Give me one(1) reason you aren't an egoist

give me one(1) reason you aren't an egoist

there is no reason to be subverted to the will of anyone but yourself

Other urls found in this thread:

objectivismseminar.com/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand
twitter.com/AnonBabble

im not gay

...

sounds like something a gay man would post

because my memes arent shit

Enjoy telling that to God.
I'm sure it'll go splendidly.

But I am an egoist desu.

god is gay lmao

We don't like namefags and tripfags around here.

>we

allow me to present you with 3 scenarios

>1. God is not real; and thus I can act however I want
>2. God is real and has an intended path for us; noone but retards believe that God exists in the same way we do, God exists within what we call the transcendental meaning we cannot understand or rationalize God, thus all things that belong to God such as God's will, God's plan ect... are equally incomprehensible, there is no theory on objective morality that stands to any serious critique and thus given this lack of direct guidance via understanding of God's will or indirect guidance via intrinsic morals it is left to say that what I will do in my life is all part of God's plan and is exactly what God wanted me to do
>3.God is real and has no intended plan for us; again going back to lack of objective morality and if there is no greater plan then why the fuck would God care what I do

negate this

Your 2 is moronic - if God commanded "don't rape children", pretending you "can't get it" is sheer retardation. You know what words mean, and you'll be held to a standard that's been expressed in clear terms.

4 god is real, can operate in ways we do not know, understands this, can also operate in a way we do know, and has created a reality which provides a clear message to us in the form of christianity

Christianity literally started as a cult of personality by a Jew who pretended he knew everything

Christ was a false prophet as no man can possibly comprehend something as fucking grand as THE WILL OF GOD

think about how grand of a thing that is for a second

the will of an entity so powerful and grand that is beyond human comprehension and the grand plan of such an entity is somehow understood by one random dude

not buying it

God cannot speak to you as God does not exist in the same way as you

If this hurts your small christcuck brain might I suggest reading HP Lovecraft's The Call of Cthulhu for a similar idea

>God cannot speak to you
Yeah - the omnipotent Creator of all things can't communicate anything at all to His creations.
Yep.
That's a reasonable assumption.

I actually believe on 3. The idea that a bunch of evolved monkeys could make art is a joke to me.

ok allow me to fully understand what position you are coming from with a line of interrogatives

does God exist on the same level of existence as you and I

>1. Thinking that actions don't have consequences
>2. Thinking that patently absurd, self-contradicting being could possibly exist
>3. Thinking that the fact that no god exist implies lack of objective morality

give me one example of objective morality

Because I love helping others and making others happy.
I tried for many years to make myself happy, and I cannot do it. The odd thing is, I'm a step away from being a sociopath, yet some days I still have that empathy.

God is the Creator of all things and is omnipotent - He can do anything and everything you can conceive, and anything and everything you can't conceive.
This includes being able to create vibrations within the world as you experience that you clearly perceive as words.

Let me take this one step further. Why would an allegedly perfect, all-powerful, unchanging being have a plan for anything?

It's not like he'd need planning to get shit done; he could just do it. It doesn't make him happy; he's already perfect. By definition, anything that he plans, he could have accomplished an easier, more efficient way.

do you unironically believe in the omnipotence meme

you do understand that present paradoxical situations

like God creating a stone so heavy that God Cannot lift it

God is powerful not omnipotent and any implication of such is retarded Christfaggery

You should be the benefit of your own actions

>It doesn't make him happy
Is happiness a necessary component of perfection?
Why would it be?

Egoism is a spook.

