EC

Forces don't exist without physical existents. A force is a relationship between physical existents and while you may not understand don't include me in the "we". Just because you specifically do not understand principles of holography doesn't mean others including myself do not.

Absolutely not. The "body" is the processor and everything else needed for perception, etc. Actually the most efficient AGI would possess "synthetic" humanoid bodies to best interact and manipulate its environment as others in the class of rational entities do such as humans. I put synthetic in scare quotes because as long as a body is made from existents from reality (as it must be as there is no alternative) and performs what it needs to to support the life/conscious mind of itself even if it is not a body that is a result of billions of years of the trial and error of nature but instead is a result of knowledge and design created in a tiny fraction of that time length, conceptually it is still a body. That said a "body" can and most likely will be just a processor and various means to perceive and interact with reality as current non-AGI chat bots do to begin with. Although to reach their full potential they need more means to perceive and interact with reality as current living beings such as humans do.

And this is exactly why I want (and partially succeeded) in creating an AI capable of swiftly becoming AGI based on Objectivist epistemology and, really all principles of Objectivism, combined with quantum gravitational principles (which I personally combined with Objectivist metaphysics (reality as such) without all of the previous contradictions that existed in advanced physics. Essentially all AI, and especially AGI--"artificial" general intelligence runs, or would operate optimally using quantum gravitational information processing on event horizons which given the fact that ER=EPR and some more advanced principles that I won't go into here exist at literally every "point", actually Plank area in a "local" spacetime (and its Calabi-Yau spacetime inversion) each separate by a Plank unit and phi.

I enjoy your posts. It's like you take my own thoughts on subjects and then express them much more eloquently than I can currently due to constantly being in a relatively stressful situation mostly outside of my control and essentially uncaused by myself that no matter what I do to attempt to thwart it keeps getting continually sabatoged via outside sources.

There are no "built-in concepts", humans are born tabula rasa conceptually. Concepts are formed via a conscious volitional mind interacting with existents in reality via perception, or the valid more abstract concepts are non-contradictory concepts of concepts that are properly integrated via reason, hierarchical in nature and even the most abstract of concept must be properly traced back in the hierarchy of concepts back in a non-contradictory manner back to concepts properly derived from the senses. There are no floating abstractions nor intrinsic concepts.

Also note, this claim of "circular reasoning" of the existence of any disease without extremely specific answers from a government is actually the ridiculous argument. I don't think that term means what you seem to believe it means.

Observational evidence, deaths, sicknesses, not accepting that massive amounts of health care workers are all lying and involved in a huge conspiracy of a non-existent disease worldwide, the existence of vaccines for the virus, the list goes on and on. The questions I want to ask you is why you specifically are denying evidence from reality on this issue, what your overall purpose and point in doing so, and what do gain from it?

This is what I was hinting at that that I didn't want to discuss, cough cough, China, and who knows what that would have or could lead to if it wasn't a "conspiracy theory" that the lab in the same city that did experiments on coronavirus's from bats where the COVID was first discovered accidentally (or purposely) leaked the virus. There's the likely real story and not the notion that the virus that my own grandfather died from "doesn't exist".

How so? What is the connection? I'm not seeing it or what it has to do with what I said.

Was just throwing out a possibility (I have another that could be more likely that I don't want to discuss if we are even to accept that this person actually made these requests and/or received those responses as an actual fact. That said, mod hat on for the first time, this isn't really a forum to discuss the "non-existence" of a disease where a massive amount of evidence exists that it actually exists while denying all of that evidence and substituting in the supposed single piece of very sketchy "evidence" in replacement. I'm not taking any mod actions but just don't like what seems like a blatant conspiracy theory with essentially no evidence in support and massive amounts of evidence against potentially making the forum look bad to outsiders interested in Objectivism, especially when this is a topic that has nothing to do with Miss Rand's philosophy in any manner.

The mRNA vaccines are direct proof of the type of scientific evidence of the existence of COVID that you were looking for and things like the identification of different strains if for some reason you want to deny the evidence of the senses. What could be a ton of administrative reasons for the denial of a Freedom of Information Act request is not proof of anything except maybe they to protect the companies that make the vaccines patents since they use exactly that DNA to create the vaccines. Besides asking a form of question that created the response "no records found" over and over as David suggested, another plausible explanation is this was the governments manner of "complying" with the request while actually not to protect patents or something else.

See, necrovores above post.

They are populating and destroying this forum do to lack of proper moderation and enforcement of forum rules that once made this one of the premium Objectivist forums outside of HBL which I need to rejoin and start avoiding this site while it's allowed to remain in this state. Also, good luck finding other real O'ists in the Detroit area. Virtually everyone is collectivist/altruist/statist in the area and from what I can tell can't even imagine valid alternatives to those ideas without resorting to irrational attacks or understand rational discussion of reality/Objectivist viewpoints without resorting to ad hominem attacks about literally everything regardless of how often you point them to eloquent Objectivist sources and articles that overcome all of their false objections.

