Kimmler Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 "How should we act towards others with poor conceptual habits? How should one act towards others who consistently refuse to use some concepts properly? For example, those who call margarine "butter" despite the drastic difference in their chemical makeup. "10/10 for the question...but how would you answer it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 "How should we act towards others with poor conceptual habits? How should one act towards others who consistently refuse to use some concepts properly? For example, those who call margarine "butter" despite the drastic difference in their chemical makeup. "10/10 for the question...but how would you answer it?The first step would be to try to discover if Ayn Rand had anything to say on the subject, or if we have any evidence or testimony (from people who are known not to be "false friends" or "enemies" of Objectivism) that she, at any point in her life, referred to margarine as butter.If it turns out that she made a specific judgment of people who call margarine butter, then that judgment is the Final Total Universal Rational Truth For All Time, Period.If she didn't specifically comment on the issue, but had called margarine butter during her life, then her doing so was a daringly individualistic and highly original feat (much like using "selfishness" or "sacrifice" to mean something quite different from what most people mean), and therefore it's probably okay for us to do so too (but perhaps not: it might be that only purely rational geniuses are allowed to call margarine butter -- it would be wise to check with Peikoff to make sure).If Rand neither commented on the issue nor left evidence of having called margarine butter, then we should be at least suspicious of the epistemology of those who do, until Peikoff instructs us not to be suspicious, if he chooses to instruct us.J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 "How should we act towards others with poor conceptual habits? How should one act towards others who consistently refuse to use some concepts properly? For example, those who call margarine "butter" despite the drastic difference in their chemical makeup. "10/10 for the question...but how would you answer it?"They seek him here, they seek him there", but no-one knows where the Scarlet Pimple will pop up next...Kimmler, has your controller awoken you from sleeper mode?Or do you get a kick out of taking on juvenile 'true believers'?Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 "How should we act towards others with poor conceptual habits? How should one act towards others who consistently refuse to use some concepts properly? For example, those who call margarine "butter" despite the drastic difference in their chemical makeup. "10/10 for the question...but how would you answer it?]"They seek him here, they seek him there", but no-one knows where the Scarlet Pimple will pop up next...Kimmler, has your controller awoken you from sleeper mode?Or do you get a kick out of taking on juvenile 'true believers'?The Butter-Margarine question was effectively settled in 1958 by Mrs Marlene Matheson, as most reasonably-informed scholars of the issue should know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xray Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 (edited) "How should we act towards others with poor conceptual habits? How should one act towards others who consistently refuse to use some concepts properly? For example, those who call margarine "butter" despite the drastic difference in their chemical makeup. "10/10 for the question...but how would you answer it?First, I would ask myself whether it hinders the communication process in case someone wrongly calls margarine on the breakfast table "butter". Since there is no problem in understanding what the person means when he/she says "Could you please pass me the butter", [even when it is margarine], I would not correct the person at all. Linguistically speaking, one could explain a person's use of the term "butter" to refer to non-buttery fatty spreads too as a semantic extension of the term "butter" where it becomes a kind of "hypernym", a general term for all kinds of fatty spreads optically resmembling it. In case the person would call the margarine on the table "bicycle" though, the communication process woud be severely impaired to the point of breaking down completely. But then, native speakers who would make such extreme mistakes in everyday communication are probably only to be found in psychiatric wards or suffer from severe dementia. Imo the so-called "anti-conceptual" mentality does not exist. For in the overwhelming number of cases, human individuals correctly use the concepts created by their languages. Edited January 13, 2011 by Xray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Kimmler,Here's an answer I think you are looking for. Bleeding Heart: How should Objectivists act towards others with poor conceptual habits?Hard Heart: Take their money.There. Is that more like it?Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 "How should we act towards others with poor conceptual habits? How should one act towards others who consistently refuse to use some concepts properly? For example, those who call margarine "butter" despite the drastic difference in their chemical makeup. "Kimmler, has your controller awoken you from sleeper mode?Or do you get a kick out of taking on juvenile 'true believers'?Tony, the question is a real one posted for consideration by Diana Hsieh's Rationally Selfish podcast kingdom. Using a survey widget, Diana is able to poll her listeners to see what concerns them in the realm of ethics. So far the question has received thirteen votes, which means it might appear on one of her podcasts. See here for the question, and here for the vote tallies on prospective questions.Certainly Kimmler is trying to find wacky things, and trying to associate Objectivishism with kook nuts. But the questions do show a weird penchant to ask ethical questions using over the top hypotheticals. I suggest we pharyngulize that poll so Diana might answer it on her grim and righteous weekly podcast.But I think she can see that its a stupid question, or rather a deeply flawed formulation of an interesting ethical question that haunts a certain kind of Objectivish obsessive: what to do with people who make mistakes . . . Here are a few of the other questions:How can I judge people more efficiently?Are tattoos or piercings irrational?Why are some people such jerks on the internet?Is it always wrong to seek popularity?Should people call their parents-in-law "Mom" and "Dad"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 "How should we act towards others with poor conceptual habits? How should one act towards others who consistently refuse to use some concepts properly? For example, those who call margarine "butter" despite the drastic difference in their chemical makeup. "Kimmler, has your controller awoken you from sleeper mode?Or do you get a kick out of taking on juvenile 'true believers'?Tony, the question is a real one posted for consideration by Diana Hsieh's Rationally Selfish podcast kingdom. Using a survey widget, Diana is able to poll her listeners to see what concerns them in the realm of ethics. So far the question has received thirteen votes, which means it might appear on one of her podcasts. See here for the question, and here for the vote tallies on prospective questions.Certainly Kimmler is trying to find wacky things, and trying to associate Objectivishism with kook nuts. But the questions do show a weird penchant to ask ethical questions using over the top hypotheticals. I suggest we pharyngulize that poll so Diana might answer it on her grim and righteous weekly podcast.But I think she can see that its a stupid question, or rather a deeply flawed formulation of an interesting ethical question that haunts a certain kind of Objectivish obsessive: what to do with people who make mistakes . . . Here are a few of the other questions:How can I judge people more efficiently?Are tattoos or piercings irrational?Why are some people such jerks on the internet?Is it always wrong to seek popularity?Should people call their parents-in-law "Mom" and "Dad"?No "what's the right way to hang the toilet paper?" question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reidy Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I would ignore his confusion and continue to serve him margarine, which is cheaper, keeping the butter for myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I would ignore his confusion and continue to serve him margarine, which is cheaper, keeping the butter for myself.This leads to the related issue of the cheaperness of the margarine, which often bedevilled my Canadian youth. Is it of more value to purchase the American margarine, and smuggle it across the border, factoring in the cost of gas,aand smuggling it across the border with the associate remote but not impossible risk of having to pay the duty on said margarine, or to buy the local butter? Should the individual rights of a family member who declares he will starve to death rather than eat the margarine, outweigh the rights of the parents to rationally purchase the spread of their choice, or the sibling who has logically concluded that his brother should just go ahead and starve?I fear a can of worms sautees could be opened up here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I think that we first need to know whether Ayn saw Last Tango in Paris and then ascertain what Marlon Brando reached in the refrigerator for... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I think that we first need to know whether Ayn saw Last Tango in Paris and then ascertain what Marlon Brando reached in the refrigerator for...Brando Butter! Yes! MSK, this could be a great tie-in somewhere for your internet marketing! Negotiating the intellectual property with Comrade Sonia could be tricky, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 How about Rando Brando Butter?Or Ayn-o-Marlon Margarine?Two superb scrumptious salubrious super spreads!Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 How about Rando Brando Butter?Or Ayn-o-Marlon Margarine?Two superb scrumptious salubrious super spreads!MichaelGeneric brand-- Brandenbutter-- oh dearie me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Engle Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 What about ghee? You don't refrigerate it, for one thing. But it comes from a (sacred) cow and is used much the same way. And, is ghee Evil<tm> because it can be associated with Hindu spirituality? rdeIf you think it's butter, but it's snot. . .it's a KimmlerPost<tm>. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 If you think it's butter, but it's snot. . .it's a KimmlerPost<tm>.Thanks buddy. That nearly made me whoops my cookies.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 ]Tony, the question is a real one posted for consideration by Diana Hsieh's Rationally Selfish podcast kingdom. Using a survey widget, Diana is able to poll her listeners to see what concerns them in the realm of ethics. So far the question has received thirteen votes, which means it might appear on one of her podcasts. Oh, O.K. - thanks. I really should get out more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimmler Posted January 17, 2011 Author Share Posted January 17, 2011 If you think it's butter, but it's snot. . .it's a KimmlerPost<tm>.Thanks buddy. That nearly made me whoops my cookies.Ba'al Chatzaf...and on that bombshell... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now