Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Iakeo

Regulars
  • Content Count

    181
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Iakeo

  • Rank
    Member

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  1. "Faith", from indoeuropean "bheidh-" meaning: to persuade, compel, confide "Reason" from indoeuropean "ar-" meaning: to fit together Do YOU see any "conflict" here? -Iakeo
  2. What is your "warrior"..? What do you mean by the (rather loaded) term "warrior"..? If your warrior is an agent in the service of the government's sole purpose, then your warrior is a policeman, and is right in his actions. If your warrior is anything else, then he is a thug and a criminal. That was simple. Got another simple question? -Iakeo
  3. If you know that acting unethically is wrong, and you know that an act is unethical, then to perfrom that act is immoral. Period. An action's consequences, positive or negative, are not the determiner of whether it is an ethical action (is morally based). The determiner is whether the act violates a moral imperitive, and if it does then it is immorally based and unethically performed. Is that a perverse enough rationale for you? -Iakeo
  4. Oooooo... cooooool..! It might be fun watch you fo go splat, eh brah..!? -Iakeo
  5. Hae ae ae..! Yeah....! A sense of humor..! That characteristic (behavior) will take you far, and keep your spirit alive during the trek. Glad you could see the point of my 'caustic" remarks. When someone actually GETS the point of harsh words, which is a more and more rare occurance these days, it brings me MUCH happiness and a feeling of closeness to the one who can smile back at my rude, yet pertinent, nonsense, which isn't nonsense at all. Excellent..! And,.. YES,.. you need to lose the scratchy shirt and uncomfortable belt. Objectively, what good do they do? Other than slow you down and force you to relive the unchangable past, when you should be moving forward,.. not suffering the past. Concentrating on that which hurt you gives it power. Sap it of it's power by finding something of value to obsess about. As you're going to obsess about SOMETHING anyway,.. it's obviously just in your nature. -Iakeo
  6. Iakeo

    Competition

    So what has the "governement" (entity) bought..!!? Did they buy (X number of) items, or the rights to have others manufacture the item..!? If they bought bought ITEMS, then by what right do they put out requests for bids to manufacture this item? If they bought the rights to put out RFP's to manufacture this item, where's the problem..!!!? Now,.. PLEASE make some sense with what you're trying to communicate, or expect to be ignored as a crank. Thanks again for the intruiging word puzzle, dude. -Iakeo
  7. What do you mean by "torture"..?! The flaky use of language around here is very bizarre to me. What is the purpose of a human beings action on an animal? If it's purpose is to simply inflict pain then it's immoral, unless pain measurement for some other purpose is the goal. If simple sadism, the enjoyment of another beings pain, is the goal, then your being a sadist, not an objectivist. Your freakin' fuzzyheadedness in asking this NON-QUESTION is amazing. Now,.. ask a real question Moose. -Iakeo
  8. Your self flagilation is disgusting. I have no tolerance for such self-sacrificial nonsense. If you're a good person, show it by being what you consider a good person should be. Period. The past is the past. We don't need your bid for pity, which is nothing more than self-righteous self agrandizement, which is the typical sign of the evangelist zealot. If you want to not be a self mutilating pity monger, simply stop it. I am indeed harch in my words, but if you have truly been "studying" objectivism you would have realised long ago that your wish to "rectify the so-called damage" you've done is nothing more than imposing the past (the not you now) on the present and future. To continue in this embarrassing train of action and thought is very VERY non- objectivist. Snap out of it, buckeroo..!! Get real and heal yourself with what you know is right. -Iakeo
  9. So what'cha got to say, Piz..? Some interesting stuff, I hope. Do you prefer high-bar to the rings, or the other way around..? -Iakeo
  10. I think you use far too few words. Your terseness leaves me with the impression that you're as deep and involved as a coat of PAM on a cooking sheet. I apparently have cookies on the brain,... sorry about that. I'd have to actually have an involved conversation with you to get ANY sense of who the froog you are, and whether it's worth my time conversing with you. Other than that,.. you seem to have nice antlers, and your name is easy to type. Now,.. say something interesting/controversial/amusing/annoying/etc.. I can tolerate anything but the "stupidly bland". -Iakeo
  11. Recreation is "re-creating" something. Since entropy breaks down that which is "created", if a creation is deemed valuable it is a good thing to "re-create" it. The purpose of recreation is stated above. It is to "re-create" that which entropic forces have and are breaking down. Increasing what one values is a moral activity. "Re-creating" (restoring/increasing) what one values is therefore a moral good, and an ethical imperative. Any act that enhances what you value is "productive", and therefore is part of your "productive life". Increasing what you value IS "production". Your definition of "recreational activity", as you're using it above, contains the assumption that it's possible to be "recreational" while NOT being productive. Any activity that is not "productive" (increasing a value of yours) is not a "re- creation" of your values,.. It is a merely a waste of time. (( You might try defining what you mean by particular words, like "recreation", to yourself, and then in your questioning to others, as that usually makes the "answer" either obvious or at least easier for others to deal with [answer]. The goal is to find a way to question YOURSELF, with the last resort being the questioning of others, about things that you don't understand. )) -Iakeo
  12. Iakeo

    Competition

    You said that the rightful patent holder sells "the product" to the government, not rights (license) to the patent, which implies that no transfer of the right to manufacture the item has changed hands. How does the government have the right to allow a non-licensee to manufacture the item? Your statement that "the government doesn't have to follow patents when the item is being purchased for use by the government" is either total nonsense, or a mistatement of what you think you meant. And "competition" is not an entity. It can't be a "looter" any more than the "color blue" can be a looter. So,.. once again,.. would somebody PLEASE pose statements (or questions) that make sense..! -Iakeo
  13. Iakeo

    Competition

    OK,.. I see one (1) question from you: "Can anyone think of any worthwhile goal and associated competitive situation for which the competition is anything but an imperfect method for motivating people to strive for the goal?" Your question is muddled and confusing, if you mean it seriously. It's a clever "open ended question" which seeks to elicit some sort of "fight or flight response" otherwise (if it's NOT a serious question). So,.. what is your REAL question? Is it, "Is any and every competitive situation anything but an excuse to use an imperfect (undefined) method ('fighting'/competition) to motivate people?" Please state your question as a sensible question. Thanks much buckeroo..!! -Iakeo
  14. Good observation of a piece, an aspect, of what I said. Some portion of our happiness COULD be dependent on seeing our "agenda" forwarded, which in this case would be for more people to see the wisdom of objectism. That (personally) would increase my "happiness quotient". I imagine (possibly hallucinatorially) that it would increase yours as well. In fact I would be somewhat concerned if it DIDN'T up your "happiness quotient". So,.. any comments on the "tractor" analogy..? -Iakeo
  15. We'll have to agree to disagree as to the "correctness" of using anything but the capital version of the letter "o" for the word "objectivist". I consider "objectivism" a discovery, not an invention, and therefore don't consider it necessary to capitalize it anymore than I would capitalize the words "cat" or "sulfur". -Iakeo
×
×
  • Create New...