Ayn Rand on God

[Procrustes Stretched]

Ayn Rand's Objectivism is snake oil posing as a philosophy.

 

[JBeukema]

Objectivism holds that reality exists independent of consciousness

Objectivism (Ayn Rand) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm more of a positivist

 

[manu1959]

It is important for the atheists here to understand their roots

The reason I object to that sentence is that is is misleading, in that it treats atheism as an ideology. Once can speak of the roots of libertarianism, or of Secular Humanism or of Christianity, but to speak of 'roots' of a personal non-belief in deity seems fallacious.

atheisim is an ideology.....one could argue it also meets the definition of a religion....

 

[JBeukema]

atheisim is an ideology.....one could argue it also meets the definition of a religion....

Only if one were a retard with no understanding of what the words mean.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Objectivism holds that reality exists independent of consciousness

Objectivism (Ayn Rand) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm more of a positivist

me knows a bit about Ayn and her followers.


btw, thank you for mentioning Positivism. I subscribe to some of IT.

 

[Ralph]

YouTube - Ayn Rand - Faith vs Reason

"You are never called to prove a negative."

Just who said FAITH is void of reason....as demonstrated, Christian faith established by the revelation found in the Holy Scriptures is certainly not void of reason, nor logic, but quite the contrary, Christian faith is found to be established based upon what can be DEMONSTRATED AS TRUTH.

Biblical faith is not having a belief in something that is not supported by reason and logic...or as some humanistic seculars declare....a belief in something not supported facts, or an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable. Even some dictionaries define FAITH as believing in something that is not true...or a belief without proof (personally I will leave that one up the Darwinian Cultist that propagates Common Descent from DEAD MATTER and an unprovable belief in a self creating universe...that created itself from nothing, having the ability to create itself from NOTHING, before SOMETHING existed...0 + 0 = EVERYTHING).

To even admit that Christianity is only probable and unprovable is to admit the possibility that it is a hoax. What? Did the Apostles propagate a message that began, "Our God of probability or We shall trust in God WHO MAY BE?" There is not one single passage that suggests the revelation that our very soul depends upon is only PROBABLY true. In each case...reasoned and logical evidence is provided for the things presented as A TRUTH COMING FROM GOD.

Indeed there is quite a difference in Faith as we find exampled in the Holy Scriptures as to having a simple BELIEF. Is faith a belief....certainly it is. The issue however centers on the kind of faith that is propagated in the Holy Scriptures. Faith (Biblical) itself is referenced as a reasoned judgment that something is true, based upon the evidence provided. If one declares....I think it might rain tomorrow...that is an example of a weak faith. This is nothing but an opinion that is held in the hope that it might be true. If on the other hand....I am charged with proving someones guilt or innocence in a court of law and I say, "I believe the guilty verdict in this criminal trial was fair and just", this is a faith that is STRONG because I was able to produce evidence that proved beyond a reasonable doubt the guilt of this individual. This happens every day in the court rooms across America...its called Prima Facie evidence....as such truth is established often not on empirical evidence but the PRESUMPTION of truth offered by key witnesses....If the defendant is not able to DEBUNK that PRIMA FACIE testimony with evidence of his own that sheds DOUBT on the credibility of that witness...then the testimony stands as TRUE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. There are people sitting on death row as we speak that have been convicted solely on the prima facie evidence of EYE WITNESS testimony...as the jury has believed (or had faith in the witness testimony...beyond any doubt) the prosecutor.

Strange indeed is the fact that in relation to Christianity.....this process is inverted, and those that accuse the Scriptures of being false.....DEMAND that anyone that accepts the eyewitness testament of those professing to the majesty of the Christ ( 2 Peter 1:16)....must PROVE those testaments of witness to be true....THE NEGATIVE to something not personally witnessed but simply accepted as truth. Thus...the secular world inverts the process of fairness (innocent until proven guilty) into a STRAW position and demand upon those that do not even claim to have witnessed anything....2000 years after the fact....TO PROVE another persons statement as being truth. When it is the PROSECUTOR, or the one that brings the NEGATIVE charge of perjury.....that must DEBUNK those statements with PROOF...either through empirical physical evidence....or the establishment of PRIMA FACIE presumption of guilt....BEYOND a REASONABLE DOUBT. And that is exactly what we are witnessing in this thread......having the accused..in a most NEGATIVE and STRAW fashion....prove the charges brought by those that negatively attempt to PROSECUTE....without any EVIDENCE of their own.

