[QUOTE=davar55;372556](2) All three big religions advocate selflessness as virtue.

(1) [B] Any ethical system that advocates the opposite of selflessness.[/B]

I thought I'd already answered.[/QUOTE]
[Emphasis added] Are you going Randian on us? :shock:

[QUOTE=davar55;372556](2) All three big religions advocate selflessness as virtue.

[/QUOTE]

Christianity, Islam and ??? Hinduism? Buddhism? Shinto? Sikhism?


Hard to quantify/compare the Hindu and Buddhist view of self with Western versions.

The correct comparison of non-affiliated non-theistic religious movement would probably Humanism which is certainly in the selflessness is a good thing camp. Maybe I'm missing the point too, but I wonder if we are circling that trap that every college sophomore seems to fall into: objectivism.

[QUOTE=chappy;372562]Christianity, Islam and ??? Hinduism? Buddhism? Shinto? Sikhism? ...
Hard to quantify/compare the Hindu and Buddhist view of self with Western versions. ...
The correct comparison of non-affiliated non-theistic religious movement would probably Humanism which is certainly in the selflessness is a good thing camp. Maybe I'm missing the point too, but I wonder if we are circling that trap that every college sophomore seems to fall into: objectivism.[/QUOTE]

Well, I meant Christianity, Islam, and Judaism all put others over self.

And without being too disingenuous, I would question why a
secular objectivism would be called a trap for sophomores and
not a valid object of study rather than dismissal.
What's your objective objection to objectivism?

[QUOTE=davar55;372575]Well, I meant Christianity, Islam, and Judaism all put others over self.

And without being too disingenuous, I would question why a
secular objectivism would be called a trap for sophomores and
not a valid object of study rather than dismissal.
What's your objective objection to objectivism?[/QUOTE]

Because it comes up when you've read enough philosophy to know what/how the words are used, but haven't lived in the real world to see how they are applied.

Because it preaches to the casual narcissist of the intellectual, telling them that they are better than, more important to the universe than, more deserving than every other person. It feeds egos and nourishes nothing.

Because its roots are anti-science and anti-human, because its precepts are psychopathy, because its politics are the failed chapters of economics.

[QUOTE=davar55;372575]Christianity, Islam, and Judaism all put others over self.
[/QUOTE]
The Christian exortation is "Love your neighbour [US: neighbor] as yourself".
As I understand it, this means equality between yourself and others,
not putting yourself first but not putting others first either.
Putting others first all the time would be potentially psychologically damaging.

What would JC say?
 

Who knows?

[QUOTE=chappy;372579]Because it comes up when you've read enough philosophy to know what/how the words are used, but haven't lived in the real world to see how they are applied.

Because it preaches to the casual narcissist of the intellectual, telling them that they are better than, more important to the universe than, more deserving than every other person. It feeds egos and nourishes nothing.

Because its roots are anti-science and anti-human, because its precepts are psychopathy, because its politics are the failed chapters of economics.[/QUOTE]

Strong words. I'm guessing you had a bad personal experience.

(3) The economics of the free market haven't failed, they haven't
even ever been fullly tried. Any success that the mixed economy
has ever had has been due to the remnants of freedom that exist.

Which moral precepts do you so badly regard? It advocates such
principles as rationality, honesty, integrity, productiveness.
What could you possibly have against moral ambitiousness?

Its roots are pro-reason and science, and in appealing to the mind,
rather than the emotions, is very much pro-human.

(2) Some intellectuals may take it that way, but it certainly is not
intended so. You are you, so you SHOULD consider yourself first.
But those three phrases aren't GIVEN to anyone, to the extent
they are good they must be earned. Are you saying all are equal,
that no one is better than, more important than, anyone else?

It only feeds the ego if you live by it, not just learn about it,
and then only if you apply it to your own basic morality. In
fact it nourishes achievement.

(1) Understanding how the words are used differenttly
outside of objectivism? Which words are used differently?
Perhaps objectivism's meanings are the right ones.

Though I know you are reasonable and intelligent and have a
sense of humor, your emotions came out in your post. I can
only say possibly your personal experience with this colors
your evaluation of the ideas we're discussing.

[QUOTE=davar55;372660]Though I know you are reasonable and intelligent and have a
sense of humor, your emotions came out in your post. I can
only say possibly your personal experience with this colors
your evaluation of the ideas we're discussing.[/QUOTE]
Just as an aside here: while I have no idea what emotions Chappy may have been experiencing, his posting came across to me as pragmatic, sober and not particularly revealing of any emotion.

Which just goes to show that words come across differently to different people, based on our different perspectives I guess.

[QUOTE=Brian-E;372681]Just as an aside here: while I have no idea what emotions Chappy may have been experiencing, his posting came across to me as pragmatic, sober and not particularly revealing of any emotion.

Which just goes to show that words come across differently to different people, based on our different perspectives I guess.[/QUOTE]

I was just reacting to the "loaded" words, like psychopathy,
anti-science, anti-human, and narcissist. Sorry if I misinterpreted
such a faulty representation as having an emotional source,
especially if it didn't, i.e. if there's a personal intellectual side to it too
(I'm sure there is).

A little poll:

If this question had any meaning,
what would you say is the probability that God exists?

(Use your favorite definition of God.)

[QUOTE=davar55;373946]A little poll:

If this question had any meaning,
what would you say is the probability that God exists?

(Use your favorite definition of God.)[/QUOTE]Under my favourite definition of God, 1.0. Under that definition which you have previously posted, 0.0