenly lost
don't be too sad
You pay for participate in the game
not for winning it

Be ready to die today
Conflict is the engine of life
Change is the blood of the World

Ends give place to new beginnings
It is autumn
and a leaf falls from the tree

Never abandon your dreams
or they will abandon you too...
forever

The pleasure of being oneself

(Selfishness as a virtue)

Nathaniel Branden was the "second in command" of Ayn Rand in the Objetivism of middle 20th Century. They were also friends and lovers for several years until they suddenly broke up in 1968.

Mr. Branden today

While still friends they published together a marvelous collection of articles under the name "The virtue of Selfishness" from where I extracted some interesting parts of the Branden's article "The Psychology of Pleasure" that I would like to comment here.

"Pleasure, for man, is not a luxury, but a profound psychological need. Pleasure (in the widest sense of the term) is a metaphysical concomitant of life, the reward and consequence of successful action—just as pain is the insignia of failure, destruction, death.
Through the state of enjoyment, man experiences the value of life, the sense that life is worth living, worth struggling to maintain. In order to live, man must act to achieve values. Pleasure or enjoyment is at once an emotional payment for successful action and an incentive to continue acting.
Further, because of the metaphysical meaning of pleasure to man, the state of enjoyment gives him a direct experience of his own efficacy, of his competence to deal with the facts of reality, to achieve his values, to live. Implicitly contained in the experience of pleasure is the feeling: “I am in control of my existence”—just as implicitly contained in the experience of pain is the feeling: “I am helpless.” As pleasure emotionally entails a sense of efficacy, so pain emotionally entails a sense of impotence.
Thus, in letting man experience, in his own person, the sense that life is a value and that he is a value, pleasure serves as the emotional fuel of man’s existence".

No doubt since those years Nathaniel Branden has become more and more one of the champions of self-esteem around the World and no doubt either he is right:
Self-esteem is a basic need for a solid and better man in any historical time, but since self-steem comes strongly from facing and overcoming challenges, it is more critical now when the opportunities for real challenges in modern western societies are quite diluted by the relative "safety" provided to individuals in almost every aspect of daily life.
In this matter there is still a question that probably only the far future will answer: Will be the man able to survive as species in despite of the weaknesses produced in the individuals (both bio-physically an psicho-mentally) due to their own evolution in societies that seem to provide every century more safety and less "real" challenges?
Where "real" means challenges where success would signify the possibility of continuity and descendancy and failure could signify the loss of life and extinction

To know more about the Branden's modern approach to self-steem I recommend his article "Our urgent need for self-steem" which you can download here (1)
Or visit this section of the Branden's site for more articles about this matter


Types of men according to Mr Branden:
(A humorous Hollywood-based little cartoon :-)

---

"One of the hallmarks of a man of self-esteem, who regards the universe as open to his effort, is the profound pleasure he experiences in the productive work of his mind; his enjoyment of life is fed by his unceasing concern to grow in knowledge and ability—to think, to achieve, to move forward, to meet new challenges and overcome them—to earn the pride of a constantly expanding efficacy."


Katsumoto in "The last samurai" seems to be a solid warrior and a man who takes risks for his ideas and lives the life as an adventure

---

"A different kind of soul is revealed by the man who, predominantly, takes pleasure in working only at the routine and familiar, who is inclined to enjoy working in a semi-daze, who sees happiness in freedom from challenge or struggle or effort: the soul of a man profoundly deficient inself-esteem, to whom the universe appears as unknowable and vaguely threatening, the man whose central motivating impulse is a longing for safety, not the safety that is won by efficacy, but the safety of a world in which efficacy is not demanded."


Sam Lowry in "Brazil" was a clerk that routinely go to work everyday in the same, small, gray office inside one of the huge control buildings of a totalitarian regime

---

"Still a different kind of soul is revealed by the man who finds it inconceivable that work—any form of work—can be enjoyable, who regards the effort of earning a living as a necessary evil, who dreams only of the pleasures that begin when the work day ends, the pleasure of drowning his brain in alcohol or television or billiards or women, the pleasure of not being conscious: the soul of a man with scarcely a shred of self-esteem, who never expected the universe to be comprehensible and takes his lethargic dread of it for granted, and whose only form of relief and only notion of enjoyment is the dim flicker of undemanding sensations."


Sergeant Garcia in "Zorro" only waits everyday to finish at work and drink a beer at the tavern to forget his sad and boring life

---

"Still another kind of soul is revealed by the man who takes pleasure, not in achievement, but in destruction, whose action is aimed, not at attaining efficacy, but at ruling those who have attained it: the soul of a man so abjectly lacking in self-value, and so overwhelmed by terror of existence, that his sole form of self-fulfillment is to unleash his resentment and hatred against those who do not share his state, those who are able to live—as if, by destroying the confident, the strong and the healthy, he could convert impotence into efficacy."


