[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] There is a difference between understanding a theory and agreeing with it. Anyone who disagrees with a theory despite being incapable of offering a rebuttal is a willful ignoramus. That kind of anti-intellectualism can only result in bigotry.Laihendi

Please for the love of god, read "The Republic".

Yes, but why.

How is a "right" anymore then a word?

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Try reading The Objectivist Ethics. I have never advocated the stripping of rights, because it is impossible to revoke a right that exists as a natural condition of that person's existence. I am for the stripping of legal privileges (you may call these "legal rights", though the term is a misnomer), which has absolutely nothing to do with natural rights. You cannot even do something as simple as distinguish the concept of "natural rights" from "legal rights" or understand any of the other basic theories of Objectivism and yet you claim to understand Objectivism and have the audacity to question the intelligence of others. That is hilarious.

Ace6301

"Natural rights" have no objective existence nor practical application.

The only evidence you have provided is your word...which is highly subjective at best.

the fact that you believe in what are essentially made up fairy laws, which no one can prove or disprove makes you both a mystic and a subjectivist.

And the thing is we are all willing to hear his reasoning and proof, but he never provides any.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]This is amusing coming from a guy who demonstrates nearly everyday that he is utterly incapable of understanding even the most basic theories of Objectivism.Laihendi

Considering you're talking about randian objectivism, i'd say that works in his favor.

Please for the love of god, read "The Republic".

[QUOTE="Ace6301"]We understand them just fine, we just disagree with them because they're dumb. Also your understanding of Objectivism is at times questionable despite it being the only thing you seem to know.Laihendi

There was actually a topic the other day where he said no one can strip people of their rights...then in the same paragraph advocated stripping people of their rights.Ace6301

"Natural rights" have no objective existence nor practical application.

The only evidence you have provided is your word...which is highly subjective at best.

the fact that you believe in what are essentially made up fairy laws, which no one can prove or disprove makes you both a mystic and a subjectivist.

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="Ace6301"] What was it that he said? Did he say that Tom Robinson was guilty of the crime he was accused of? It wasn't even misunderstanding the themes it was actually misunderstanding the very plot itself.Laihendi

Considering you're talking about randian objectivism, i'd say that works in his favor.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="RushKing"] Ok, but it's still a pseudo objective reward system.MakeMeaSammitch

strong nation, happy people...what more could you want?

Technically cookies would be free...lol.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="RushKing"] There is no such thing as objective value. Wage systems are forced subjectivity.RushKing

It's not a wage system...

strong nation, happy people...what more could you want?

You are overstating the value of automation, as well as its capabilities, by a long shot. The majority of production based automation efficiency advances have involved production consistencies and labor redundancy. Additionally, the sufficiency you are advocating ignores product individuality and variation. The labor intensity involved in reconfiguring equipment from one job to the next (often referred to as a makeready) is decades away from automation capabilities. As this often requires a size-able workforce, the unskilled laborer is far from obsolete. The Utopia you advocate is worthy of striving for, but unreachable within the coming centuries, at least in so far as my experience.Chemistian

That's all i ask.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="RushKing"] What If don't want to live at the mercy of a management class deciding whether or not my actions are "contributing" to society or not? If we know we can't objectively measure an individuals productivity, why should we attempt to?RushKing

you are illogical if you don't as you can gain anything you want by merely applieng youself in the way you are best able.

contribution can be measured objectively. if you work as part of a government think tank you are contributing, if design airplanes you are contributing, if you fix cars you are contributing...etc. it is quite easy to tell if what you have done or what your situation is demands a mansion or a two bedroom house.

It's not a wage system...

Education, military, police,all manners of production,legislation,court/judiciary system, prison system,emergency services, roads, building codes, food and drug administration, intelligence, international diplomacy and transportation.

Those are the big ones i want complete federal government control of.

Note: I may have missed some, more can be added later.

frannkzappa