This show consisted of a discussion between Mosley, Arthur, and a new caller. They talked about many of the points from last show from different points of view. Some of the topics include the enforcement of contracts, libertarianism, and the gold standard, just to name a few.
Also, Paul Hsieh of NoodleFood Blog sent us a well-written email with commentary on the last show, whose points Mosley read and discussed on the show as well. Below is the email in its entirety.
Dear Jason,
I hadn’t heard of TalkObjectivism.com until recently, but I decided to listen to your Memorial Weekend podcast (show 061) today. First, I’d like to thank you and your co-hosts Brandon and Arthur for creating another venue for interested, active-minded people to discuss Objectivism.
I’d also like to make a few comments in response to some points that were raised during your discussion with Charles the Libertarian. I hope you’ll accept these in the spirit of constructive criticism. You are free to share this to your co-hosts or to anyone else that might be interested. (I was also going to CC this to Arthur and Brandon, but I didn’t see their e-mail addresses on the website.) You may also read any of this on the air or post it to your blog if you think it would be beneficial.
I’d like to touch on three topics:
Continue reading ‘Follow-Up on Show 061 (Show 062)’
Even though Arthur and myself were not able to make the show due to conflicting events during this Memorial Day weekend, Mosley persevered and hosted the show.
For the first half of the show, Mosley selected some topics to discuss from the wonderful NoodleFood blog that he found to be particularly interesting or exceptionally unnerving. These came from the following posts: To Hell with Economics, Creationist Science Teachers, Animals Breaking the Law, & Why the New Atheists Can’t Even Beat D’Souza.
He also discussed public-funded art, which is art paid for with tax money, and how this is wrong, citing a display he recently saw: a giant bronzed sculpture of a close-pin. This led to a discussion on taxes, more specifically, the Fair Tax Act and how it is not a solution to our tax problems.
Then, for the second half of the show, Charles, the once vice-chair of the Libertarian Party of Oregon, called in to express his views on capitalism and the enforcement of contracts which he debated with Mosley, and will continue to debate next week. Hope to see you there!
For Show 060, Mosley and Arthur discuss how best to bring Objectivism into the culture and ways that this is currently being done.
In order to influence the culture, one important factor is changing the academia. Presenting Ayn Rand’s ideas in schools is a great way to get young minds to start thinking about philosophy from a perspective that they might not otherwise consider because of the ideas that they have passively accepted. The Ayn Rand Institute influences the academia through various programs such as offering free classroom sets of Ayn Rand’s novels, holding essay contests on those novels, organizing campus clubs, providing talks, etc. (This is a non-exhaustive list.) Also, the Institute runs The Objectivist Academic Center which provides classes that systematically present the philosophy of Objectivism to help train the academics of the future. If you are a student and wish to help change the schools, some things you can do are: try to convince teachers to participate in the free books/essay contest program, start a campus club, and request The Undercurrent for your school.
Another way that the culture can be affected is through the media, bringing Ayn Rand’s ideas to audiences that may not have otherwise heard of them. ARI intellectuals frequently appear on television and radio spots (such as Yaron Brook on the Fox Business Network), release op-eds, and submit letters to the editor. Writing letters to the editor is a great way that anyone can promote Objectivism.
There’s also something else that everyone can (and should) do: live Objectivism. People need to see the unity between theory and practice, so it helps to lead by example. Besides this, there are all sorts of activism by which one can contribute. Diana Hsieh has created a website for Objectivist activism, OList that is worth checking out if you’re interested.
For details on what Ayn Rand had to say on this topic of influencing the culture, see the essay “What Can One Do?” in Philosophy: Who Needs It.
The show ended with a great discussion on the use of the words “selfishness” and “greed” and whether they help or hurt the cause for Objectivism.
We hope to see you next week! (We’re working on a scheduling a debate.)
This show was a short one that basically recapped a previous show on “the common good” (Show 055), focusing on the comments made here on the blog by iheartcells (Beth) and Brandon (myself).
Mosley started the show by reintroducing the topic with a brief summary of what Ayn Rand had to say on the issue and then explaining his own views. He proceeded by reading Beth’s critique of our previous discussion and then letting me read my rebuttal.
We may give a brief closing mention of this topic on next week’s show and then move on to something new. If you have any topic ideas, please let us know!
Show 058 is a follow-up to last week’s show on children’s rights. This time around Arthur gives us his two cents on the topic. He starts the discussion by going to the heart of the issue, the basis of rights, and identifying the facts of reality that give rise to them. In order to prevent any rationalistic view of rights (the idea that rights exist as some kind of other-worldly entity/Platonic form), he examines and makes the context clear.
