On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
Anthony wrote:
Why would someone be *glad* that it's not obvious who wrote an article? What rational reason could there possibly be for such a position? I'll grant that in some situations it might be rational to give away your work for free and without attribution, but to be *glad* specifically *because* you are not attributed, I don't see how that can possibly be considered a moral position within the framework of Objectivism.
Me, I wasn't claiming any moral position within the framework of Objectivism. It's more like a [[Random act of kindness]]. (But yes, part of the silly, delicious little thrill is precisely that the recipient will never know who his benefactor is. Whether this is rational or not I won't say.)
I was talking specifically about the moral framework of Objectivism, because that is the topic of this thread.
Here's a quote from Rand, which might as well have been made in response to your statement. "Why is it immoral to produce a value and keep it, but moral to give it away? And if it is not moral for you to keep a value, why is it moral for others to accept it? If you are selfless and virtuous when you give it, are they not selfish and vicious when they take it? Does virtue consist of serving vice? Is the moral purpose of those who are good, self-immolation for the sake of those who are evil?"