I am thinking I should add that however much you don't like the social contract of your society, you are a part of it and beholden to it. You're welcome to complain about it (now that we've invented free speech as a part of the social contract) and welcome to try to change it (now that we've invente...

Mr. A, a primary point that you seem to be missing is that the reason the money you earn is all yours, by right, is because of the social contract that makes that construction possible. Since this whole diversion seems to have arisen around "what claim does anyone else have on your property?&qu...

To wit, one could imagine the following scenario in the rampantly individualist Objectivist dystopia: A: "This is my property; you have no right to it or claim upon it. Please leave." B: "Says who?" A: "Says me, that's who." B: "Why should I care what you say? Who ...

Because those people hold no claim on anothers property. . This is technically incorrect as it is the government, which is an extension of the people that form it (at least in democratic societies like our own) that establish and secure property rights. Property rights do not exist in nature and ar...

For what it's worth, I make rather a lot of comments about Objectivism (though often under the broader banner in which it is contained: capital-L ideological Libertarianism) on my blog in a variety of the posts. If desired, I could post links to some of them, but I won't spam with those unless peopl...

Absolutely. I chose to use the word "faith" in the above to echo the language given to me, but in the future now I'll be likely to pause to clarify the language and then use the more accurate term "confidence." Definitely appreciated!

Yes Johnson, I agree. The word "faith" is difficult to use accurately, and I did use the word "faith" to mean "confidence" earlier in the thread. Thanks for sharing that; it is helpful.

I should add a brief addendum to the idea of "Christological philosophies," were those to be developed in place of religions like Christianity now. Why Christological? Why not Zarathustran? Why not Herculean? Why not Harry-Potteran? Why not Eldaran? Why does this particular historical/lege...

Cheers, Robert. I have a lot of agreement with you, though maybe not total agreement, that the foundations of many religious ideas are in metaphors. It is my expectation (particularly after reading John W. Loftus and E.P. Sanders) that there is more there than mere metaphor, especially given how ove...

Those are very, um, odd questions, I think, Ant. I'll do what I can with them, though. "How has this made you a better person?" I'm not at all sure what this question has to do with anything. We might, for instance, wonder how developing his very useful diagrams made Richard Feynman a bett...