"But all property rights are derived from the principle that (on the horizontal plane) I own myself and my time--that I am a unique individual with unique volition, unique purpose, and unique wants."
Self-ownership - and the idea of a unique, individual Self - is a #Gnostic premise, which is why #private property rights are inseparable from a Gnostic morality and worldview. This is also why it is fundamentally incompatible with Christianity, where you do not own yourself, your interests do not matter, and you have no right to your determine your own #fate - other than to submit to puppeteering or die, of course.
Ayn Rand misses this too. She is absolutely correct on the #Self being the highest moral entity, but cannot articulate a legitimate "why" due to due her anti-mysticism bias. The "why" is #spiritual.
Self-ownership and the rights derived of it are not permissions or responsibilities given to Selves by some higher power and, therefore, potentially subject to being suspended or taken away at some point. They are intrinsic to the #nature of Selves as emanations of the Alien God. They are properties of self-consciousnesses - which necessarily and inalterably has supremacy over matter. This is why the Self owns the body and not the other way around, which would be a perverse (and demiurgic) assertion.
Objectivism is Secular #Gnosticism. Similar to how Marxism is Secular Catholicism. It is a good look at the premises and logical conclusions of a Gnostic morality and worldview.
An Alien's Angst
npub15e…5uz8m
2023-10-14 02:26:45
in reply to nevent1q…sv46
Author Public Key
npub15e33vf8dx0k0ea22w4qzayc7r8xg07y7h3x7c39glxu8vf96rghs65uz8mPublished at
2023-10-14 02:26:45Event JSON
{
"id": "97daec79f71151be228784c8ebb2e099785167e3e0134f4e4b2764a54372302b",
"pubkey": "a6631624ed33ecfcf54a75402e931e19cc87f89ebc4dec44a8f9b87624ba1a2f",
"created_at": 1697250405,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"t",
"Gnostic"
],
[
"t",
"private"
],
[
"t",
"fate"
],
[
"t",
"Self"
],
[
"t",
"spiritual"
],
[
"t",
"nature"
],
[
"t",
"Gnosticism"
],
[
"e",
"dcfa80d693293069042e99d7c51844179b01678e86f10ae0ede3521c8831e736",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"eda96cb93aecdd61ade0c1f9d2bfdf95a7e76cf1ca89820c38e6e4cea55c0c05"
]
],
"content": "\"But all property rights are derived from the principle that (on the horizontal plane) I own myself and my time--that I am a unique individual with unique volition, unique purpose, and unique wants.\"\n\nSelf-ownership - and the idea of a unique, individual Self - is a #Gnostic premise, which is why #private property rights are inseparable from a Gnostic morality and worldview. This is also why it is fundamentally incompatible with Christianity, where you do not own yourself, your interests do not matter, and you have no right to your determine your own #fate - other than to submit to puppeteering or die, of course.\n\nAyn Rand misses this too. She is absolutely correct on the #Self being the highest moral entity, but cannot articulate a legitimate \"why\" due to due her anti-mysticism bias. The \"why\" is #spiritual. \n\nSelf-ownership and the rights derived of it are not permissions or responsibilities given to Selves by some higher power and, therefore, potentially subject to being suspended or taken away at some point. They are intrinsic to the #nature of Selves as emanations of the Alien God. They are properties of self-consciousnesses - which necessarily and inalterably has supremacy over matter. This is why the Self owns the body and not the other way around, which would be a perverse (and demiurgic) assertion.\n\nObjectivism is Secular #Gnosticism. Similar to how Marxism is Secular Catholicism. It is a good look at the premises and logical conclusions of a Gnostic morality and worldview. \n\n",
"sig": "65dc693ed0e75fcab3e33b68960e0d6703038a02fb4c7a993bc49958e468e7f68a54d8966711048ea499cf71c87bc73c66f650e1defd49366bd50807d56d9ca2"
}