For DJs who follow Objectivism

[Francisco d'Anconia]

I got a PM from a fellow Objectivist who had a question for me prompted from a previous about a DJ contemplating giving up or at least putting his DJism on the back burner. (I almost have no more use for this DJing ****. )

I won't get into the whole philosophy of Objectivism or the book Atlas Shrugged which is a epic novel that is based on that philosophy. Anyone looking for more info can just 'Google' it.

I am posting an edited version of the PM I received and my response in hopes to spur a dialog from other DJs who study Objectivism and/or who have at least read Atlas Shrugged.

Francisco, there's something I've wanted to ask you for a while:

Are you looking for a Dagny Taggart type and would you know how to handle her if you did find her?

Or, have you more or less given up on philosophical purity and settled on whether or not she meets System qualifications alone? Your recent posts on your statistical odds in MN and on LTR compatibility make me think you're struggling with this as well.

My last LTR was an example of settling. As an Objectivist, I've found that there are so few women who can actually think, forget about holding some ideal values about life.

Actually I really don't want anyone quite like Dagny, remember she was one of the hardest to convince that she was being taken advantage of by the looters. The traits of hers that I do enjoy was her confidence and intellect. However she did seem to be lacking in the relationship skills like compassion.

One thing to understand, I do not want to be with anyone I would have to 'handle.' I wouldn't be with anyone I couldn't accept at their core nor anyone who couldn't accept me at mine. Acceptance does not mean 'agree with' necessarily, it's just understanding that I as she, are allowed to have our own opinions.

Yes it would be perfect to have a LTR with the right woman, but I refuse to dwell on not being with one right now. As my namesake, FD in Atlas loved Dagny but he did not allow them being apart nor her loving Galt stop him from living a fulfilling life.

I do believe that the American culture has made many people complacent, definitely to levels that are unheard of in other countries. Yes this is the land of opportunity, but yet many people want to partake of the opportunities of others, ones that others have nurtured and grown into something spectacular.

In a nutshell, yes I am going through the same thing. I've met a handful of women who were so close to possibly being the one but their base ideals were those that they could not accept NOT being one of MY ideals. It's hard but it's not anything I haven't encountered before so it doesn't bother me much. I know that meeting the right woman IS possible even if the probability isn't high.

So the search continues....

 

[diablo]

Replies deleted due to increasing political discussion - i.e. Bush this, Kerry that.

NO POLITICAL DEBATE!

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Originally posted by diablo
Replies deleted due to increasing political discussion - i.e. Bush this, Kerry that.

NO POLITICAL DEBATE!

Thanks for not closing the thread. I did not intend to discuss the philosophy, just to bring together the DJs who follow it to discuss how to get what they want without sacrificing their values.

Funny how agendas can turn things around completely....

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Alright, hopefully you guys aren't still pissed about having your posts deleted but we do have to play nice together.

I just wanted to share an update to my situation of living in Minnesota with an infinitesimal chance of coming across a woman that fits (at least 80%) of the qualities that I am looking for in a woman without settling or compromising my personal ideals based on 'Objectivism.'

Yesterday I contacted a woman through an Internet dating site that seems to fit into at least 90% of the qualities that I am looking for in a woman (being a resident of MinneSNOWta being one of them). She is originally from the Mediterranean but lived mostly in Europe before moving to the states.

We've traded a couple of emails the past couple of days and plan to meet for coffee Friday after work. She's hinted that she would like for me to take her out dancing but I'm not going there until after I talk to her face to face and to see if we have chemistry. Right now she sounds too good to be true but I will find out for sure on Friday.

What I really wanted to say is that along with having the right attitude and being comfortable with your ideals, convictions and purpose; things that may not seem probable is always possible if it's realistic.

So Friday I'm off to see this hot dark haired beauty (yes, I've seen a full body picture of her), who is not only confident and intelligent but also describes herself as sexy, sultry, extremely giving to the right man AND a terrific lover with the right person. So come on, wouldn't I be stupid NOT to check her out?