AMUSING...no?

 

[elvis]

YouTube - Ayn Rand - Faith vs Reason

"You are never called to prove a negative."

where's Nathaniel Brandon?

 

[elvis]

Why do we care what Ayn Rand said on this subject?

Atlas shrugs.

 

[frazzledgear]

Why do we care what Ayn Rand said on this subject?

It is important for the atheists here to understand their roots, just as the Christians here ought not to be ignorant of Judaism.

Ayn Rand herself is not the root cause of atheism. Her atheism merely reflected her upbringing under a particular oppressive regime -one that as part of its own Marxist roots, deliberately tried to quash all religious belief. It did so not only by using public ridicule but nonstop indoctrination and condemnation of religions and religious beliefs as part of their government run educational system. As well as closing and destroying houses of worship in the hopes that doing so would lead to the death of the religion itself. It isn't as if trying to force a population to have a particular set of beliefs and non-beliefs has never happened anywhere else in history before the Soviets. Communists have just made no secret of wanting people to replace faith in Almighty God with a mindless faith in a godless government run by a bunch of faceless, corrupt and error prone strangers who don't give a crap about anyone under a system that insists people exist only for the benefit of government itself which demeans the life of everyone. All because those who consider themselves the "elite" believe it is not only possible to program all people to all hold the same government-approved identical beliefs and opinions so they can all exist as fungible cogs in the greater wheel of government -but that they SHOULD be. The repeated attempts to do so has only produced nothing but massive injustices, horror and mass murder. Which has proven without a doubt that communism is fit only for an ant colony. But never for human beings.

Obviously Rand, in spite of despising the communist system and all it stood for, never shed the atheistic trappings that system made sure she was exposed to at every stage of her upbringing. An irony that totally escaped her notice apparently -while the other truly horrific injustices perpetrated and produced by that system did not. LOL So they were successful in producing an atheist. One who despised her own government so much she left but whose writings from then on reflected her neverending hatred of the system that raised her. The Soviets were unsuccessful in destroying all religions and religious belief in their country in spite of spending their 70 years of existence trying to do so. As happens in ANY nation where an attempt is made to destroy a particular religion or suppress a particular or all religious beliefs -it is simply driven underground. Only to re-emerge again when the political climate improves.

 

[Avatar4321]

I think it says much that the same arguments have been forwarded for centuries and theists still ignore them,.

As I watch the video, most of what she is saying is what I would call a 'standard' collection of responses one expects from a reasoning atheist.

They were flawed then, they are flawed now. Time doesnt make an argument better.

 

[Avatar4321]

atheisim is an ideology.....one could argue it also meets the definition of a religion....

Only if one were a retard with no understanding of what the words mean.

Unfortunately, people are retarted with no understanding of what the word means:

Religion
1 a: the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

It's easily arguable that athiesm is a person set of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices.

It's also easily arguable that Athiesm is a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held with ardor and faith.

 

[JBeukema]

It's easily arguable that athiesm is a person set of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices.

No, it's not. Atheism is, by definition, nothing more than a lack of a certain belief or a non-belief in a certain thing.

It's also easily arguable that Athiesm is a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held with ardor and faith.

No, it is not. Evidently, you are the retard in question who does not know what the words mean.

 

[G.T.]

Ayn Rand was just another creative person in the sesspool of the world of creators.

The only reason she has any fans or haters: she was a bitch.

 

[JBeukema]

Just who said FAITH is void of reason....

Faith, is, by definition, belief without evidence. That is contrary to reason and logic,

as demonstrated, Christian faith established by the revelation found in the Holy Scriptures is certainly not void of reason

Yes, it is, as the scriptures cannot be demonstrated to be an infallible source of ultimate truth- even Christians don't see it as such a thing.

Christian faith is found to be established based upon what can be DEMONSTRATED AS TRUTH.

Then why is it you can never demonstrate that any of your assertions have any evidence?