Oswald Cobblepot in "Batman Returns" is one of the more disgusting villains ever, who hates himself and everything in the World

---

Conclusions:

Self-steem is a value that is empowered by the virtue of pride.
It is possible to be the hero of your life, everyday can be an adventure, everyday can be enjoyed.
It is possible to live the life in a manner which you can be proud of yourself.
There is nothing more important than this if you want to be happy.

---

All quotations are from the article "The Psychology of Pleasure" by Nathaniel Branden published in the Ayn Rand's book "The Virtue of Selfishness" - I strongly recommend this book that you can buy at Amazom.com
Download here (1) the complete article in PDF format
(1) If any of these links offend any copyright please email me your complain and it will be cancelled

Something for nothing

(Rush song)



To sweep the clouds away
Waiting for the rainbow's end
To cast its gold your way
Countless ways
You pass the days

Waiting for someone to call
And turn your world around
Looking for an answer
To the question you have found
Looking for
An open door



You don't get something for nothing
You can't have freedom for free
You won't get wise
With the sleep still in your eyes
No matter what your dreams might be

What you own is your own kingdom
What you do is your own glory
What you love is your own power
What you live is your own story
In your head is the answer
Let it guide you along
Let your heart be the anchor
And the beat of your own song

You don't get something for nothing
You can't have freedom for free
You won't get wise
With the sleep still in your eyes
No matter what your dreams might be

(Rush Website)

Epistemology: Reason

("You can't eat your cake and have it, too." )



In the following post I will analyze some concept/s of the essentials of the classical Objectivism as published in the ARI pages proposing expansions, complements and/or new thoughts about them.

Traditional Objectivism:

Epistemology

"Man's reason is fully competent to know the facts of reality. Reason, the conceptual faculty, is the faculty that identifies and integrates the material provided by man's senses. Reason is man's only means of acquiring knowledge." Thus Objectivism rejects mysticism (any acceptance of faith or feeling as a means of knowledge), and it rejects skepticism (the claim that certainty or knowledge is impossible)."


Expanding the concept:

No question the reason is man's only means of acquiring knowledge and to know the facts of reality
More: Man itself "is" reason, since what everyone of us are, what each one of us calls "I" reside nowhere else that inside our respective minds.
And when traditional Objectivism "...rejects mysticism..." it is expressly referring to any acceptance of faith or feeling as a means of knowledge.
But Gods exist, feelings exist, emotions exists, intuitions exists. Let's analyze them from an Objectivistic point of view and see where they come from and what they could be useful for.

My contribution:

1-Gods exist, we created them! As we created theater plays, mathematical equations, the Mona Lisa, or our reasons to love
And we own them a great debt: They served in the early past of the humanity to the first differentiation between matter and ideas, earth and sky, and ultimately as the first system for establishment and preservation through generations of the primitive ethical values that gave origin to civilization.
There is a God that I specially like: "The Sould of the World" that is the sum of all the thoughts, the work, the knowledge, the art, the effort, the wishes, the dreams, the beliefs, the books, the lives, etc. accumulated thought history by the Human Race since we were almost monkeys and someday we suddenly threw a bone to the sky...
This "God" is our heritage as specie and the "shoulder" each one of us stands on as individuals, in order to be able to grow further...

But most people use different Gods to avoid thinking, to avoid fear to death, or to justify their nonsense, their laziness, their lack of intelligence, their robbery to other people or even their massacre of other human beings.
So what can Gods be useful for an Objectivistic man, who usually doesn't believe in Gods in the same way other people do?
I like martial arts and some time ago I read an ancient Japanese book called "The Demon's Sermon on the Martial Arts" by Issai Chozanshi, where he differentiates in a man's attitude: "letting things to fate" from "letting things to Gods"
While "letting things to fate" is just letting happening whatever the "fate" has for us, without taking any responsibility in our destiny, without doing anything to change them, without using our mind to find a solution to our problems, "letting things to Gods" is the opposite attitude what means really doing our best effort in order to achieve the results we are looking for, using our intelligence, our creative work, playing our best cards on the table. But finally we have also to recognize that we are neither omnipotent nor omniscient, so the results are never guaranteed. "The rest is in God's hands" could be a good phrase to resume the concept, when used in the correct sense.

Everyone has their own Gods, whether they are inside churches or at home represented by their careers, the money, the family, friendship, success, culture, fame, people they admire, or the best motorcycle in town: Their beliefs, their values.