Don't worry, there will not be any 'one-itis' going on here, but it's nice to have one in your stable that "could eventually" become a viable partner. More later...

 

[Cesare Cardinali]

Diablo,

What the f*ck??? My reply was not a political reply and should not have been deleted. Please explain. And if you're not reading the replies to determine their nature then don't delete them!

 

[aBAzLLnA]

Isn't following the DJ system essentially following objectivism, at some level?

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Originally posted by aBAzLLnA
Isn't following the DJ system essentially following objectivism, at some level?

Oooooo, I think we've got someone who get's it... I will say that it seems that guys who are Objectivists tend to have good DJ skills. It doesn't necessarily mean that a DJ can be a Objectivist though.

 

[aBAzLLnA]

Objectivism seems too much like a cheap spin-off of Buddhism. As a believer (or follower, I don't like terming someone following a religion...) of Buddhism, the goals of both seem VERY much alike...

Buddhism also teaches to be desireless and the whatnot...

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

BUMP

Just wondering if there's still any Objectivist DJ's out there who are faced with possibly compromising their values relationship wise since the pool of Objectivist women seem to be a bit scarce.

 

[Cbaoth]

Loved Atlas Shrugged, got Virtue of Selfishness and Capitalism for Xmas, so have yet to read those.

As far as women go... As long as they they are women of reason and rationality that is good enough for me.

And yes, I think Objectivism and DJism go hand in hand... Both are about caring for yourself first and foremost and getting the best out of yourself

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Originally posted by Cbaoth
...As far as women go... As long as they they are women of reason and rationality that is good enough for me....

Women of reason and rational... Is this even possible? And if it is, would she be some type of pseudo-feminist?

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Bumping. Are there any other Objectivist in the forum?

 

[Egoist]

I think the Fountainhead addresses the issues of relationships and love at maybe a more understandable level than A.S.

Look at Roarke. He is focused on achieving his goals no matter what. He sees the girl he likes, he takes her, but he never puts her on a pedestal or allows her to become more important to him than his life/goals/etc.

It is kind of interesting how Rand treats marriage as something that has no substance if the spiritual connection is not there. In other words your marriage is just a hypothetical institution that exists on paper unless there is a real connection between two people.

But yeah, in terms of objectivism and DJing, its a hard one. I am a huge fan of Rand and objectivism in general, of course there are always details where you have to decide for yourself on how far you follow your ideals. Rand's view of love in A.S. was heavily infuenced by Socrates/Plato view on love as a mirror of our aspirations in life. Do I agree with this view? I am not sure. I have experienced "pure" romantic love with a woman, and "dirty" sexual lust with just a sexbunny. What would Ayn Rand say about pursuing many women and having sex for its own sake, without regard to ideas or morals? I am not sure.

Overall, I do not draw exclusively on AR and her work as a source for my worldview/reality. I don't believe there is just one source. Objectivism is a huge part of my belief system, but I still draw on wisdom of other philosophers, science, psychology, etc. Even Rand admitted herself that her characters are idealized, not real people but more of "perfect" romanticized heroes. In other words, while you can use "what would francisco do" approach in your life, it doesn't mean that you would ever be expected to be as perfect as him or galt. Just like you shouldn't strive to be Jesus.

But yeah, I still think about it a lot.

 

[Egoist]

about women and logic: no woman will ever have the ability to be 100% logical and rational. It's just the way that nature works - men are made to be logical, women are made to be emotional. We are different from each other, its a ying yang thing.

Which reminds me, I think evolutionary psychology is complimentary to objectivism. If fills in the voids and uncertainties. While Rand is 100% about human brain and our potential, evpsych teaches us about how we are all still governed by our genetic code and that we cannot simply ignore our evolution and how we came to be who we are.

The two worldviews, while often at odds, provide two different perspectives that to me provide a good overview of human nature - drawing on both human consciousness and genetical makeup. It explains both why I am ambitious and idealistic, and why I wanna bang long legged hotties.

Makes sense?