Biblical faith is not having a belief in something that is not supported by reason and logic...or as some humanistic seculars declare....a belief in something not supported facts, or an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable

That's exactly what it is.

.

Even some dictionaries define FAITH as believing in something that is not true...or a belief without proof

That's because that's what faith is. If thre is evidence, then uit's no longer a matter of faith, but of a conclusion basedon evidence. of course, this is why the bible stresses the value of faith, as there is no evidence and none has been or will be forthcoming.

(personally I will leave that one up the Darwinian Cultist

Once again, we see that theists are inherently liars. There's no such thing as 'Darwinism' and the term dies in his lifetime. Only lying theists like you ever use such a term,.

that propagates Common Descent from DEAD MATTER

Darwin never addressed such a thing, you twit. See the above.

and an unprovable belief in a self creating universe...

Nobody but lying theists like you ever said the universe created itself

that created itself from nothing,

Nobody but lying theists like you ever said such a thing

To even admit that Christianity is only probable and unprovable is to admit the possibility that it is a hoax.

'Probable' s not an applicable term

There is not one single passage that suggests the revelation that our very soul depends upon is only PROBABLY true. In each case...reasoned and logical evidence is provided for the things presented as A TRUTH COMING FROM GOD.

Not really. Al we read about are guys hallucinating from breaathing the smoke of a burning plant, waging genocide, or 'talking to god' when nobody else is around.

I

. Faith (Biblical) itself is referenced as a reasoned judgment that something is true, based upon the evidence provided.

Thus...the secular world inverts the process of fairness (innocent until proven guilty)

That's a matter of law and has no relevancy, you fool

into a STRAW position

Wrong, by definition

and demand upon those that do not even claim to have witnessed anything....2000 years after the fact....TO PROVE another persons statement as being truth.

If you hold that the statement is true, then the BoP is on you, whether you first said it or not. Funny how you make this idiotic assertion, yet you demand evidence of those who accept the conclusions of others based on reason and scientific inquiry. Evidently, the irony is lost on you.

When it is the PROSECUTOR, or the one that brings the NEGATIVE charge of perjury.....that must DEBUNK those statements with PROOF...

Clearly, the fundamentals of logic escape you. He who states the positive bears the burden of proof- just like it's the prosecutor who must prove positively that the defendant committed a crime. Your own example is self-refuting, fallacious, and demonstrative of your utter stupidity.

AMUSING...no?

Insomuch as your utter stupidity may be considered comical.

 

[Fatality]

YouTube - Ayn Rand - Faith vs Reason

"You are never called to prove a negative."

a well ordered universe is not a negative

 

[Fatality]

Faith, is, by definition, belief without evidence. That is contrary to reason and logic,

by your definition you mean.

the Biblical definition is:

action based on belief sustained by confidence

 

[JBeukema]

Faith, is, by definition, belief without evidence. That is contrary to reason and logic,

by your definition you mean.

\

the Biblical definition is:

action based on belief sustained by confidence

feel free to cite the verse in which your definition appears

interesting thaqt it still makes no mention of evidence or reason...

 

[eagleseven]

Faith, is, by definition, belief without evidence. That is contrary to reason and logic,

by your definition you mean.

the Biblical definition is:

action based on belief sustained by confidence

Actually, that's Charity. You know the three virtues; Faith, Hope, and Charity?

Faith is maintaining belief sans proof.

 

[sidneyworld]

Why do we care what Ayn Rand said on this subject?

It is important for the atheists here to understand their roots, just as the Christians here ought not to be ignorant of Judaism.

You know, Eagle, you're growing on me. But you really need to stop generalizing with idle supposition. I have a great deal of respect for Judaism. Just because one focuses their discussion on one thing, does not necessarily qualify ignorance in anything else.

Anne Marie

 

[eagleseven]

Why do we care what Ayn Rand said on this subject?

It is important for the atheists here to understand their roots, just as the Christians here ought not to be ignorant of Judaism.

You know, Eagle, you're growing on me. But you really need to stop generalizing with idle supposition. I have a great deal of respect for Judaism. Just because one focuses their discussion on one thing, does not necessarily qualify ignorance in anything else.

Anne Marie

My extolling virtue is not a declaration of my audience's vice.

Are you projecting your own feelings of inadequacy onto my text?