2-As for emotions, feelings and intuitions Ayn Rand herself in "The virtue of Selfishness" says:

"Emotions are the automatic results of man’s value judgments integrated by his subconscious; emotions are estimates of that which furthers man’s values or threatens them, that which is for him or against him—lightning calculators giving him the sum of his profit or loss"

It is quite clear that emotions, feelings and intuitions are very related between them inside our mind and they can be in daily life powerful friends to be used in our benefit or fearsome enemies that will turn against us if we can't manage or use them properly
Those three elements are no doubt product of certain processes inside our mind somewhere in the frontier between our conscious and subconscious, they have nothing of "divine", "occult" or "paranormal", and without entering in any profound psychological analysis, which I am not skilled enough for, we all can more or less testify that they appear quite suddenly triggered by some situation or stimuli and most of the times are not easy to control.

What can we do then? Just abandon ourselves to these apparently "irrational" (a hard word to swallow for an Objectivist) parts of us?
No. There is always something to do instead to just "let things to fate". These three elements: emotions, feelings and intuitions can be very powerful tools for us in certain situations where speed is required over the more deep and accurate but slower totally-conscious analysis (emergency situations or daily routines by example)
Can they be wrong? Of course, as anything inside ourselves, because they are nothing more than the product of our mind in last instance. The good news are that we can work on them, modify them if necessary even when they are produced in some physiological centers where we don't have total control with our consciousness.
How?
The human being comes to the World as "tabula rasa" and these three elements are somewhat automatic reactions related with the "software" we write in this tabula rasa during our lives, specifically they are very closely related with our values
So modifying our values, changing our deepest mind, is the only way to modify the "source" where our emotions, feelings and intuitions are based on.
I know our values strongly comes from our early childhood, our education, our life's experience, etc. but they are no immutable, they can be learned, changed, expanded, improved...
With effort you can be a better person than your are, closer to your dreams, closer to the ideal man you want to be.

Believe me it can be done. I did it. I was originally destined by birth to be a poor fool, unsuccessful, unhappy loser in my life, and I was, and it took 43 years of internal work, changes, learning, efforts and challenges to be a better person, but I am. And even when I could think that I somewhat lost almost 40 years of life, it would have been much worse never knowing a better way of life, never knowing myself, never being happy as I am now. More: I have the priceless proud of having won a hard game. The fun is on the road, the objectives are just the engine.
In the beginning it can seem to be an extremely difficult and even impossible task, it can take years, decades, but as long time passes the task gets easier due to practice and despite the results it is a good and rewarding way to live, because there will be always something new in the horizon.


Note:
You can finally ask why the Ying-Yang icon in the picture? The answer is that you don't have to be worried about the results of this sometimes enormous effort when they are not totally the ones you expected, this icon symbolizes the cycles in the flow of life: if you are not totally successful today, persist, endure, don't abandon. Because tomorrow the tide can be more in your favor or the internal work can finally give the desired fruit in some future, it is never in vain.
This icon also symbolizes the ethics, the black-and-white idea, the concept that for an Objectivist nothing "is the same", ideals are not meant to be gray. But as you can note there is a small circle of black in the white, (and vice-versa) meaning that finally nothing is perfect, so don't be over-exigent with yourself to the point of not enjoying the life, a little character's defect only demonstrates that the character in the whole is good, even when this defect should be marked for later improvement. An exception only proofs the rule, doesn't invalidate them. More: Complex systems with some little internal contradictions tend to be more stable than "perfect" ones, but this will be a subject for some future post...

Haikus for the Objectivistic Warrior

(Poem)



Always follow your mind
that beats inside your chest
that flows through the veins of your World
nothing else

Never trust the collective
your neighbor, the police, the state, the law
When it comes to defend your life
you will probably be alone

Don't believe them, revenge is legitimate
nothing else will calm your pain
if someone took something of yours
Eye by eye, tooth by tooth

Train to defend yourself and
your loved ones
The cemeteries are full of good-hearted lambs
with altruistic intentions

My motorcycle roars softly under my legs
Rush sounds in my ears mixed with the wind
The road is the life
The life is the road

In the evening the sun goes down
green leafs say goodbye to the Winter
From the top of the pyramid
you quietly watch the entire World

Metaphysics: Objective reality

("Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed" )



In the following post I will analyze some concept/s of the essentials of the classical Objectivism as published in the ARI pages proposing expansions, complements and/or new thoughts about them.

Traditional Objectivism:

Metaphysics
"Reality, the external world, exists independent of man's consciousness, independent of any observer's knowledge, beliefs, feelings, desires or fears. This means that A is A, that facts are facts, that things are what they are—and that the task of man's consciousness is to perceive reality, not to create or invent it." Thus Objectivism rejects any belief in the supernatural—and any claim that individuals or groups create their own reality.


