Medicine.
I hate to gloat, but he was being such a sanctimonious tool about it. I just wish Rumor_Watkins would come back to play some more.
I don’t think you’ll have to wait long.
I’m back, shit-for-brains.
Gonna need to read through however many pages before I get all caught up…
Just because you CAN be an ignorant fuckwad in the pit, it does not therefore follow that you MUST be an ignorant fuckwad.
You’re welcome.
Meh, there’s nothing else to post. You still think you’re crowing about your “gotcha” whereby I claimed that “pro bono” only appeared in the comments and wasn’t an actual rule of professional conduct, while the term actually appeared only in the comments and the non-binding preamble, and you still embarassingly cited to outdated law.
I’m confused by this thread.
-
RR is employed.
-
His business has an ‘expectation’ that certain activities will be performed by RR if he likes that whole ‘being employed’ thing.
At this point, it should be obvious to any conservative, libertarian, or non-communist that RR is expected to carry out the services his employers ask of him, or accept that there are other employment opportunities out there that do not ask him to do thinks like pro bono, like for example school bus driver. Particularly a libertarian - if a person doesn’t want to do what his employers ask of him, his only moral alternatives are to do it, or quit. Or join a union.
It’s not about a moral obligation to help the poor or be a nice guy; these things are beyond the ability of a libertarian to comprehend. It’s about the moral obligation to hold up your end of an employment relationship, which should be obvious to any libertarian who is not a hypocritical dipshit who actually cares nothing about libertarianism when it doesn’t serve him and instead cares only about socipathically raping society for his own benefit.
So. No libertairian would challenge his employer’s right to ask him to do pro bono work. Of course, that doesn’t mean you have to like doing it. So if you don’t like doing it, you can post on a message board and whine about it. That is something a real libertarian can do.
Of course the inevitable result will be everyone telling you quite rightly that you’re a dick, and a moron for getting into the one field (besides medicine) that generally requires you to do a little bit of free work for the poor, if you didn’t want to do that. But that’s just how the ookie crumbles.
This is incorrect. Here’s the very first sentence of the OP:
So you determine whether an action is moral or not based on what people say about it on an internet messageboard?
Hey, beats asking a lawyer.
Once again, there are many societal norms. One of them concerns simple professionalism. Thumbing your nose at the idea of pro bono work implies not aspiring to do pro bono. Which is unprofessional. So RR hasn’t absorbed societal norms particularly well: this is but one example.
Writers, Photographers, and Computer People. You’re welcome.
QFT
Rand, if you can’t answer this then you really need to STFU and go away.
CFT (Clipped For Truth)I will show this thread to any of my students (to whom I assign THE FOUNTAINHEAD) when some of them start raising the point that individuals, not government, must be entrusted with the responsibility to look out for the greater good of society. (I always get a few fresh convents to Objectivism-before I can de-convert them by assigning them compassionate works by non-sociopathic authors.) This thread is perfect real-life proof of how anyone with a modicum of exposure to casuistical thinking can distort such common words as “responsibility” and “obligation” to serve his own sick needs.
Prr, yes, it is sad how you and others are distorting those words to serve your own sick needs. I’m glad you recognize that.
It’s really funny how I work 60 hours a week providing highly valuable services to society, but I don’t do pro bono, so you all call me a sociopath. But if some guy works 30 hours a week at McDonalds and another 10 serving food at the Salvation Army, you would all think he’s a saint. Do you really think that, on the whole, that guy is benefitting society more than I am?
Yes as I have no doubt you spend your day helping high income fat cats avoid taxes.
Pretty sure that **Howard **will be an ignorant fuckwad regardless of the forum he’s posting in.
No, I determine whether *society *considers an action moral or not based on what people say about it on a message board. When you are trying to argue that you’ve internalized *society’s *concepts of right and wrong, a bunch of that society violently disagreeing with you is a pretty good indication that you’re mistaken.
Don’t forget to highlight the post where the part that specifically addresses his equivocation means the opposite of what it says, because the only possible interpretation that supports his selfish actions is the one that the writers agreed with him but were forced to say the opposite for political reasons. :rolleyes:
You don’t see insisting that a passage must mean *the exact and literal opposite *of what it says, because that’s the *only *way it supports your pet theory, is “distorting those words to serve your own sick needs”?
Sfg, I’m not insisting tha that passage means the opposite of what the words say. I fully acknowledge that those words mean that the bar association thinks lawyers have a moral obligation to do pro bono. I just don’t really give a shit about what other people think I have a moral obligation to do.
On the issue of my own notions of right and wrong, all I meant to say was that I share the same basic ideas of right and wrong with regard to my own actions as do other people in my society. So, I tip, and help old ladies across the street, and don’t ask a woman if she’s pregnant, and don’t ask why someone was out of the office, etc. etc. I don’t tgink anyone else has a “moral obligation” to do these things because that concept is meanoingless. Similarly, if you tell me I have a moral obligation to do something, that doesn’t mean I’m going to do it.
Also, on the subject of how you (SFG) determine whether one has a moral obligation to do somethging, you seem to believe that you have the abilitý to tap into society’s views on what people should and should not d. How do you do that? Do you conatantly conduct scientific surveys? What percentage of people does it take for you to determine that a certain action is a moral obligation?
For example, if I conducted. Scientific poll of Americans and over 50% said that eating meat, drinking alcohol, and having pre-marital sex were all immoral, would you believe you have a moral obligation to not do any of those?
I sure wouldn’t brag about doing it.
soothingly No-one thinks you’re a sociopath.
As to that, there are too many variables to deciding between you and another person; and I don’t really care about people as much as you do to come to any conclusion. That kind of moralising, though, in your comparison, explains why libertarians are as righteously annoying as communists.
On the other hand, I guess some people, given the choice, would prefer food to tax advice if they could elect for one only; so prolly the hash slinger is objectively more valuable than a lawyer.