*beneficiary

look I'm not the one making the decisions here I can't rationalize it either way but if God has a plan for human beings then I'm actively taking part in it right now

according to whom

>do you unironically believe in the God we've been talking about this whole time
God is responsible for the very apparatus in which you reason or make deductions about anything at all - there's no reason whatsoever to believe the way things are are the way things must be.

god is for chumps fools
what a bunch of retard mans

i knew a guy who died once and came back to life and he said god isnt real

He's unchanging
Becoming happy = change

Therefore, he can't become happy.
If happiness is good, then he's already happy. Perfectly so.

fuck off. I don’t have to listen to you

when you go through your life review after your death, you not only experience life from your point of view, but from the point of view of everyone you've ever interacted with
>tl;dr be nice to people because you'll be feeling it later

I'm not letting you skip around this paradoxical bullshit

you can't just wave your hand and say that paradoxical situations don't matter cause you and your cultist friends said so

I don't let people get away with the statement of "there is no objective truth" meme because that statement is implying it is objectively true

thus I shall not let you get away with such mental gymnastics

>Objective
>According to whom

Does not compute.

>The concept of objectivity contains the reason why the question “Who decides what is right or wrong?” is wrong. Nobody “decides.” Nature does not decide—it merely is; man does not decide, in issues of knowledge, he merely observes that which is. When it comes to applying his knowledge, man decides what he chooses to do, according to what he has learned, remembering that the basic principle of rational action in all aspects of human existence, is: “Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed.” This means that man does not create reality and can achieve his values only by making his decisions consonant with the facts of reality.

>4 we are all just cells in the finger of God, which means we are all a part of God
you can be a cancer to your God body if you wish, but I would rather be the white blood cell that removes the bad from the God body

>He's unchanging
What you mean by "unchanging" is a moronic conception of what's meant in Scripture in the few verses where anything like that is said. When God was moving around on earth, that's necessarily a change - motion is a change from one spacial state to another. When God has issued commands to men, that's a change - God is doing something. The act of doing anything is a change.
Jesus Christ.

>God is biological being

Even the church knows you're wrong

Because I have an innate inclination towards altruism.

You need god son, and a king.

>"there is no objective truth"
>implying I'm a relativist
I'm a rationalist. I believe God has given the world a structure by which reason is reliable. I'm also not a fucking idiot and don't just assume it MUST be that way - God made it that way, and He could fucking make it a different way. Assuming He couldn't would be fucking downs.

I'm glad you've finally come to see that the God portrayed in scripture is impossible.

this is literally "dude I swear Im right on this matter realistically incomprehensible to me"

thunking

>observation is not grounds for objectivity

and can you give me a reason why you believe your observation is infallible

You just have a moronic understanding of what's actually being said in Scripture. You probably think Christians must hold that Peter was a literal rock too.

How do you know he could have made it differently. Have you observed that? Oh, right, you're just (((believing.)))

we are all made of light, just different densities and vibrations

Stirner is cool but I'm not a fan of individualism. I think it just ends in ruin but oh well.

>How do you know he could have made it differently
God is omnipotent. Saying He couldn't have made it any other way is a straight denial of that, and is moronic.
You're just (((believing))) you're not in the Matrix and are typing on a keyboard right now. Guess you must suck dick!

God is dead. Guv is next.

Hail Egoism. Hail Chaos.

>I'm a rationalist.
>AnCap
>teaching people about God

Senses aren't under direct volitional control. (You can point your eyes, but can't just see whatever you want once you've done so.) Therefore, they can't really be "right" or "wrong." The information they provide can be misleading, but it is still information about reality. The information still comes from an interaction between your sense organs, the thing you're perceiving, and the surroundings.

So, you can't know everything by simple observation, but what you can perceive, you can know.

Not a single on of those things is mutually exclusive with another, but you - the rando dipshit - just sputter whatever inane dribble that occurs to your autistic brain first.

>innate

:ok_hand:

literally socially bred into you

but thats ok cause it's still within your will

tldr do what you want my man

gee maybe because the people who wrote scripture were a bunch of cultists

Egoism is not excusively stirner

the "big 3" if you will are Nietzsche, Stirner and Rand each with their own flavour

I have my own line of thinking but my manifesto is not yet complete so I cant really readily explain it fully yet

but tldr there is in my opinion room for permanent institutions of order being necessary to preserve individual wills to their maximal levels possible

>God created a world where reason is reliable
>dude paradoxical situations dont matter

hmmmmmmmmm

Nothing I have observed has led me to believe I'm in the Matrix.
Nothing I have observed has led me to believe God exists.

