Why should I?

Educated, yes; successful, no!

Refusal to feed the mouth that bites, if done by an insignificant few, has no effect except on those who refuse. If it is done by many, the abusers will (we hope) accept being confronted with the problem and adjust their behavior.

Some YouTube videos mention that as fewer and fewer men accept marriage, the number of women who seek and cannot find husbands has significantly increased in recent years. If I and other doctors stop medical work, then there may be pressure on organized healthcare, which is so far reacting to USA physician shortages by approving nonphysicians to do health care. Actions by me alone will not bring about reform in divorce laws or in health-care laws, but I feel better having withdrawn than I would if I still actively participated in either corrupt process.

I used the example because I knew you are an educated, successful MD.

Providing practical advice on contending with government bureaucratic abuse is a value. Telling people to go on "strike", as if an organized shutdown by a small minority would improve anything, is not. Nor was advocating that the purpose of Atlas Shrugged.

Welcome to The Gulch SonofAyn!

Being Objective and looking to the fundamental base of Value was Rand's iteration in The Objectivist's Ethics. She left a couple gaps.

One's mortality is the source of value for any life form. Life is self-evident and holds 6 to 8 expressions of definition regardless the life form. The purpose of Life is continuity. And from the definition of Life...It must obtain and process some type of fuel and propagate to continue. All individual life forms begin and end.

Humans are a bit different. We can create non-reality and try to live by our subjective creation. Abstraction. Humans created tools that eased our trials of survival. We created specialties among us to further our ease. All of this is self-evident. As ease of survival increased the exposure of each individual to every aspect of the survival mechanisms decreased. Assumptions become self-evident.

Humans cannot survive without nurture. Thus, our indoctrination into what we deem community. As a human matures to the point of self-sufficient survival there are choices to be made. The choice of Freedom as an absolute or Liberty, a conditional behavior of community. Psychopathic and narcissistic behaviors are those of Freedom as an absolute. Liberties are of conscious involvement in community.

As to your posting on religion and being objective. The two are incompatible. Religions are abstractions of fear, power and control created and maintained by ignorance and psychopathy.

Deem this contributory or not....a full authorship is under development. Proposed release approximately a year from now.

Thanks for the great questions as your introductory!

Don't get me started! giggle I'll tell on you!

I rather thought the point was to live for yourself and not "contribute to Objectivism" or offer values to others.

Isn't this an attempt to treat Objectivism as a 'collective" that controls what is appropriate to think and say?

Objectivist values. Good point. Thank you for your explanation.

A curious example you used, that of being a doctor. I AM a doctor, forced to retire due to a combination of bad health, bad divorce, and friction with medical boards in three states. See http://www.jpands.org/vol17no2/harshm... for my response to a misadventure with the Maine medical board; my instructions on how to fight back differ from the response of going on strike but fit closely with insisting on individual autonomy.

Sharing pride in accomplishment for a common goal here is not "boastful" (which I don't like either). The common goal in this case is specifically Objectivist values, not just personal values without regard to that (and whether or not it has monetary value). That could be worth sharing and discussing on a forum like this (if it in fact represented such common values, which it unfortunately largely does not).

For example it would not mean the accomplishment of becoming a successful doctor as such, but what aspects of the career exhibit an Objectivist approach (or Objectivism helped to attain it) or how it helps to advance that within the profession as improvement.

There is an apparent or actual difference between "contributions to Objectivism" and "personal accomplishments [that have monetary value]." That's why I don't share your opinion on the question. And converting this forum into a free-for-all for the boastful would be a consequence of relying on your interpretation. I agree with you about politics and ethics.

People advocating and creating value are proud of it. This forum could be a place to share the accomplishments. That's not rhetorical.

Personal accomplishment and values are much more than politics. But even advocating major political change requires and understanding and advocating a philosophy that justifies freedom politically. Every politics presupposes an ethics, and every ethics presupposes an epistemology. Ayn Rand's philosophy provides the foundation through her explanations of reason and individualist ethics. She wrote about the importance of this many times.

If the question is not a rhetorical device but is to be answered simply and directly, then I am not sure that its answers will have any use. The question itself, therefore, seems to be without value. The concepts of politics and personal autonomy, as you correctly imply, cannot be completely distinguished from each other; advocating major political change demands assessing freedom and the responsibility that accompanies it.

An Ayn Rand forum is for much more than to "repudiate being enslaved by society or by any component of it". Ayn Rand's philosophy of reason and individualism is a positive force for achieving values and extends far beyond politics. No one is "whipping you to coerce you into doing more", which sounds very defensive. The question posed for this thread is perfectly legitimate, not "rhetorical" and not "destructive and ludicrous", which characterization is alien to my own reaction. The response to it in "emotional content" may vary with one's own sense of life and knowledge of Ayn Rand.

You may find that some discussion here is worth your time, but on the whole you are correct to question the nature of the forum despite its stated intent. It is typically dominated by those with values many of which militantly contradict Ayn Rand's philosophy of reason and individualism Perhaps you can improve on that.

You contribute through the quality of your posts.

Two quotations come to mind:
-Many a true word spoken in jest.
-The best laid plans of mice and men aw gang awry.

I haven't made any contributions nor do I plan on it. Oops.

I would like to know more. But I agree, hell I have already been accused of being an alt on my first day. Not a comforting landing... I am an objectivist through and through, but I don't think this gulch is worth my time and money just yet.

My underground medicine novel and my anti-brainwashing video have already been explicitly mentioned. Also see http://brightwriter.com for others, including human-relations material with little direct relevance but potentially helpful nevertheless.

No rhetorical question can be devoid of emotional content. (Proof: the statement that it implies would otherwise be made as a statement, and asking a question is an aggressive act that constrains the person asked to a narrow range of responses if rudeness is to be avoided.) The obvious implication is that we who read the question are being whipped to coerce us into doing more. The whole point of this group is to repudiate being enslaved by society or by any component of it, thereby making the comment itself destructive and ludicrous.

In a word, "enormous", but this doesn't seem to be of interest here. There is a good deal of hostility to the purpose of this forum here, as indicated by how quickly your question was mindlessly 'downvoted' by a couple of the militants. More serious is the lack of positive interest.