Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 88974

Almost all the Christian commandments are harmful in one way or another to the Mind, the Reason, the Progress and the Self-steem of men but two of them are specially evil in modern times:

1-"You shall love your neighbor as yourself"
2-"You shall not kill"

The first one gives place to consider altruism or un-selfishness as one of the alleged highest virtues of our society, and is often stretched to the even more insane "You shall love your neighbor more than yourself" as the pinnacle of virtue

But who is "your neighbor"? The commandment doesn't mention anything about your relation with him: Is he your friend? your relative? someone you admire? someone unknown? someone known but despised by you? your enemy?
Does your neighbor deserve to be loved by you? Is he wise? idiot? honest, thief, criminal? brave or coward? helpful or useless? hard-worker or lazy? nice or indifferent?
The commandment doesn't specify anything, so we should assume that we should love everyone, anyone.

This commandment is deeply affecting the politics and economics of the World because no one dares to defend Capitalism on moral grounds, simply because it goes against this commandment which is taken as some kind of axiomatic truth, some revealed supreme virtue that everyone seems to agree with...
Why? Simply because it resonates deeply in our brain, in our soul where we have genetically hardwired thanks to our evolution as species other virtues like kindness or compassion or sympathy which are (were at least) essential for our survival as group and individuals because these virtues allow us to live in tribes and societies which in turn has the potential to greatly improve our chances of survival and our standard of life

Tonix777, Objectivist Living 54 Comments [8/14/2012 4:02:30 AM]
Fundie Index: 49
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2 3
Leighton Buzzard

But who is "your neighbor"?

I believe some dude name of Jesus is said to have answered that question. Quite well, if you ask me.

What's the Randroid answer? We should care for nobody but ourselves?

8/14/2012 4:23:47 AM

Tempus

What's the Randroid answer? We should care for nobody but ourselves?

Yes

8/14/2012 4:47:17 AM



"Who is your neighbour?"

Kind of self-explanatory, if you have a firm grasp of english. A rule that boils down to not being a murderous asshole makes much more sense than pork prohibitions.

8/14/2012 5:01:38 AM

Reynardine

You admitted in your last paragraph what you denied in the others. It appears you now think you can live without society. Try it, please.

8/14/2012 5:06:09 AM

Filin De Blanc

Objectivism, for those who want a philosophical underpinning for being pricks.

8/14/2012 5:07:59 AM

michael3ov

Ahh the virtues of selfishness. This nonsense is something that the American voter needs to learn about. Especially since today's right wing is so devoted to this pseudo-philosophy. We also have two Ayn Rand devotees running for President and Vice-President. These men would try their best to bring the Randian dystopia to America that they so desperately desire. The middle class, working class, and the poor are screwed if these men win the election. Even more so than they are now.

8/14/2012 5:08:42 AM

Doubting Thomas

I'm really confused here. This person has a problem with two of the very few actual good pieces of advice in the bible.

8/14/2012 5:14:23 AM

Voice of Humanity

That reminds me, I never did finish The Protector Trials, brb.

8/14/2012 5:24:46 AM

tmarcl

But who is "your neighbor"? The commandment doesn't mention anything about your relation with him: Is he your friend? your relative? someone you admire? someone unknown? someone known but despised by you? your enemy?

If you'd read on, you would have found out that yes, this does apply to everyone.

The fact is, that all human societies have this sort of commandment/philosophy. We're social animals - we have a better chance of surviving in groups than we do on our own. If we're 100% out for ourselves, then the group is likely to pick up on that, and avoid us. A certain amount of altruism then, is essential for the individual's survival.

Believe it or not, you owe society a debt - we all do. The fact that you're using a computer, wearing clothes, have a job, speak a language are all provided to you by society. As smart as you might be, I sincerely doubt that you yourself provided every resource and every technical ability from start to finish to get the computer, clothes, etc that you currently have. Society provided those.

It is then incumbent upon you (and everyone else) to acknowledge that debt. The more resources you use, the more you owe.


8/14/2012 5:42:46 AM

Mister Spak

So what is your point? The religious command should be ignored? Or the survival enhancing tendency that inspired it should be obeyed?

8/14/2012 5:47:06 AM

farpadokly

The internet is absolutely infested with this kind of subnormal semi-sociopathic creep, who are all into neo-social darwinism and think of themselves as a sort of master race of superior beings, despite the fact that if society broke down in earnest they'd all perish in a very short time.

8/14/2012 6:27:34 AM

Felix Wilde

Mises and Rand in one night... Ugh.

In case you haven't noticed, we kinda still live in a tribe. One which is global. A huge, interconnected economy in which the conditions of people you will never meet, in a country you will never visit, affects you. In the age of telecommunications dependence, cooperation is as important as ever. If it helped us in small groups with little communal knowledge and culture, how would it be any less necessary in a world where we keep most of our knowledge and culture on one big virtual data network?

Edit: Indeed, these are also always people in some kind of sociopath-friendly manager/employer/2IC but-not-the-actual-boss position. Rand makes no sense: If we were all unrestricted free agents, everyone would self-employ, so they'd get all the profit and not a wage for their work, and the Randroids would have to actually work for once.

@ Doubting Thomas: True. True indeed.

8/14/2012 6:27:39 AM

SpukiKitty


Barfy The Wonder Dog states my sentiments about this 'Toxic666' guy perfectly!

