All of it matters. What you think matters. What you feel matters. What you do matters.

What if your thoughts and intentions are good but you don’t act on them? You commit an evil by not taking action, you sin by omission.

What if your thoughts are evil but you do good? You’re in danger of eventually doing evil. Good and evil begin with thoughts.

The right thing done the wrong way becomes the wrong thing.

Your convictions can be right, but the crowd’s convictions can be wrong. But the reverse can be true, your convictions can be wrong, and the crowd’s convictions can be right.

Being human isn’t automatic Being virtuous isn’t automatic. Being rational isn’t automatic.

The ultimate cultist…….

Indeed. When I think of “cult follower,” I think of THX.

I just Kant Kope with all of this meaningless obtuse material.

What a crashing bore you are. TLDR again.

End Pt4 Thank God.

No idea what any of this gibberish means. And I don’t care. TLDR.

Just what I need….

Rand’s purpose of a definition. Can you imagine what life would be like if I sat around trying to define the purpose of a definition.

Must be a slow day on your block. So very special……..

End Pt3

If you could only think for yourself. Instead you rely on the recycled prattlings of a dead woman and near dead living corpse. You couldn’t find an original thought with two hands and a flashlight.

End of Pt2. TLDR.

Wow, a useless lecture on fixing our cultural “meltdown” Do you really think anyone gives a crap on what Lenny Phuck-off or you think?

Anyway, TLDR. But I did get to crack open a beer because you mentioned your big bug-a-boo, Christianity.

You are such a puffed up crashing bore. I’d rather be a brute. No wonder she won’t date you, Mr. Wimpy.

Kantian philosophy also led to Hegel who led to Karl Marx, who led to Hitler and Stalin.

“No, Kant did not destroy reason; he merely did as thorough a job of undercutting as anyone could ever do.

If you trace the roots of all our current philosophies—such as pragmatism, logical positivism, and all the rest of the neo-mystics who announce happily that you cannot prove that you exist—you will find that they all grew out of Kant.” – Ayn Rand

“One of Kant’s major goals was to save religion (including the essence of religious morality) from the onslaughts of science. His system represents a massive effort to raise the principles of Platonism, in a somewhat altered form, once again to a position of commanding authority over Western culture….

Plato was more than a Platonist; despite his mysticism, he was also a pagan Greek. As such he exhibited a certain authentic respect for reason, a respect which was implicit in Greek philosophy no matter how explicitly irrational it became. The Kantian mysticism, however, suffers from no such pagan restraints. It flows forth triumphantly, sweeping the prostrate human mind before it. Since man can never escape the distorting agents inherent in the structure of his consciousness, says Kant, “things in themselves” are in principle unknowable. Reason is impotent to discover anything about reality; if it tries, it can only bog down in impenetrable contradictions. Logic is merely a subjective human device, devoid of reference to or basis in reality. Science, while useful as a means of ordering the data of the world of appearances, is limited to describing a surface world of man’s own creation and says nothing about things as they really are.

Must men then resign themselves to a total skepticism? No, says Kant, there is one means of piercing the barrier between man and existence. Since reason, logic, and science are denied access to reality, the door is now open for men to approach reality by a different, nonrational method. The door is now open to faith. Taking their cue from their needs, men can properly believe (for instance, in God and in an afterlife), even though they cannot prove the truth of their belief. . . . “I have,” writes Kant, “therefore found it necessary to deny knowledge, in order to make room for faith.” – Leonard Peikoff

An “anti-concept” is a term, a word, that is designed to obliterate an actual objective concept. “Anti-racism” obliterates the objective concept of individualism — and so does “radical individualism”.

If you want to morally condemn hedonism and nihilism, please do so, but don’t call them “radical individualism”.

The secular Left wishing to obliterate the legitimate concept of individualism uses the anti-concept of anti-racism.

The religious conservatives wishing to obliterate the legitimate concept of individualism are now using the anti-concept of “radical individualism”.

“An anti-concept is an unnecessary and rationally unusable term designed to replace and obliterate some legitimate concept. The use of anti-concepts gives the listeners a sense of approximate understanding. But in the realm of cognition, nothing is as bad as the approximate . . . .

Observe the technique involved . . . . It consists of creating an artificial, unnecessary, and (rationally) unusable term, designed to replace and obliterate some legitimate concepts—a term which sounds like a concept, but stands for a “package-deal” of disparate, incongruous, contradictory elements taken out of any logical conceptual order or context, a “package-deal” whose (approximately) defining characteristic is always a non-essential. This last is the essence of the trick.

Let me remind you that the purpose of a definition is to distinguish the things subsumed under a single concept from all other things in existence; and, therefore, their defining characteristic must always be that essential characteristic which distinguishes them from everything else.

So long as men use language, that is the way they will use it. There is no other way to communicate. And if a man accepts a term with a definition by non-essentials, his mind will substitute for it the essential characteristic of the objects he is trying to designate . . . . Thus the real meaning of the term will automatically replace the alleged meaning….

[Some other terms that Ayn Rand identified as anti-concepts are “consumerism,” “duty,” “ethnicity,” “extremism,” “isolationism,” “McCarthyism,” “meritocracy,” and “simplistic.”] – Ayn Rand