Expanding the concept:

No question reality exists outside human perception: A is always A no matter some people's beliefs or how many people are not totally aware of this basic fact.
And when traditional Objectivism "...rejects ...any claim that individuals or groups create their own reality..." it is certainly referring to a positive reality for man living "qua man" (Because it is undeniable that some individuals or groups are in fact able to "create" diverse types of false or distorted realities in their minds)

My contribution:

1-The "real" reality, the things in their most profound an complete nature are never fully knowable.
Since we perceive them only with our wonderful but limited senses and minds we can only know a part (eventually a big part) of them.
We can easily test this affirmation by learning anything new about some thing around us: we know now more about that specific thing that we knew few seconds before and this process of deepening the knowledge about anything can be infinite. Also can be infinite the possibilities of evolution of our brain so in the same way that we perceive better and deeper the reality than a chimpanzee, the man in the future will certainly be able to perceive them better and deeper than us.
Of course concluding that we don't and we can't know anything at all is a huge mistake from lazy, nihilistic or skeptic minds, because we yes can know enough about almost anything to deal with them for any human purpose.
As a practical example we can know enough about a chair in order to handle them, move, use, reproduce, repair, change, etc. or whatever other purpose.
More: Any excess of knowledge about the chair, like the crystalline molecular structure of the nails, or the hardness coefficient of the wood are normally not useful for practical purposes, so they would only take a precious vital time to learn and a costly space in your brain's memory that could be used instead for more important things

2-From the previous point we can conclude a very important assertion:
We only know about the reality our own perception of them.
We always build inside our mind a mental model of the reality around us and every thing on them including ourselves. This is the reason because it is so important develop, refining and matching our mental models as close as possible with the objective reality, it is a matter of survival and success in the real World. Our consciousness, our reason, our intelligence, are definitely the best tools to do this.
The more complete, complex and accurate the mental model we construct of the reality, the more chances to be successful in daily life either for particular tasks or projects or for long term objectives like living a long happy existence for example.

3-If points 1 and 2 are true then we have a very powerful tool to change our World: Our own mind.
Either by wishing the change as the first primary step to then think the way and move forward to "do it", or using your mind to change itself.
This last option is specially critical in an essential matter which is the perception of ourselves inside the whole reality.
Who are you? (who do you think you are?) And perhaps even more important: Who do you want to be?
Can you really move the mountain that is obstructing the Sun with your current resources? Or it is easier to move yourself to be able to see the Sun?
In the same manner the easier way to change the World is changing the way you see and interpret them, it means changing, improving, expanding your mind in order to be able to achieve your values. Or even learning other values or changing yours when necessary, by example when they don't fit the reality or don't make you happy.
Because what makes everyone of us finally happy or unhappy is our perception and interpretation of the reality and not the reality itself

For me the ultimate challenge is being free to chase your dreams about yourself, becoming able to be the hero of your own movie: your existence.

Objectivism 2.0

(Introduction)



I have to say first that I was quite much objectivist long time before knowing about Ayn Rand's Objectivism and her wonderful work.
Thus adopting this philosophy was for me more a return, a deepening and an affirmation than a discovery.
But despite this, reading each one of her books was a shocking, beautiful and exciting experience.

By the way perhaps you have noted that in the header of the blog about Ayn Rand and her philosophy I purposely used this word "...beautiful sense of life ever discovered..." it is because while reading "The Virtue of Selfishness" I suddenly realized that her philosophy the Objectivism was always there, in the common sense of our ultra-modern everyday life, or in the ancient savannah where the first tribes of Homo Erectus struggled to survive almost two millons years ago using the most powerful weapon ever created: their minds.

While reading any of the Ayn Rand's writings I constantly wonder why there were no other people capable of putting together all the Objectivism's truths as brilliantly as she did...
Perhaps the answer is that she suffered the oppression of the Russian's socialism and mysticism in her own flesh before escaping to USA, or perhaps this little, almost fragile woman, was more brave, intelligent and intellectually honest than virtually any man before.

While other philosophies are more close to "invents" (some of them really weird and even awful), Objectivism is a simple, enlightening magnificent discovery.

The modification in the color of the Atlas Shrugged's picture above symbolizes the evolution, the only constant: the change.
The Ying-Yang's border icon represents other concepts which I will talk later about, like the theory of conflict, the cycles of the processes, the importance of the frontiers, the exceptions and the rules, the quantity vs. quality in the philosophy and life, the tools of intuition, emotions and feelings, the Gods and religions, etc.
Those other concepts eventually complement, expand and enhance the original Ran'd vision of the Objectivism, without getting in contradiction with its basic principles.

This blog will be also eventually dedicated to talk about other Objectivism related experiences, art, etc. like the Canadian group of music Rush by example.

The roots

(Objectivism basis while standing on one foot)




1- Metaphysics: Objective Reality.
("Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed"
or "Wishing won't make it so.")

2- Epistemology: Reason.
( "You can't eat your cake and have it, too." )

3- Ethics: Self-interest.
("Man is an end in himself.")

4- Politics: Capitalism.
("Give me liberty or give me death.")