I have written two new books:
Everything is Something
and
The Collected Essays on Logic.
Please buy them! Thanks!
People, critics, often accuse Objectivist philosophy of not engaging with "real" academic philosophy, so these books try to answer that objection, by engaging with some very famous theories from academic philosophy and explaining why Objectivism can refute and replace them.
Hello Readers,
I have gone back to being a vegetarian. This time, not for cost or health reasons, but for ethical reasons. I have previously been of the opinion that animals do not possess consciousness. I am now of the mind that animals do, in fact, have some very limited form of consciousness. In which case, they experience their own deaths, when murdered. So eating meat has lost its enjoyment for me. Alas! But the health benefits for me are icing on the cake--pun intended!
UPDATE: So once again, I could not do completely without meat, but my compromise is that now I am what is known as a "pescetarian": I will only eat vegetables, fruits, grains, dairy, eggs, and fish. Fish and seafood are the only meat I will eat. I don't eat mammals or poultry. This decision, again, is ethical, as fish and seafood have brains that are so primitive that they probably cannot possess self-awareness, although they might be aware of what is in front of them. In contrast, most mammals probably can be self-aware, and maybe some birds too. To be a mammal, which humans are, and to eat mammals, is pretty horrible, honestly, and I say this as someone who did, for the majority of my life.
A Leftist can be at one with Leftism. Or not.
Leftism cannot be at one with itself, because it cannot pay for the cost of what it wants to spend to help the poor.
A Conservative can be at one with Conservatism. Or not.
But Conservatism cannot be at one with itself, because its core virtue is freedom, yet it opposes freedom across a broad range of "social" issues, like abortion and gay marriage and recreational drug use.
An Objectivist can be at one with Objectivism. Or not.
Objectivism can be at one with itself. It has no internal contradictions.
Therefore only an Objectivist at one with Objectivism is perfectly at one, perfectly logical, without contradictions, coherent, with integrity.
So quitting coffee has gone great, went from 5 cups a day down to one or two cups a week. Saving a lot of money.
Being vegetarian did not go so good. It turns out that meat contains protein, which is what makes you feel full after you eat. I ate a lot of broccoli and carrots and bananas and tomatoes and did not feel full. And didn't feel like I was getting all the nutrients I needed, despite eating a ton of vegetables--apparently meat contains actual nutritional value. Who knew? So I'm back to eating meat, but just sparingly--not in every meal.
So I'm blogging... Who blogs anymore, right? I am such an Xenial... (Xenial is the name of the sub-generation between Generation X and the Millennial Generation. So sort of like an older Millennial. I am technically a Millennial but I just made the cut.)
Anyway, so, after spending the last decade drinking 5 cups of coffee a day, I have stopped drinking coffee...
And, after being an omnivore for virtually my entire life, I have decided to become vegetarian. I will eat plants and dairy, but not meat or eggs.
Why? A combination of cost and health. Meat is both unhealthy and economically inefficient, from a point of view of cost as compared to the same nutrition produced from plants.
I had also reached the point with coffee where my body is so desensitized that 5 cups was having no effect... That's a sign it's time to stop!
Having low self-esteem is bad.
Having a small ego is good.
But self-esteem = ego.
Is having a big ego good?
Objectivism is the philosophy of Ayn Rand.
Ayn Rand was human and therefore fallible.
But Objectivism = The Truth.
Truth can't be false, therefore, The Truth is infallible.
Can Objectivism be added to, by someone not named Ayn Rand, if she were wrong about something?
How many different names for the elements of logical syntax can the philosophy professors define?
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?
The philosophy professors don't take Ayn Rand seriously.
Ayn Rand is a plausible interpretation of Aristotle.
Aristotle and Plato are the foundation of (Western) philosophy, and that is a historical fact.
Therefore the philosophy professors don't take philosophy seriously.
More new books.
Some people podcast.
Some people write email newsletters.
But I write books.
I just enjoy it more.
Please check out my newest works!
I took it upon myself to read the Critique of Pure Reason. That lasted a few days, before I couldn't pick it up anymore. But I will say this: say what you want about Immanuel Kant, he was a great enemy of Objectivism, but he was also a great writer. He takes the fact that his theory is so absurdly crazy that there literally are no real-world examples of his ideas, and turns that to his advantage: "I sacrificed examples in the interests of clarity," is basically what he says, but he says it so much more elegantly. He says "this is the last work there needs to be in philosophy, ever, this answers every question, and you have no choice but to agree with me, you must agree with everything I say," then, in the next sentence, obviates any anger the reader might feel at being talked to with such arrogance, by saying that any previous philosopher, who put forward any theory of the soul or reason, was actually being far more arrogant than Kant--which is obviously not true, but the quality of Kant's prose form was so good that he makes the reader feel as if it was true. I think Kant's staying power in philosophy, at 300+ years and counting, owes more to how good of a writer he was, and far less to the quality of his philosophy.
Hello Readers,
I have created a dedicated email account for reader fan mail:
author.russell.hasan@outlook.com
I promise to look at this inbox and reply on a fairly regular basis. If you don't hear from me within two to four weeks, feel free to resend your letter.
I've also recently published some new books, you can find them here: Russell Hasan on Amazon