After a thorough and thought-provoking analysis, Arthur considers how children rights differ from those of adults. He discusses how children are dependent on their parents to survive since their rational faculty is not fully developed, and what implications this has for rights. Acknowledging that the fine details are not for philosophy to answer (but rather the philosophy of law), he gave his general views as to what rights children have and how the law should protect them.
This was an excellent and entertaining show, so I hope you check it out. If you have any comments, feel free to post here or join us next week on TalkShoe.
Also, I just wanted to note that there is now a talkObjectivism facebook group. If you like the show, join up!
Spinning off from a comment about “the common good,” Mosley discusses children’s rights and to what extent they have them. He walks through various questions about the topic such as:
- What does a parent owe his or her child?
- Does a child have the right run his or her own life contrary to parents’ wishes?
- At what point does a child become an adult?
- Does a child have the right to an education?
- What constitutes neglect (by a parent)?
Check out the show for Mosley’s views and feel free to leave a comment or join the next show if you have some views that you’d like to share!
Because today is 4/20, commonly known as “Weed Day” (among other things), this show was about drugs, alcohol & addiction. It began as Arthur read a quote from Dr. Peikoff’s Q & A about the issue of smoking and drinking explaining how the morality of its use is dependent on the context (see the Q & A/show for details). After discussing that, Mosley and Arthur proceeded to discuss a topic not directly mentioned in Peikoff’s Q & A, illegal drugs.
Then, for a good portion of the show, there was a discussion about drug addiction and its relation to free will. It was concluded that although one may experience compulsions, withdrawal symptoms, etc., anything that requires the use of concepts is necessarily volitional. For example, a drug addict may become biologically dependent on a drug, but he could willfully ignore this necessity, should he choose to.
And since 4/22 is near, a day conventionally known as Earth Day, Mosley decided to end the show with a mention of a new holiday invented to contrast with the environmentalists’ celebration: Exploit the Earth Day. The premise behind it? “Exploit the Earth or Die™. It’s not a threat. It’s a fact. Either man takes the Earth’s raw materials—such as trees, petroleum, aluminum, and atoms—and transforms them into the requirements of his life, or he dies.”
On this show Mosley discusses three interrelated topics: the common good/public interest and mixed economies. To set the context for the discussion, he reads some relevant quotes from the Ayn Rand Lexicon.
The Common Good & The Public Interest:
“The common good” (or “the public interest”) is an undefined and undefinable concept: there is no such entity as “the tribe” or “the public”; the tribe (or the public or society) is only a number of individual men. Nothing can be good for the tribe as such; “good” and “value” pertain only to a living organism—to an individual living organism—not to a disembodied aggregate of relationships.
Mixed Economy
We are not a capitalist system any longer: we are a mixed economy, i.e., a mixture of capitalism and statism, of freedom and controls. A mixed economy is a country in the process of disintegration, a civil war of pressure-groups looting and devouring one another.
Mosley then proceeds to the discussion the manifestations of these issues in the world today. Check it out!
Hello all, sorry for the delay in show notes. I was away for Spring Break this past week, but I’m back and so are the notes.
The Open Mind vs. The Active Mind (Show 053)
Mosley and Arthur discuss the term the expression “having an open mind” and what it actually means. They argue that having an “open mind” is not being open to reason, but disregarding it. It consists of granting equal plausibility to any claim, regardless of any knowledge that one may have that contradicts it. And so, they conclude, one should not have an “open mind” but rather an active mind. Their view corresponds with Ayn Rand’s position.
Corporate Responsibility/States’ Rights (Show 054)
Show 054 consisted of an excellent discussion of two topics suggested by a listener. The first topic dealt with how responsibility should fall on, and how justice should be served amongst, a corporation. The second topic dealt with states’ rights. I won’t try to rehash the arguments here. It was a great show and I highly recommend it.
For this show, Mosley and Arthur responded to some of the listener questions and comments.
The first was a question posted on the website asking, “Speaking of capitalism, where are the Google ads?” Mosley explained that he does not use them on talkObjectivism because he would have little to no control over what would appear and does not wish to advertise for sites antithetical to Objectivism.
The second comment was from a listener who kindly inquired about Show 013 which seems to have been mysteriously replaced by another show, from another TalkCast, that is extremely vulgar. Mosley has contacted TalkShoe and is currently working to restore the original show.
For the remainder of the show, Mosley and Arthur discussed a post on talkObjectivism.com regarding Show 049. The essence of the post is contained in his statement saying, “I don’t know how you guys came to the conclusion that the Left would do less damage to Objectivism.” Mosley and Arthur do an excellent job of outlining the points why the Republicans are far more dangerous to Objectivist ideals in the long-run than the Democrats. For anyone still unclear about this, I would also highly recommend listening to Show 049 and reading Diana Hsieh’s post on the matter.
