Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

ucwp76

Newbies
  • Content count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

6 Followers

About ucwp76

  • Rank
    Novice

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Psychology, Philosophy, Complexity Theory, Classical Music and Formula 1.

Previous Fields

  • Country
    India
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Interested in meeting
    A woman who reflects all my values and convictions, with whom I can have the clearest and most convincing conversations: The Woman. Obviously, she would find her values reflected in me, with whom she can have the clearest and most convincing conversations.
  • Relationship status
    Single
  • Sexual orientation
    Straight
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted
  • Biography/Intro
    I'm curious, down to earth and methodical. I love a good argument and have zero tolerance for non-sense. I also have a pretty good sense of humour and get along easily with people.
  • Experience with Objectivism
    The Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged, Philosophy Who Needs it?, Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology and Virtue of Selfishness.

    Academically, I have a background in psychology and neuroscience. I've always wanted concrete answers to the biggest and most fundamental questions of life. I hold a competent understanding of metaphysics & epistemology and want to apply it to all facets of life. I'm looking forward to connect with people with whom I might share perspectives and goals.

Recent Profile Visitors

966 profile views
  1. Is there a word to describe this type of thinking?

    Not sure about a specific term, but you're sure to find a vat of emotion followed by rationalizations.
  2. MOVIE REVIEW - PK(Drunkard)

    Movies are not the proper medium to debunk irrationality, especially in a country where movies are taken for granted - "after all it's just a movie, it's for entertainment, why take it seriously, the purpose is to just think differently for one day and then get back to our practical lives." Besides, context dropping is the most prevalent problem in the 'intellectual community' in India. It has deep roots, really deep roots. Anuj, I think we shouldn't ignore this question - 'at what line do you conclude that it's a lost cause'.
  3. Eddie Willers

    Is it a trashing when I observe that Eddie, during his final moments, considered the train more valuable than his own life? Taggart's wife was not an ideal person. One would commit suicide only when one is riddled with pain, fear and guilt. I think, that both of them had the choice to take their attention away from all the things that were bothering them and then choose to pay attention on the solutions - 'how to overcome the collectivist mongrels'. It is a question of philosophical literacy and psychological strength. I don't mean to trash anyone. I would say that innocence is usually accompanied by ignorance.
  4. Self-Driving Cars

    I think what set of qualities in a car turns an individual on boils to personal association. I'm a huge fan of formula one. I also love drifting. Can I drift in the modern day 'performance car'? No. But will enjoy the seamless gear shifts? Most certainly, because it'll be close to what I've always want to do - race in a F1 grand prix. But as far as the question of automation goes, nope, it's not a good idea. Self driving cars are practical for long distance drives and that too for people who wouldn't mind taking public transport. For relatively short trips and the sense of freedom, nothing beats the rush of driving your own car. I share your concern about the vulnerability/reliability of the technology, no matter how advanced it maybe. But, that's insufficient reason to draw conclusions.
  5. Eddie Willers

    I agree with your assessment of Eddie, but not of Dagny. It was in her own self interest that she turned over the John Galt line to TT. Everybody knew that Dagny WAS Taggart Transconinental. She was not a serf to TT because TT was not an entity that was being served by her and at her expense. TT was the reflection of her own self. Technically, she was working on the Rio Norte. It was out not being allowed to do her job, that she took the extreme measure of setting up a new company. She did not trade a higher value for a lower value. She has never been a serf anywhere in the novel, in think.
  6. Eddie Willers

    Eddie didn't value his life enough to save it. He placed the train, which had been brought to such a state by the looters, above his own life - like a captain, he chose to sink with his ship. Is it still okay to say "poor him"? He was virtuous in the context of other values, such as perfection, reliability etc.
  7. Watching the spectacle?

    Eddie was not invited to the gulch. I wonder why?
  8. Watching the spectacle?

    Hello Devil's Advocate, I suppose I didn't pass your test then? Good to meet you. Howdy dream_weaver, thank you for the heads up. I can say that I feel at home. Well, I suppose Severinian would benefit from checking his premise as well?
  9. Watching the spectacle?

    I am being asked to draw likeness between emotional responses to a picture and a situation which takes place in a very complex and deep context. Am I being tested because I'm a newbie here or is there really a flaw anywhere in my argument, if so, I'd be delighted to right myself.
  10. Watching the spectacle?

