Leaderboard

It was a weird post by Nicky anyway. SL was saying Nicky's response to me was irrelevant to the discussion - I wasn't asking about IF there WERE things black people do because they're black. So Nicky's "if" was irrelevant. EDIT: By the way, race/gender/etc are all relevant to a person's actions to the extent other people enforce norms. Even the belief that there is a norm leads people to act in response to a norm, whether it is conformity or non-conformity. That was part of my point earlier: the concept of gender only makes sense as a set norms set by society. Nothing else. Sex changes can't alter that. But they can help self-image (I'll get to Jaskn's post later).

Anuj's statement presents a central point in regard to Objectivism and metaphysics. Ayn Rand was often accused of promoting atheism, and her critics quickly linked her atheism to Nazism and/or Marxism. Ayn Rand distinguished her philosophy as one that exalted the human spirit, and its role in ethics. With Nazism and Marxism as the only known "godless" or atheist government models, anything or anyone atheist has been associated with these most infamous totalitarian systems. It continues to present a stigma for atheists in many conservative circles. Ann Colter titled her critique of America's New-Left: Godless. Metaphysics is not exactly the hottest topic to raise at a social gathering. In my experience, the mere suggestion that one holds convictions supported by facts draws the most negative criticism. People are much more comfortable with someone who simply claims to be agnostic; saying "who know?" and "there are some things man isn't supposed to know," sounds so much more "human" than someone saying, "Why should anyone believe in something that doesn't exist?" The controversy conveyed in such a rhetorical question can result in the most hostile reactions, or a sustained silence. This is the reason it is so critical to acknowledge to human mind, the potential powers it possesses, and the fact that other materialists, be they monists or Marxists, rejected the composition of reality to the inclusion of the mind as an existent. And it is the mind that embodies the spirit. To revisit the exchange with Devil's Advocate, the human spirit is a force to reckoned with, whether inspired through religion or through Objectivism. I wish to thank Dream-weaver for his addendum to my earlier statement regarding a new society influenced by Objecitivism. (Agreed, "dominated" was a poor choice of words, but it was late in my day, and my thesaurus was drained.) If people were focusing on discovering the ideas of just some of the names of those mentioned, we might see this new society happen sooner. And a few comments on this: The 1960s were a turbulent ten years. The cultural changes were complex, although it is true that many of the young participants were unthinking, or irrational animals. But that would be over-simplifying it. To be sure, religion in that decade was expanding, rather than contracting. I can't support this claim with exact data, but if you look at the trends: the "Hippies" might be categorized as the heirs of Dionysus, celebrating the Age of Aquarius, a rejection of modern ideals, and reverting to the Modern Primitives. Many of them embraced gods of the ancient times, or Eastern religions, via George Harrison, Ravi Shankar, and The Beatles. Some attempted to revisit Christianity in a movement known as "the Jesus People." Most of us from those times remember them as "Jesus Freaks." (My friend, the Messianic-Rabbi was very much influenced by this trend.) Most of this was merely "seeking." Certainly, people do need something to believe in, and for those of that decade, many had truly "lost their way." And still many stayed true to their conservative traditions, taking comfort from their churches and televangelists, such the Reverend Billy Graham. Was religion what they were seeking? If it makes them happy, I will defend their right to choose it, as long as it is a privately funded choice. However, I can't help noticing how conflicted people of faith can be, in spite of their convictions. As for the sexual revolution, it was in part a new expansion of personal freedom, especially for women. But guys certainly benefited, too. The term, "sexual revolution" is often used by conservatives as a pejorative, but conservatives aren't very comfortable with individual freedom. America at present is still feeling the effects of the 1960s; each news story of social or race-related unrest and controversy, our foreign wars, marijuana liberalization, expanded substance abuse, and the endless insistence for egalitarianism and diversity remind me that the "Culture War" rages on. It certainly isn't Objectivism that's stuck in the '60s, but I could argue that the state of our nation is. In the end, will America succumb to "That Ole Time Religion," or discover morality through reason? Or is this a false set of alternatives?

I too enjoy movies for the entertainment value. However, when it comes to listing my favorites, or even those that are "enjoyable," I would not include those that have disgusted me with their poor sense of life--unless there is some other truly redeeming aspect of the movie, like a superb performance by a particular actor. The reason for this is that I view art or entertainment as primarily a source of "fuel" for my own outlook on life (similar to what Rand suggested in The Romantic Manifesto). That is, if I'm going to spend my time on it, it had better give me something that I want or crave: some belly laughs, inspiration, or just a benevolent outlook on life. My tastes tend toward the "lighter" side when it comes to movies, but the more dramatic movies I enjoy usually have a particularly inspiring character or two. That being said, AutoJC, why did you like Mystic River? I haven't seen it, but the previews I saw made it seem like an excruciating movie to watch. But I would like to hear what about it appealed to you. On to some of my favorites: Amelie (full French title: Le Fabul Destin d'Amelie Poulain)--some of it's a little silly or mystical, but the important aspects are: despite her parents' fearful outlooks, a young woman takes a few chances, acts benevolently towards others, and finds love. It just leaves me feeling happy. Elizabeth--Cate Blanchett's performance is wonderful. Seabiscuit Chocolat High Fidelity--clever and some great music. Shakespeare in Love Some Like it Hot--for the laughs and Marilyn Monroe. Charlotte Gray--another Cate Blanchett film, I don't believe this one was in wide release, but it was very, very good--about a Scottish woman who joins the French resistance during WWII. Cold Mountain--although the very end soured it for me. Big Fish

I liked 'Fight Club' because it is a great portrayal to what I am not. It is a great example to shy away from. The recent release of the movie' Thirteen' is also great. It shows the danger of peer pressure, and what it can do to an unaware individual. I don't usually analyze movies. I watch them for entertainment VALUE. If I had a favorite, it would be a tie between 'Rain Man' and 'As Good as it Gets'. Another favorite, as far as uplifting and aspiring goes, is the movie 'BraveHeart.'