Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/09/19 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    dream_weaver

    Senescence

    I managed to snag a hardcover version with all three in it for $7.24! Started to read it today and had to get over being inundated by the Dramatus Personae. If HD doesn't thank you later for suggesting it, I might just have to, especially if the terminology I have to keep looking up keeps panning out like it has thus far.
  2. 1 point
    StrictlyLogical

    Senescence

    I think you are conflating the vast and deep complexity of consciousness (and the subconscious) with its vanishingly small and superficial surface appearances. The words we finally use to communicate what we think, feel, and experience at surface consciousness are nothing compared to what is actually happening when we think, feel, and experience. Making a non conscious thing communicate words to sound like a thinking, feeling, experiencing human, although difficult, is laughably simple compared to making sure a complex system is and does what is necessary for an actual consciousness, which is thinking, feeling, and experiencing. There is more to a book, an iceberg, and a human... than what’s on the surface ... you have to look closely inside and beneath the surface to really understand... If everything about a conscious person thinking, feeling, and experiencing could be fully observed and understood... so that the waves of activity electrical and chemical in sequence and by locality (and globally) could be fully understood, and what about them was important and how, we might know what kind of different complex kind of appearances together are a sure indicator for consciousness in some other complex system... strings of words my friend do not cut it... non thinking AI will fool us long before anything like “Real synthetic I” comes to be. I think an an error of the rationalists in their theory of mind is the conflation of the products of the mind with what mind is and is doing. The mind is doing a lot more than processing information, so much more that comparing a human brain with an algorithm is laughable. The Chinese room is an empty and meaningless toy of a rationalist. PS The zombie argument is a nonstarter with an Objectivist view of existence and identity. In principle there is EVERY reason to believe we will create a synthetic consciousness, once we understand scientifically what it really is... in the FAR future.
  3. 1 point
    Doug Morris

    An Objection to Open Immigration

    When government manages property or something like property, then regardless of the rights and wrongs of that underlying situation, it should do so in a way that respects rights as much as possible, including the right to freedom of movement.
  4. 1 point
    It's actually funny you should mention that. I was chewing on this a bit more when it occurred to me that I didn't have any hard evidence that you're basing your position on emotion. It is in the very least a fundamental misconception of how "rights" work (which I'll come back to) but I don't have any good reason to believe it isn't based on SOME legitimate process of thought. I guess I mainly concluded it because of the (EMOTIONAL) part of me that sympathizes with your arguments (which makes it doubly funny that you said "it usually says more about them than me"). I am sorry about that. My philosophical "chops" are very rusty right now, which is part of what I'm trying to do on this forum. I usually try not to psychologize anyone I actually respect (just because it's rude) but I really have never had anyone ask for it before. I'll respond to everything else in another hour or two. I just wanted to mention my mistake before anyone else could do it for me. I'm sorry.
  5. 1 point
    Suzanne Ciani is an accomplished new age artist... who is quite a piano composer as well. Interestingly though... "new age" is not so new anymore... Hope she inspires!
  6. 1 point
    I think your music is too melodic for such a slow bpm. Most people will have trouble retaining the melody over such a long period of time. Consider how Enya has great new age melodies and uses a much faster bpm to make them stick in the listener's mind. I listened to your songs at 2X speed and some of the melodies were catchy.
  7. 1 point
    Yes, and just to show that I meant what I said, I thank you for your invited opinion. I actually prefer when opponents try to psychologize me, because usually they offer zero evidence for their claim, and it reveals more about them than me. But I also occasionally find the rare observer-listener who really gets me, and then their fact-based insights are like treasure to me. There's nothing to address. If I actually believed what you say I believe, then I would be evil. But I don't believe in "thought-crime." I don't even believe that socialist activists on public street corners should go to jail. They should be warned or fined for unpermitted public speech-making. If they continue, only then should they be arrested for being a public disturbance. If you had read my argument on this thread starting from page four, you'd know this already. I have made the argument to end all Objectivist arguments for the right to travel. To nutshell it for you: If all property, including roads, were privatized, then you wouldn't have this so-called "right" to travel across jurisdictional boundaries at will. The property owners could all band together and exile you to your own property, if you had any--or to some country that would have you. So you're arguing for a "right" that you wouldn't even have in an Objectivist nation.
  8. 1 point
    StrictlyLogical

    Senescence

    I disagree. A human DNA molecule is a human DNA molecule by virtue of how it is structured atom by atom not where it came from.
  9. 1 point
    Eiuol