Why would I believe something I have no evidence for? Assert the arbitrary harder, please.

>God created a world where reason is reliable
>He didn't have to and that's fucking moronically obvious
>"HEHEH YOU ARE CONTRADICTING URSELF xD"
t. (You)

this isn't even a logically sound post

this is your brain on christcuckery

Nothing you have observed is necessarily reliable, so relying on your sensory faculties as if they were necessarily reliable is a faith commitment by virtue of not being capable of validating itself by the same inductive reasoning without commitment to viciously circular reasoning in the form of "my senses are reliable because my senses tell me they're reliable".

Yeah, Rand's politics is basically "How little can we have before it fucks everything up? Let's do exactly that much."

>God created a world where reason is reliable
>He didn't have to and that's fucking moronically obvious

>the "big 3" if you will are Nietzsche, Stirner and Rand each with their own flavour
I'm aware. my dude. I've read all of Nietzsche's works with the exception of TSZ.

It doesn't change that these philosophies are for the few and not the many (us). Good brain food, though.

You have made a claim to knowledge:
>Nothing you have observed is necessarily reliable

What basis do you have for this?

>with the exception of TSZ

How do you know that reason is reliable?

Inb4 "faith"

Cartesian demons and brains in vats.

cause I don't like other people suffering
that said I'm monstly an individualist, not sure about "egoist"

I don't, I just use it. Faith and knowledge are mutually exclusive. If you have knowledge of something you can't have faith in it's regard. If you have faith in something you don't have knowledge of it.
Hurka der, dipshit.

>What basis do you have for this?

easy fucking logic, how may you claim that anything you see is actually how it is

not being able to reliably discern right or wrong implies you have no grasp on objectivity, just psuedo-objectivity as far as you may rationalize it

Have you read Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology?

From what you've said in the thread, it seems like you would at least find it interesting.

>Undeveloped prefrontal cortex
>Antisocial tendencies

BIG surprises

haven't read any Rand actually

probably should though

>Cartesian demons
>"People aren't automatically right, therefore they can't be right."
Ok, honey.

>Brains in Vats
Senses are still giving objective information of reality, that information is just not as useful as one would hope.

Absolutely this. Lolbertarians are literally mentally malformed subhumans, just like Stirner and OP.

So what you're saying is that you don't (can't?) know that reason is reliable but you're going to depend on it anyway?

Sounds like textbook faith to me.

ayn rand is an ugly jew trying to subvert white societies

>therefore they can't be
STRIBBITY STRAW MAN
It's "therefore they're not NECESSARILY right" dipshit. Which means they can be doubted, and insofar as you AREN'T doubting them you're putting FAITH in them.
Fucking retard dipshits Jesus Christ.

objectivismseminar.com/

Their podcasts are down right now, but you can still look at their book list. OPAR and ITOE are the big ones.

I guess at the end of the day I am deep down but I still think practically it's better to arrange agreed upon morals with other people rather than stealing peoples lands as soon as you can or whatever if someone based their entire life around egoism.

Nice normative statement

Who do you report to to collect your shekels?

Because I'm not looking for justifications for my bad decisions

You do understand atl the minimum temporary unions of some form or another are common amoung egoist thinkers

...

Thing is I was a total moralfag, now I put soda in my water cup at fast food places and call off at work uncessecarily

Isnt egoism grand

Wouldn't the "better" thing be the egoistic one?
I mean, if agreeing upon morals is better for you than stealing, then someone stealing isn't really an egoist.

>Nice factual statement.
Correct, and thanks. Enjoy continuing to be genetically irrelevant.

