My kids have been playing violent video games for years, just like I played violent video games when I was a kid. They also have their own iPod's and PDA's, so they are no stranger to technology.
What's so odd is that they haven't once gotten into a fight, they help spiders to get outside alive, and are quite helpful around the house. They get straight A's in the gifted and talented program at their school, get invited to birthday parties, and can speak to adults quite well. In short, they are happy, well-liked kids.
The reason of course is that their mother and I spend a whole lot of time making sure they understand the difference between fantasy and reality, and we don't let them play games or watch TV unless we know about it and approve.
All the things you mentioned may be right for your family, so I'm in no way judging you. However, the simple truth is that only consistent, authoritative, parental(or other guardian) involvement will result in a healthy and happy person.
Well said, and if I may say so, more coherent then your original post. I was a pretty heavy "Randite(?)" for many years, before moving on. I still consider much of what she had to say valid, just incomplete. I feel the same way about Christianity: has a lot of things right, and whole lot wrong.:)
Oddly enough, I've read quite a bit of Rand and I don't see any of what you are describing. Rand's core point is that you should never give up more then you gain. She never says don't help people, only that if you do so in way that results in you feeling badly or cheated, then you aren't doing anyone a service. Ultimately, we all make decisions based on our values, which can vary from person to person. Based on Rand assertions, giving money to the homeless for one person could be a virtous act, but for someone else, that same act could be immoral because they do it out of guilt or fear.
You say "Helping is Hurting, Charity is Theft, a Hand Up is a Slap in the Face, Sharing is Selfish, Only Egotism is True Loving Compassion." I could be mistaken, but I don't recall ever hearing that in any of Rand's writings. In Atlas Shrugged, the main protaganists do a great deal of sharing, helping, and so on. In fact, they go to tremendous lengths, even risking their lives, in order to help others.
As you say, there are many reasons to help people. However, if you consider every good deed you have ever done, wouldn't you say you have gained something from it? Even it was just a good feeling? In fact, I woud suggest that you have done many things that have helped others but hurt yourself, and that you don't remember them as good deeds.
Slashdot Mirror
My kids have been playing violent video games for years, just like I played violent video games when I was a kid. They also have their own iPod's and PDA's, so they are no stranger to technology. What's so odd is that they haven't once gotten into a fight, they help spiders to get outside alive, and are quite helpful around the house. They get straight A's in the gifted and talented program at their school, get invited to birthday parties, and can speak to adults quite well. In short, they are happy, well-liked kids. The reason of course is that their mother and I spend a whole lot of time making sure they understand the difference between fantasy and reality, and we don't let them play games or watch TV unless we know about it and approve. All the things you mentioned may be right for your family, so I'm in no way judging you. However, the simple truth is that only consistent, authoritative, parental(or other guardian) involvement will result in a healthy and happy person.
Well said, and if I may say so, more coherent then your original post. I was a pretty heavy "Randite(?)" for many years, before moving on. I still consider much of what she had to say valid, just incomplete. I feel the same way about Christianity: has a lot of things right, and whole lot wrong. :)
Would you take an action independent of your feelings about it? Do you believe that is actually possible?
Oddly enough, I've read quite a bit of Rand and I don't see any of what you are describing. Rand's core point is that you should never give up more then you gain. She never says don't help people, only that if you do so in way that results in you feeling badly or cheated, then you aren't doing anyone a service. Ultimately, we all make decisions based on our values, which can vary from person to person. Based on Rand assertions, giving money to the homeless for one person could be a virtous act, but for someone else, that same act could be immoral because they do it out of guilt or fear. You say "Helping is Hurting, Charity is Theft, a Hand Up is a Slap in the Face, Sharing is Selfish, Only Egotism is True Loving Compassion." I could be mistaken, but I don't recall ever hearing that in any of Rand's writings. In Atlas Shrugged, the main protaganists do a great deal of sharing, helping, and so on. In fact, they go to tremendous lengths, even risking their lives, in order to help others. As you say, there are many reasons to help people. However, if you consider every good deed you have ever done, wouldn't you say you have gained something from it? Even it was just a good feeling? In fact, I woud suggest that you have done many things that have helped others but hurt yourself, and that you don't remember them as good deeds.