8/14/2012 6:44:13 AM

Pacal

I loved th8is comment:

"This commandment is deeply affecting the politics and economics of the World because no one dares to defend Capitalism on moral grounds,...."

Randoids have no trouble lying do they?

8/14/2012 7:04:21 AM

Horsefeathers

"The commandment doesn't specify anything, so we should assume that we should love everyone, anyone."

Bingo.

"This commandment is deeply affecting the politics and economics of the World because no one dares to defend Capitalism on moral grounds, simply because it goes against this commandment which is taken as some kind of axiomatic truth, some revealed supreme virtue that everyone seems to agree with..."

No, they don't bother to defend it because it's indefensible. Rather than loving your neighbor, Capitalism says that you should exploit your neighbor for the cheapest rate possible that earns you the most profit, then turn around and sell your product--which your neighbor just made--back to your neighbor for the highest price he can afford.

8/14/2012 7:21:06 AM

Anon-e-moose

"1-"You shall love your neighbor as yourself"
2-"You shall not kill"

The first one gives place to consider altruism or un-selfishness as one of the alleged highest virtues of our society, and is often stretched to the even more insane "You shall love your neighbor more than yourself" as the pinnacle of virtue

But who is "your neighbor"? The commandment doesn't mention anything about your relation with him: Is he your friend? your relative? someone you admire? someone unknown? someone known but despised by you? your enemy?
Does your neighbor deserve to be loved by you? Is he wise? idiot? honest, thief, criminal? brave or coward? helpful or useless? hard-worker or lazy? nice or indifferent?
The commandment doesn't specify anything, so we should assume that we should love everyone, anyone."

I wouldn't want to be killed/raped/harmed, nor have my property stolen/damaged, so why should I do the same to others?

Commit acts of gratuitous kindness.

Be Excellent to each other!' [/"Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure"]

See? Simple Humanism. So what makes religions think they have the right to infect, nay complicate such a simple philosophy?!

Even Wiccans live by their Rede (emphasis added):

'An it harm none, do what thou wilt.'

What can be simpler than that?

8/14/2012 8:02:19 AM

jakraziel

Did this guy just object to two of the undeniably good parts of the bible?

8/14/2012 8:24:57 AM

Anon

That's because capitalism can't be justified on moral grounds, it's the economic equivalent of natural selection (not a good thing in this case.
The whole of human society has been a struggle to escape from the principle of "the survival of the fittest" that's why we have society and technology, the problem with capitalism is that it is essentially the same as "the survival of the fittest" there is no morality and no fairness, if you are able to become rich you win, if you aren't you lose.
When you bear in mind that the difference between riches and poverty is often as arbitrary as 'how rich your parents were' it could hardly be described as civilised.

8/14/2012 8:39:11 AM

J. James

"Objectivist living", huh? That was evident before I even got to the second paragraph.

Don't you just love that most Randian Objectivists are either dirt poor and green with envy or were born with silver spoons slotted in their various orifices?

It's like a religion of selfish vice and douchebaggery.

8/14/2012 9:17:29 AM



Omg.... They acknowledged evolution......

8/14/2012 9:17:50 AM

freako104

Those two are very easy to follow unless you're a psychpath. Also Ayn Rand's character Howard Roark is not an example of a person to follow as he cared little to none for others

8/14/2012 9:49:00 AM

Papabear

But, as Jesus told you to love your enemies, who your neighbor is becomes irrelevant.

8/14/2012 10:02:52 AM

Skyknight

@J. James: That's kind of the point. Rand, if I'm remembering this correctly, was born to a well-off family, and thus resented the Bolsheviks for forcibly depriving her of that. (Her VERY frigid mother--who outright told her and her siblings that she was only raising them out of duty to her husband, that she had no intrinsic use for children at ALL--probably didn't help matters any.) Essentially, all her philosophy is, in the end, is an inversion of Bolshevik views.

Then there's the little matter of the infamous killer who somehow drew her adulation. I don't think she had much use for the murder itself, but she nonetheless found herself entranced by the killer's implicit dispraise of society's arbitrary rules. I think it's a case of her deciding that the murder did NOT inevitably flow from the abjuration (do you get the feeling she didn't look into WHY he abjured the rules? Different reasons result in different decisions after abjuration...). From there, you get (alleged) heroes like Roark and Galt, who are righteous precisely because they are the inverse of the foolish, envy-corrupted masses. To Rand, acceding to others, and/or thinking others ought to accede, was the sole essence of evil; therefore, good consisted entirely of charting one's own way without thought of others (if they couldn't endure your unseeing path, they must be willfully weak; only the wicked would risk harboring weakness for even a femtosecond).

Basically, a religion/philosophy that enthrones Superbia.

8/14/2012 10:26:22 AM

Sergeant343

Okay.
"You shall" not kill is only in reference to murder(shown to him later).
Neighbor can be any one of those things, but I believe it is referencing everyone who lives next you or in your neighborhood.
I don't see it other than with foreign aid, perhaps I am missing something. People do defend capitalism on moral grounds, so you can't say no one does.

8/14/2012 11:31:43 AM

Louis Cypher

Why are the horrible parts of the bible always accepted at face value but the good part are scrutinized and in some case outright rejected. What kind of bizarro world did that teleporter send me to?

8/14/2012 11:32:34 AM
1 2 3