Been there, done that. Quite a few times in fact. And, with each reconfiguration, I was able to think myself into believing that this time I got it right. Then it began to dawn on me that whole point of having new experiences, new relationships and contact with new ideas is to set up the next incarnation.
Then it began to dawn on me that each new fabrication was no less an existential contraption rooted in dasein.
You’ll either get there yourself or you won’t.
On the contrary, I try to make a distinction between the things I believe that I am able to demonstrate to others that, as rational men and women, they ought to believe in turn, and those things – value judgments, moral and political prejudices, aesthetic inclinations – which seem more the embodiment of dasein as an existential contraption in a world bursting at the seams with contingency, chance and change.
Okay, lets try this…
Generally, those who call themselves fascists, make particular assumptions about such things as race and ethnicity and gender and sexual orientation and nationalism, and cultural values.
How as a radical pragmatist would you make a distinction between yourself and a more hardcore fascist in regard to particular contexts involving interactions around demographics of this sort. What makes for a modern fascist?
From my way of thinking here, an objectivist is someone who insist that their own thinking about these things is the only way that others are permitted to think about them if they wish to be construed as “one of us”.
I merely suggest this has far more to do with the psychological perks embedded in believing that “I” can be anchored to fonts like fascism, than in the capacity to demonstrate [philosophically or otherwise] that fascism reflects the most rational [virtuous] point of view.
Again, this thing: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296