Monday, February 28, 2011

The Irony of Weightlifting

All ultimate and necessary truths are aspects of God's being, including the truths that are the means to all truths including themselves, truths that make up reason, logic, a set of values and conditionals, intentions and purposes.

There is a sense in which courage of one's convictions is in direct proportion to the extent to which one is willing to attack those convictions. Moreover, this way of negation is not only necessary for completing the structure of one's understanding of one's perspective and oneself, it is also required to understand surviving claims and their argumentative structures in the sharpest contrast to arguments for their negations. This prepares one more fully to examine competing claims, although again the resulting comparative analysis either contributes to the edification of one's view, or else changes it or negates it altogether. That's the necessary risk one takes.

 Moreover, one is already taking a risk in not knowing whether one will live through the coming day, and in operating according to whatever default view is assumed already. There's no such thing as a philosophical neutral zone.

The essence of the self-critical process is the attempt to approximate an ideal structure of justification. So why not an all-out attack on every front? Systematic, comprehensive, from the ground up, and developed into more than a habit---like breathing.

The result of course is to strengthen one's view, assuming it's true, and render being one's own worst enemy the greatest of friendships.

Anti-Randianism Necessarily Mimics Objectivism

I used to think that the 2D-characters complaint about Atlas Shrugged and other novels of Ayn Rand was legitimate criticism, but statist and and other coercive collectivists keep using the same arguments that the supposedly cardboard-cutout villians used in the book. The elusive 3rd dimension compulsively acts out Ayn Rand's characters for us, while criticizing her novels for not having realistic characters. One of the most striking ironies of the modern world.

I'm even starting to wonder if they are secretly copying certain passages for use in their ritualistic scolding.

If the characters are 2D, it's because Rand is holding up a mirror to flatland, even if possibly in spite of herself as well.

Adapted from a comment by robc at

Thursday, February 10, 2011

While You Slept

In terms of the mind, everything God-like is already assumed in our principles of thinking, analyzing, and evaluating, and is referenced as a somehow distinct system of exceptionless infallible thought compared to our own error-prone system of thinking. As a universal criterial system, they embody rules for everything including determining which objects of experience are persons. Yet these principles themselves are necessarily treated as an independent unified guidance system, a God of personhood recognition criteria, exempt from the limitations of our imperfect aim at its ideality. It's personal because this system is necessarily the determiner of what is personal. It is therefore a personal being. We function in its image, however approximative. It doesn't *need* any ontological status that might be negated of it, and that precisely because of what it is as a factor that must be constantly reckoned with nonetheless, if not up front then in the background mimicking what it is denying.