 

[Vulpine]

But yeah, in terms of objectivism and DJing, its a hard one. I am a huge fan of Rand and objectivism in general, of course there are always details where you have to decide for yourself on how far you follow your ideals. Rand's view of love in A.S. was heavily infuenced by Socrates/Plato view on love as a mirror of our aspirations in life. Do I agree with this view? I am not sure. I have experienced "pure" romantic love with a woman, and "dirty" sexual lust with just a sexbunny. What would Ayn Rand say about pursuing many women and having sex for its own sake, without regard to ideas or morals? I am not sure.

So far as I can gather, if that is who you are and what you do (a DJ that bangs lots of women), than that is your existence. This provides a "moral loophole" for DJ's to slip through. Where objectivist morals follow that if noone is being taken advantage of or hurt, then "it's all good", your existence as a DJ would "trump" morals. Follow?

Say you are a Don Juan... and you intend that the women you are with be pleased by you and pleased when they are with you (a positive effect) until you find yourself not wanting to be with them: then this is your EFFECT on women. Your existence determines your effects on the most basic level. Whether a woman is hurt by you leaving is of no import, you do what you do: meet women, fuq women, leave women. Since these women are pleased by you by choice (they chose to be with you) then they knowingly accepted the terms (provided you didn't lie to them or provide false promises), and freely traded (emotions, sex, goods and services, etc.) with you. Now, objectivist immorallity in the DJ case is if you INTENDED to have a NEGATIVE effect on a woman instead of positive one. For example, it would be immoral to "seek revenge" on a woman. Ultimately, the loophole is since you exist as a DJ and women will be hurt as a matter of course, than your very existence as a DJ voids any moral implications.

Would anyone else agree?

Oh, and to take this a step further, I only feel mildy sorry for women I hurt for the same reasons. I have the emotion based on the reality, but my above reasoning also releases me from guilt.

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Thanks for posting guys. You both bring up interesting points yet somehow there's seems to be a bit of (healthy) contention. As a starting point, here's a basis of Objectivism as Rand deemed as a starting point:

1. Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man's feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.
2. Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man's senses) is man's only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.
3. Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.
4. The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism. It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. It is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and no man may initiate the use of physical force against others. The government acts only as a policeman that protects man's rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.

Note: The last point is just in reference to complete the premise of the philosophy. This thread is in no way meant to start a debate on politics or religion!!!! Please refrain from derailing the thread!!!

Now given this as the premise of Objectivism, I believe that a DJ could bolster his effectivness by incorporating some of these ideas into his lifestyle. Thoughts?

 

[Vulpine]

So, I'm basically hip to the game, er, I have the concepts fairly correct?

I've always referred to myself as a "bone-crushing realist with hedonistic tendancies", it's sort of nice to have a more commonplace term (or at least one with a better ring to it) to apply to my philosophies.

It would seem that I'm an objectivist, not because I have studied it, but because I've just thought/lived (for the most part) this way. Who knew?


Hmm... I've got some reading to do.

 

[SELF-MASTERY]

Why do you guys like wearing labels?

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Like you I was living my life this way to the disdain of the societal norm. Hell, I was open to considering myself a nonconformist or even an anarchist! I read Atlas and BANG!!! It all finally made sense AND there was an actual philosophy behind it! I never turned back.

The one thing that isn't quite accurate in what you said was that an Objectivist morals follow that if no one is being taken advantage of or hurt. That statement makes Objectivism sound like a collective reasoning, that "no one" is being taken advantage and that the common good is the primary goal. That sounds a lot like socialism to me.

Consider this, an Objectivist follows the premise that HE will gain his personal means by his own merit by some manner of exchange. Understand that the exchange does not need to be of equal value, just agreed upon by both individuals.

So being a DJ (or possibly a player for that matter) could be considered morally sound since the DJ is supplying something in exchange for the woman/women. The exchange could be as simple as his company, his presence. Given that, it would seem that forgoing the established societal moralities may instill a greater personal power to the individual.

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Why do you guys like wearing labels?

We don't wear them; other people assign them to make their lives easier. People who feel that they need to define themselves so ergo they must define others in some manner to be able to make a distinction.