    Severinian, The 'general public' in the novel, is depicted as not being objective,people went by feeling, whim and the 'public good'. If I were in Atlantis and was being told ".... the final crash, when the roof comes down on their heads", would I be wrong to think to myself - "finally, the looters are falling of the weight of their own evil, this is good, for me and all rational men"? The entire idea of feeling bad, depends on the degree of innocence of the people freezing and dying, as in collateral damage. But I think in a society, things wouldn't go as bad as they went in the novel, if there really were innocent people. Yes, the number of such people would need to cross a certain threshold to make a difference, but in the novel, that number was so small, that the system collapsed pretty quickly. Should one feel bad no matter how small that number? I don't think so. When evil exists, lives are lost. Tough. The only emotion permissible then, is the one that is experienced in response to the fall of that evil. Which is exactly what is portrayed through the many dialogues quoted here, which refer to the "final crash".
  11. How can we achieve happiness when work requires pain?

    Let’s build some context. “Happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of one’s values.” (Virtue of Selfishness) “Happiness is a state of non-contradictory joy—a joy without penalty or guilt, a joy that does not clash with any of your values and does not work for your own destruction, not the joy of escaping from your mind, but of using your mind’s fullest power, not the joy of faking reality, but of achieving values that are real, not the joy of a drunkard, but of a producer.” (Galt) Now, let’s do some definitions for pain (all from merriam-webster): “a sharp unpleasant sensation usually felt in some specific part of the body” “a state of great suffering of body or mind” “the active use of energy in producing a result” “strict attentiveness to what one is doing <take pains to be sure that you don't damage anything while moving the furniture>” Do you see that the definition of pain varies with context? Here’s the elaboration: Pain is a response to noxious stimuli. Pain is good. It’s essential. Without pain, any living organism would die. Pain tells you what’s bad for your life: “hey! Something has gone wrong, pay a little attention here, else you’ll lose functionality of this part and that’ll eventually lead to you not being able to survive” But do we all back out at the first sign of pain? Nope, we’ve learned to recognise the fact that the pain is only an indicator of the problem and not the problem itself. Further, we have sufficient experience and knowledge to classify pain based on its potential for impairment and set it aside, e.g. I’m in pain when I wake up an hour earlier in the morning than I usually do, but I need to wake up early to get something done (which brings me happiness by achieving value). My body is pleading me to go back to sleep, eyes are burning, head’s throbbing. But I KNOW that it’ll pass, that I’ll compensate for the sleep later, that it’s not a brain tumour causing these symptoms. When I drag myself out of bed, I might incur some discomfort, some pain, but does it tip the scale? I got the job done, I’m happy, I can now use the fruits of that job to do more. But, if I had a migraine (sensitive to light, nauseous, severe pain) I’d see a doc and take meds & a day’s rest and that’d enable me to get back to work - pain has actually enabled me to get back to work. I am not suggesting that pain, unless debilitating, ought to be ignored. What I am suggesting is that the function of pain is a protective one, therefore must not be misconstrued as being a ‘buzz kill’. Pain is a bodily response. The job of contextually interpreting and inferring what that pain means and how you ought to perceive and act on it is YOUR job, not the body’s, it cannot think. Conventional false ideas have dropped this context. They’ve equated pain with effort and made it a dysfunctional affair. They’ve blurred out the following facts: the pain/discomfort incurred in doing work that brings you happiness is really just there to ensure you don’t harm yourself; it is compensated for by the achievement of your task and is not an indicator of something life threatening unless you cross limits, which you won’t if you Know What You’re Doing and doesn’t refer to the ‘state of exhaustion, reduced emotional vitality and painful duty’. Recognizing this is the key to answering the apparent dilemma – ‘Happiness requires work which may require pain, therefore happiness is not achievable’, in other words, it’s key in removing contradiction. Blow the understanding of the philosophy of physical pain to pain at the psychological level, break everything up to their constituent bits. You’ll realize that it holds up well. If it doesn’t, then you’ll have to re-evaluate a lot of things. If the “migraine” was brought on because of too much work, then the issue lies in your ability to direct your work patterns away from flash points that result in migraines – which in other words means: you might be doing the wrong things. This can change, but only when you change your perspective on pain.
×