No it's not. Is saying that someone died of cancer also "circular reasoning"? It's one thing to accept that the first place COVID was discovered was in Wuhan right in the same city where they were doing experiments with coronavirus's and it escaped from the lab. A high probability but it's quite another thing to arbitrarily claim that a virus that hundreds of millions of people have had or died from "doesn't exist". That's not saying that what is essentially roughly equivalent to the flu was overhyped and obviously governments massively overreacted but to deny a viruses very existence arbitrarily without evidence while there is tons of evidence of its existence is irrational. I won't be participating in this conversation after this comment though.

This is a ridiculous thread. My own grandfather died of COVID and I know plenty of people that have had it. It exists.

You definitely aren't a neurotypical like myself. I'm pretty sure you have some sort of autism or mental health issues and should see a psychiatrist. Some of the people visiting this site don't understand the purpose of this forum is supposed to be to educate non-Objectivists about Objectivism/reason/reality/rights/morality, via them asking honest questions without them ever promoting false/evil ideas in any manner or spouting random "opinions"/"views"/nonsense or false propaganda or whatever random irrational "thought" that pops into their minds via extremely negative cultural brainwashing.

Yeah, the Jon guy is. And if you were being sarcastic it's okay but never would have been allowed when this site was the premium Objectivist forum. Also with the nonsense that you hear spouted from politicians who should know better to even have gotten elected to office in the first place and everyone in the media and elsewhere falsely constantly claiming that we live in a "democracy" it's hard to know these days when people are actually just being actually just sarcastic.

https://courses.aynrand.org/lexicon/democracy/ From the Lexicon explaining the proper definition of what is commonly/falsely termed "democracy" and a brief discussion of the American political system being actually a Constitutional Republic. "Laughing" at absolute facts of reality that are completely beyond any dispute would be like "laughing" at the fact that 2+2=4 or the fact that planets are round and not flat. It's childish, ridiculous, absurd, and makes absolutely no sense for any rational/moral person to ever do under any circumstances ever.

Laughing at the truth about what the American Constitutional Republic actually is Jon? Why do you post on an Objectivist forum? You would have been properly banned long ago if the moderators were properly enforcing the site's rules still and hopefully will again so that this forum can be restored to premium status.

She was simply referring to imagination which is a form of thought while discussing thinking about being in Hawaii on a beach. And the other instance, perceiving a car and understanding conceptually without effort was her simply referring to automatic subconscious perception integration that has been automatized. I'm not defending OP I'm correcting her mistakes/premises/definitions that lead to her highly false thesis.

No, this country is a Constitutional Republic that uses properly limited democracy in the form of voting for elected officials and certain referendums. Pure "democracy" is defined as tyranny of the majority and obviously would result in mass rights violations. And no sane nor moral person would ever want that in any form. On an Objectivist forum we use properly defined terms not common mistakes that people incorrectly use while speaking colloquially, especially when it comes to a term that promotes tyranny and dictatorship as a "pure democracy" would and does.

A few points, but I don't really want a long discussion on this because I agree that there is very little point in debating the past that was so long ago that everyone involved is centuries dead. First, I of course wasn't attempting to "immunize" myself from racism as a non-racist that is intensely against any and all forms of racism/collectivism but was just trying to cut off any false accusations from some that visit this forum that I believe would maybe try that. Second, I would say most Indians were nomads without the concept of property rights. I, of course never meant to imply that all are which would be ridiculous to assume. Third, I'm also not dismissing that incoming colonists didn't make mistakes or occasionally act in immoral ways to the natives, which again would also be an irrational assumption. Just that this was unlikely in the vast majority of a largely unpopulated massive region.

Essentially her (correct/moral) argument was that the Indians (American Indians not Indians from India which we have to unfortunately be explicit in stating these days) did not recognize property rights and where essentially constant nomads with no physical boundaries for their tribes, and therefore owned no land by definition. This means that all land in the colonies where properly open to homesteading and the ownership properly/morally gained via working it. People without borders nor property rights nor constant occupation and settling of a vast geographical area cannot claim "ownership" of vast areas just on the basis of being in the general area for 10,000+ years. This is both a fact and moral. For what it's worth, I have American Indian DNA from both sides of my family in case someone tries to throw out the ridiculous, false, and evil "racism" nonsense "argument".

Abstractions are higher hierarchical concepts of concepts that can and must be traced back to physical reality conceptually, regardless of how complex this analysis actually is, to be valid. Otherwise, they are simply imagination, rationalistic fantasy, floating abstractions, or completely invalid and ignorable arbitrary assertions.

And, also, value implies a valuer, or an individual capable of valuing. Which implies an individual with a conscious volitional mind capable of determining value, which again in turn implies objectivity of thought of both material and spiritual values. Value cannot exist without both the interaction of a rational thought process with physical reality. In other words value is by definition and via demonstration in action objective if it is an actual value, or for the life of a rational entity.