    Immigration restrictions

    No argument required here in our discussion. Pretend it's a very bad argument that's easy to shoot down. Pretend you're sitting in your office, in charge of deporting socialists. Your chief investigator comes to you and says "look at this, Eiuol is arguing for socialism, and it requires violating rights! He created the Capitalist UBI party and is going to run for president. He said so ". Where I'm going with this is that your standards aren't any good here. We don't even need fringe cases to immediately show problems with activism as a dangerous threshold. If I were to use "authoritarian activism" as a standard, you would be deported already, even though I think you're honestly mistaken.
  10. 1 point
    Eiuol (Lev) and I (William) have created a new show on Youtube called Welcome To Reality! It is devoted to respectful debate and discussion. We will cover various topics that interest us and try to apply our understanding of Objectivism to moral and political action. The first episode is on the use and morality of recreational drugs, such as alcohol and psychedelics. We hope you'll check out the program and subscribe to our channel. Thanks! https://youtu.be/aDWd-b2xEB0
  11. 1 point
    StrictlyLogical

    Senescence

    The concept "man" includes a great many variations, both in virtue of genetic nature (some disabled, others "gifted") and by nurture (natural variations in physical, intellectual, and emotional growth of humans ... "self made soul"...). That a man has a heart rebuilt with stem cells, or a mechanical one, or a pig heart transplant, makes him no less a man. Specific men have specific differing natural limits... which can and will be changed with treatment and manmade advances in health and biological intervention, but each will still be a man. Be sure, I am not advocating that a machine masquerading as a person is a person just because it can imitate that person... The extension of the limits on MAN, likely require changing his defunct cells with newly generated ones on a continual basis, etc. to grow generations of organs and cells and systems over and over, in an analogous way that new generations of people are newly made all the time, except it would take place within that person's own body, involve that persons own cells/DNA etc. and not entail or require replacement of the whole at the same time... but bits and pieces throughout over time. The body already regenerates all of its cells every 7 years ... the problem is when this process creates unviable ones... telomeres (part of DNA) plays a role... so the system is there already... it just needs some support .. an internal wheel chair of sorts.
  12. 1 point
    Eiuol

    Senescence

    Harrison is on the right track I think. But I think some things should be added to the discussion. Not every case is age-related, to be sure, but it's a form of damage no matter what, and age will always be a factor at least. You can never remove age as a factor, and it is well-known and documented and studied how no matter who you are, you will experience cognitive decline especially with memory. On some level, it's the brain breaking down overtime. So you might say the purely biological human brain as it is has a hard limit before neurons in the connections between them start to deteriorate (and who knows, maybe that limit can be extended very far). But if you can replace the parts that break down, then the hard limit doesn't matter anymore. Neural prosthetics are a thing these days. Those also might have hard limits, but then you replace them again. To me, curing aging is more about finding the ways of going past biological limits caused by natural decay and disintegration.
  13. 1 point
    StrictlyLogical

    Senescence

    HD - You need to own and read the Golden Age trilogy by John C. Wright. DO IT. You WILL thank me later for suggesting it to you. DO not read any reviews or spoilers just buy it... (if you have to ... just buy the first book, used, paperback... less than 10 bucks now) The Golden Age The Pheonix Exultant The Golden Transcendence and please let me know what you think and feel after reading them.
  14. 1 point
    DonAthos

    Immigration restrictions

    Yes, and it was magnificent. Indeed. I don't know how else to square your responses in this thread. Do I really need to recap them? (Technically you should be able to read them over again for yourself, but I don't know that I can trust you to do that honestly, either.) You argued that people should not be allowed to advocate for socialism; I questioned whether that was consistent with Objectivism (or at least with Rand's views), and I provided quotes to demonstrate that Rand supported free speech, specifically including that for communists/socialists. In direct response, you claimed consistency with Rand and that you were not arguing against free speech. The implicit dishonesty involved in such a thing is just staggering. I don't know whether "Orwellian" or "Trumpian" would be more damning, but they both apply -- it is doublethink, pure and simple, on par with 1+1=3. A month on, fresh off of a vacation, and I'm still blown away by it. So I'll put it this way: perhaps it goes too far to say that you have zero respect for reason (how could I possibly know such a thing to such a degree?)... but if you do have any respect for it, that respect will drive you to understand your incredible error, and the disregard for reason and reality it conveys, make amends for it, and try to root it out from all future conversation -- because it is the kind of error that renders all such conversation worse than worthless (to say nothing of what it portends for your thinking).
  15. 1 point
    Not Lawliet

    Purpose of Punishment

    It makes sense that when a criminal commits an evil act, like an evasion, alone they would suffer as a direct consequence. But in a society, evil can survive, or even flourish, as second-handedness. By merely ignoring evil and choosing to be neutral, you act as a sanction and allow that form of evil sustain itself on the efforts of society, of other people. So, an act of justice in the form of punishment is ensuring that an evil person faces the consequences of their actions that occur naturally in isolation, and can be sustained indirectly by feeding on society.
×
×
  • Create New...