trc@houti.UUCP (07/08/83)
Response to Larry Kolodney on altruism: Altruism is not innate in the sense of being instinctual - no morality is. Nor is altruism innate in the nature of humans. It *might* be true that an altruistic instinct, combined with normal survival instincts, in might be useful for the survival of a species. That doesnt mean that humans have such an instinct. I explain the fact that "most people find objectivism repugnant" by simply stating that most people havent heard of it, most of those that have do not take the time to understand it (and it does require some mental effort), and that even those that start to understand it may reject it on the basis that it would require that they give up a lot of false but comfortable ideas. I certainly do not attribute it to some instinctual response on their part! I suspect you are right that engineering types make up a large portion of the objectivist ranks, and for pretty much the reasons you have stated. But I do not find anything objectionable in putting a large emphasis on the value of thought - its value has been run down too much of late. I do not agree that Objectivists tend to ignore the human spirit - but then I may have a different definition of "spirit" than you. Do you define spirit as something supernatural and/or ineffable, and as divorced from the body, and not part of the human mind? I would not normally reply to as blatant an insult as your closing remark. In fact, I wont address the (small) content of the insult. I will merely point out that character assassination is generally a tool of those who cannot find any rational arguments to support their position. If you want to argue - fine. If you just want to sling mud, please do it elsewhere. Tom Craver houti!trc