3dmike
640cc Uber Pimp
That sounds like a beautiful way to start the day and defile that golf course at the same time! Awesome
That sounds like a beautiful way to start the day and defile that golf course at the same time! Awesome
Decal Dennis
TEAM EP&G
Took me less than a minute to make the vector for the Buddy RC logo and have it ready to print....of course I wouldn't print without permission tho.
AKfreak
150cc
I stand corrected, sorry for the misinformation, T
AKfreak
150cc
I am not tripping. I was just surprised that I didn't get any after begging for 4 of them LOL. . Really its not a problem at all. It just makes room for others. Secraft maybe, Savox, JR, DA, ect...
3dNater
3DRCF Regional Ambassador
I think Rand was nuts. She was right about a few things. But the book, although thought provoking, is totally rediculous.
Before you flame me... I am a capitalist through and through. I just don't like her brand of egoism. I do tend to like the philosophy of Jesus the best. Society benefits from people being moral and unselfish while Rand espouses selfishness as the highest virtue.
I believe it is my responsibility to provide for my family, develop my talents and do the best I can with what I have. I don't believe society owes me or anyone else a living. But reaching out to the poor is a very rewarding experience that I don't think Rand ever had the experience of having. There is no room in her philosophy for altruism, humility, charity, selfless service, thankfulness for bounteous blessings, or love of your fellow man.
I dont like being forced by the government to give to the "poor" either. like what Dinesh said about how if someone is forced to give, it strip the virtue out of the transaction (there is a great youtube video about this). The person giving feels like they were robbed, and the person recieving feels entitled to more. The ideas of the left that try to solve all of society's problems through policies of "economic justice" just don't work. People are not EVER going to be truly equal from an economic standpoint and I think we should learn to accept that. What I find value in is the OPPORRUNITY, as [MENTION=95]Aeroplayin[/MENTION] so gracefully said, to step out of our caste and reach for something better with a belief that if we work hard and strive to be exceptional we can have a more fruitful and bounteous life... hopefully to share with those that we cherish and love.
If we all focus on trying to be the best person we can be everyone wins. Life is about a lot more than money.
Before you flame me... I am a capitalist through and through. I just don't like her brand of egoism. I do tend to like the philosophy of Jesus the best. Society benefits from people being moral and unselfish while Rand espouses selfishness as the highest virtue.
I believe it is my responsibility to provide for my family, develop my talents and do the best I can with what I have. I don't believe society owes me or anyone else a living. But reaching out to the poor is a very rewarding experience that I don't think Rand ever had the experience of having. There is no room in her philosophy for altruism, humility, charity, selfless service, thankfulness for bounteous blessings, or love of your fellow man.
I dont like being forced by the government to give to the "poor" either. like what Dinesh said about how if someone is forced to give, it strip the virtue out of the transaction (there is a great youtube video about this). The person giving feels like they were robbed, and the person recieving feels entitled to more. The ideas of the left that try to solve all of society's problems through policies of "economic justice" just don't work. People are not EVER going to be truly equal from an economic standpoint and I think we should learn to accept that. What I find value in is the OPPORRUNITY, as [MENTION=95]Aeroplayin[/MENTION] so gracefully said, to step out of our caste and reach for something better with a belief that if we work hard and strive to be exceptional we can have a more fruitful and bounteous life... hopefully to share with those that we cherish and love.
If we all focus on trying to be the best person we can be everyone wins. Life is about a lot more than money.
Ohio AV8TOR
Just Do It
All this because Joe quit 3DHS!
3dNater
3DRCF Regional Ambassador
Haha!
Aeroplayin
70cc twin V2
Ah, what the heck... Since this thread has devolved into the forbidden topic of politics, I may just as well continue down that road.
Good to hear that I'm a producer at least.
Where I was going with the Christian Right thing is that there's an obvious conflict between Christianity and Rand's atheism.
If I wrote what I did earlier, the way I intended, no one should truly be able to say where I stand on all of this. I enjoy philosophy, and especially those that stimulate debate about how freedom and morality are related. I actually have no opinion on Rand other than that I would disagree about her being nuts. The basis of the Rand philosophy may not be mainstream, but I certainly don’t find cognitive dissonance here since the Rand philosophy is based on objectivism. Please understand that I promote nothing here, just trying to answer your initial question about the philosophy. I am a follower of no one, and believer in very little, at the moment.
But the basic philosophy of objectivism is that reality and consciousness are different and independent of each other – that morality exists only in a society that respects the individual, and their individual right to pursue happiness as they see fit. This is very similar to Laissez-faire capitalism. In France, the merchants were asked by the bureaucrats how the government could help them in their business endeavors, and Le Gendre simply told them to leave us alone, or let us be -- Laissez-nous faire. In the US, we say, Get off our backs.
I had mentioned earlier about the founding fathers, and their intellect. They also understood that what they were creating – a society where the common man was free to sell-express and pursue happiness, wealth, property ownership, etc – could not survive without basic individual morality, and they thought it would survive because they believed in inherent human morality.
So the first ingredient for the success of freedom is individual morality because freedom enables the corrupt, immoral, and narcissistic sociopaths, to gain wealth and power at the expense of the general good and for the wrong purposes. If government or business functions under rules we all believe in, and society treats each other the way we expect to be treated, and we run our business and government in a way that benefits ourselves and society, and we hold businesses and government to a strict standard, and we don’t selectively punish those that perpetrate the laws but do it judiciously and without bias, then freedom, morality, and justice, will survive.
So wherever you get your morality from – a religion, moral parents that teach basic right and wrong, the inner family, the extended family, supportive schools and teachers, etc – it is the foundation on which freedom can grow and survive. This was the American experiment. “A Republic, if you can keep itâ€.
So, I believe, that this is the connection you may not see – the morality and freedom connection, where one is required for the other to work.
YellowJacketsRC
70cc twin V2
In Response to 3DNater: Food for thought (Not an opinion, just thoughts).
It can be argued that Rand is exactly right. But not for the reason most people would think. I remember watching a movie starring Bill Murray where he went on some sort of philosophical journey (don't remember much of it). Anyway, at some point he is sitting next to a river talking to a man who is washing dishes in the river. The man suggests that to live a just and proper life, one should do "whatever makes him happy". Murray asks with indignation "so you mean I should go out and take what're I want from whomever I want, do whatever I want to whomever I want, lie, steal, cheat...." (You get the picture). The man responds, "That won't make you happy".
Giving to someone other than ourselves, putting our immediate self interests in the back seat to something greater than ourselves, these are the makings of a truly human, happy, and fulfilling life. SO the irony is (I think this is irony) that "he who is last shall be first". Go figure....
It can be argued that Rand is exactly right. But not for the reason most people would think. I remember watching a movie starring Bill Murray where he went on some sort of philosophical journey (don't remember much of it). Anyway, at some point he is sitting next to a river talking to a man who is washing dishes in the river. The man suggests that to live a just and proper life, one should do "whatever makes him happy". Murray asks with indignation "so you mean I should go out and take what're I want from whomever I want, do whatever I want to whomever I want, lie, steal, cheat...." (You get the picture). The man responds, "That won't make you happy".
Giving to someone other than ourselves, putting our immediate self interests in the back seat to something greater than ourselves, these are the makings of a truly human, happy, and fulfilling life. SO the irony is (I think this is irony) that "he who is last shall be first". Go figure....