Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Doug Morris

Regulars
  • Content Count

    183
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Doug Morris last won the day on March 7

Doug Morris had the most liked content!

About Doug Morris

  • Rank
    Member

Previous Fields

  • Relationship status
    Single
  • Sexual orientation
    Straight

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Contact Methods

Recent Profile Visitors

827 profile views
  1. Reminds me of an anecdote I heard but can't verify, which was disbelieved by one person I shared it with. A researcher needed some radioactive materials. If delivered too soon they would decay to uselessness before they could be used, so the researcher specified no earlier than a certain date. A secretary changed that to no later than the specified date. They arrived right away, making them useless. The disbelieving person was a secretary who said no secretary would make such a change without asking the person who put in the request.
  2. The secret valley was a private club, not a nation.
  3. That's for citizenship, which is a different question. The government owns a lot more property than it should, and therefore should exercise restraint in how it runs that property.
  4. Obviously. I was trying to clarify the concepts of subconscious and nonconscious, and in particular the distinction between them and whether any other categories needed to be added, by asking which category the subliminal effect fit under.
  5. In my experiences with S-E-X subliminals, the women were not naked or sexually suggestive. One was a businesswoman, dressed as such, in her office. There was no perceptible delay and no conscious thought between first seeing the picture and experiencing the arousal. Presumably I was not even consciously aware of it, let alone focused on it. I had to look for it to find it. I was not aroused by the sexy picture someone posted one time, with the comment to the effect that we can't tell whether she's sexy without knowing about her character. (I think it was an old post on a necro'd thread.) My question was whether the seemingly instantaneous process of becoming aroused, which must have been triggered by the word in the hair, was subconscious, nonconscious, or what.
  6. On multiple occasions I have looked at a photograph of a woman, been sexually aroused by it, then looked closer and seen that it had been retouched so that some of the strands of hair spelled S-E-X. Once I became conscious of this, the sexual arousal went away. How does this sort of subliminal effect fit in with what is being said about subconscious and nonconscious?
  7. Do you have anything to back this up with? Does this mean that if the Axis had won the war, what they did would have been moral? I'm not sure what you're saying about Trump. His presidency was made in America. Acting one way or the other about Trump constitutes doing something about what is going on in America, although it has effects elsewhere as well. Trump's emotion-guidedness, erraticness, and being out of his depth are very dangerous. He has acted against individual rights by attacking freedom of movement across borders and by interfering with women's abortion decisions. He has cozied up to authoritarian governments in a way that is probably more harmful than helpful. On the other side of the ledger is his rolling back some regulations, although Gus van Horn had a column arguing that this is a tiny drop in the bucket. Racism consists of thinking of other people or treating them as members of racially defined collectives rather than as individuals. Thinking of other people or treating them as members of collectives of any kind rather than as individuals is evil. It is evil because it distributes judgments, rewards, and, where necessary, punishments according to what other members of a collective are and have done and earned, not according to what each individual is and has done and earned. It is evil because it evades the differences among individuals. As far as racism in particular goes, there is much more individual variation within races then there is statistical difference between races. In trying to communicate with someone, it may be necessary to deal with their emotions. But it is essential to base one's own position on facts and reasoning, and to try to get them to do the same.
  8. Can you derail the train?
  9. One thing that complicates this issue is that government currently owns a lot of things it shouldn't.
  10. Somebody challenged me once with the following. You're driving a car down a mountain road. The brakes fail. You can steer but not slow or stop. You are approaching a bridge packed with kids. Your choices are steer for the bridge and mow down the kids or steer to the side and be killed yourself. He indicated he wouldn't have any respect for anyone whose choice was to steer for the bridge. I tried to explain that this was an abnormal situation with no fully satisfactory outcome and he said he would be perfectly satisfied to steer to the side and die. He had a military background. I don't know to what extent that entered into it.
  11. That should be perceive race as a very real concept.
  12. Some of this is starting to get repetitive again. The greatest amount of evil exists in places like North Korea. How can I have a significant effect there? I understand and acknowledge that some people perceive race a a very real concept. They are deluded.
  13. Here's another approach. Man has rights because reason is the primary tool by means of which he lives. So the question becomes, at what point does a fetus or baby start using this tool? Wouldn't that be when he or she starts forming concepts?
  14. How does Nagel, or do you, conclude that it is fundamentally inexplicable? We don't have a full explanation yet, but that doesn't mean an explanation is fundamentally impossible.
  15. That might work. In order for there to be a concept there must be a word symbol. In order to observe that a child has concepts, we must either observe it talking (or perhaps signing, writing, or typing) in concepts or observe it understanding when someone else does. The latter often comes first. I take it you are referring to the potential we know they have, not to their actual performance so far as I at first thought you were. So we can conclude that a newborn is a potential person. But can we conclude that a newborn is an actual person?
×
×
  • Create New...