Dont bother. OP is a brainlet that refuses to acknowledge the possibility of a power so much higher than himself that it views him not as a threat to be competed against but as a thing to compete for. He will live and die without ever realizing anything beyond himself, like the average brainless sheep in the Shepards flock.

I wasn't moralizing., you can make bad decisions on a desert island. Morality is almost outside of it unless you're Naked Ape shitposting and consider the acting against the order of the universe implicitly immoral.
Not everything is spooky, sometimes you're just an idiot

Thing is my *practical* (not ideal)application of egoism (for me) is an authcap society with me as grand leader

People get the idea that egoist applications have to be anarchy

Rather I say social institutions and collective might help perserve your individual will( so long as you lead them)

I used to be a total Nietzschefag, but now I don't do either of those things because they violate the principles of justice and productiveness respectively, and I realize that it is in my best interest to be just and productive.

Isn't egoism grand? :p

Ok, so which agency does everyone think the spookposters are working for? They seem a might more sinister than the average shill.

...

It could just as well be Schubert or Reger.

The only truly religious man was the traditional one. And if you consider yourself religious you are noting but a pathetic LARPer who should kys.
Even worst is the fact that you follow an ideology based on liberal/bourgeois values. You can say you believe God all you want but in reality you are as religious as any commie faggot.
>Not a single on of those things is mutually exclusive
It is if you use them in a improper way. Anarcho-capitalism is a economic and political ideology, and -as I said above- is based on liberal/bourgeois values; irreligious values. A truly religious person isn't interested in political and economic ideologies for the fact that God is enough and everything for him. If a person is truly religious he is not an anarchist, nor a fascist, nor a communist, because he is not the kind of person who needs that kind of things, the only thing he is, is a religious. The one who takes parts in any kind of "ism" is a sing of his estrangement from religion and God. And you cannot change that. Being a rationalist means you are incapable of understand anything related to God without think in God like a thing that can be analyzed; this is, to see God as an object purged of his "soul". But then you can don't apply rationalism when you think in God, making irrelevant the fact of you being "rationalist" to the discussion.

If you are implying that senses are unreliable, I disagree. Given the same context, they are going to give my consciousness the same data. The implications I draw from my senses can be unreliable, be that just means I need a method where I provide evidence for what I think based on what I can perceive. I can use such a method to think accurately, minimize the mistakes I make, and know what it is I do know. So, once I follow a method of reason, I can know things objectively.

Not to mention, if we're talking christianity, Jesus preaches straight-up socialist statism.

Let me break this down for you in a matter of seconds.
God commands nonviolence, mercy, and forgiveness of Christians. Non-violence, mercy, and forgiveness are all things state agents necessarily - by acting AS state agents - violate. Therefore, any consistent Christian must be against people acting in a uniquely state capacity which necessitates violating those commands.
Rationalism is the belief that we can come to know things other than by sense experience, which is simply true and doesn't conflict in ANY way with Christianity.

You are a dipshit.

Egoism is a good pill. It appeals to highly individualistic people. Most people arent so because of the average herd instinct. People without this instinct are called robots, autists, psychos, and other nonsense. Sure, autists, robots and psychos lack the herd instinct too, but lacking the instinct doesnt make you one of the above.

have you seen a lot of uruguayan shills? me neither
Rand was born Alisa Zinov'yevna (((Rosenbaum))) on February 2, 1905, to a Russian Jewish bourgeois family living in Saint Petersburg."
source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand
I don't know what is your game but the fact that ayn rand was a jew is a fact.
If I was a jew shill wouldn't I be trying to defend her?
>can't even logic

>nonviolence, mercy, and forgiveness
Is that what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah, the Philistines, and those guys selling shit in the temple?

Also, you're just going to let all those violent, vengeful, unforgiving people do their thing? Do you realize how much pain and suffering that will cause? Doesn't sound very compassionate to me.

What is it afraid of? The goyim realizing they should live for themselves instead of for (((others.)))