Ariana Binetta

North Korea really is a type of madhouse. I think they're capable of anything. They do things that no other horrid dictatorship in the history of the world has done--this includes communist Albania. Still, I think you're right. The really sick thing is Iran might easily transfer its nukes to Al Queda before we even know they have them. How hard, really, would it be to sneak a bomb into New York, DC, LA or London? Bush seems rather amoral and "morally equivalent." I think he probably would hinder Israel. This is unfortunate because Israel's fight is our fight. And the PLO is little different from Al Queda. Both should be destroyed, if possible. Unfortunately I think the Gaza surrender has made the Israelis soft in the head. They seem as appeasment-oriented as they've ever been in their whole history. Really ominous. Maybe someone will sneak a nuke into Tel Aviv too.

This is an OUTSTANDING movie. It's powerful, moving, tragic, memorable, and definitely makes you think. You also have to see it twice to really get it. And watch out for any idiot friends who want to give you "spoilers!" (Made in 2000 starring Guy Pearce, Joe Pantoliano and Carrie-Anne Moss.)

Iran is run by true fanatics, IMHO. So is North Korea. If either gets the bomb the world situation will get very interesting very fast. I hope President Bush is on top of this. But he seems rather unintelligent and disengaged, so we could be in some real trouble here.

I think there should have been an option for "Yes, in virtually every respect, although there may be a few small points I take exception to or don't fully understand."

The physical evidence in favor of God, as far as I know, is flat zero. And "God," as all the monotheists and polytheists that I'm aware of conceive of Him, seems to violate a great many known laws of the universe. So there's no evidence for, and a lot of evidence against. And yet--maybe if we all look deep enough into our hearts and souls there may be a small place where He could exist, and even needs to fill up...! Maybe a very superior God exists in some strange and remote physical or metaphysical part of the universe unknown to our five senses and limited human reasoning processes/power. Maybe we need to directly harness the power of computers to our brains so we see the world in a much more rounded, deep, 3-D, and multi-dimensional sense?

Can God exist? She can do anything she wants---she's God!!

You're not alone. OPAR was very heavy sledding for me. A real chore. I think it's just clunky and poorly written. Maybe Leonard was intimidated by the topic with its importance and "officialness." This is interesting too because Peikoff's other book (Ominous Parallels) was rather wonderful, stylistically. And his Ford Hall Forum lectures are similarly easy to follow and pellucid (look it up, guys! ). Rand's ITOE is also hard to follow...but maybe that's just the complexity and subtlety of the material? Usually you can get it if you just go over it a few times, but with OPAR maybe not.

Very thoughtful comments, Synthlord! A pleasure to read. And, yes, Rhea was very annoying. But George Clooney was an absolute doll! :-) His effort to understand McElhone was nothing but valliant. Love makes you do these things... What I took away from the film is that life is potentially much more rich than people realize. The possibilities with science, and new environments and species, is great. How wonderful is it to get a chance to recreate life and get a second chance?! I think the mistake everyone made was not to realize that once a new life was created, it instantly became independent and new. All should have treated it as such. Rhea and Kelvin both errored here. But a wonderfully photographed movie with a full heart--and terrific food for thought!

Outstanding movie! Eerie, atmospheric, and beautiful. It does feature murder and suicide, but maybe if the various characters had had an Objectivist sense of self-discipline and rationality they could have handled the various strange goings-on better. The existential reward at the end, you know, was potentially great. A brilliant and thought-provoking film!

I hope I'm not missing Dan's point but...Aren't drugs everywhere? Haven't drugs and art--whether creating or appreciating--gone together since time immemorial? Isn't the whole human body itself a vast and powerful drug manufacturer? From tiredness to sleepiness to day-dreaming to meditation to exercise to song-and-dance to sex--Don't people experience altered consciousness constantly? It keeps life new and fresh! I think the impact of hormones, chemicals, and altered consciousness is continuous. So, yes, drug-takers--within certain limits, obviously--can make and appreciate fine art.

I know neither one of these items of destruction are actually "books" but how about all that utterly limitless verbiage about relgion and socialism which chokes our world? So so much of it seems like pitiful propaganda of very low quality which can't influence or hurt anybody--but what quantity! All these endless volumes of Jesus and Marx (and company) seem to hit us high and low, direct and indirect, obvious and subtle, friendly and mean, etc. The harmfulness of this numbing, pulverizing, insidious, unending stream of intellectual trash seems almost beyond compare and is almost two ultra-powerful "books" in themselves.

I wrote yesterday: Greedy Capitalist replied: That is not the only sentiment I express. Anyone who reads my occasional posts can see that. In fact, that wasn't even the only sentiment I expressed yesterday--even those this whole thread is devoted to "forum atmosphere." My goal here is to discuss Objectivism with an informed, intelligent, worthwhile audience in a way which can benefit my life. But it's a real value in discussing things to be able to really express one's true self and thoughts. This is where the intimidation factor and "Warn %" ratings and REPORT! button on every post comes in. The Valliant book mentioned above is hugely worth discussing in an open, honest and critical manner. But it helps if people could do so without having their motivation questioned.

The original post from Felipe was: I always feel a little intimidated here. It's clear dissent and original thinking isn't much tolerated. This is why I mostly "lurk," not post. Recently a new book came out by James Valliant which did much to set the record straight and give the other side of the story--but which was the essence of tendentious. Not impartial or objectively truth-seeking at all. But do I feel comfortable expressing that sentiment here? No, I do not.

SoftwareNerd asks: No, but somehow this appears to be a different a situation. For America to be an open fraud seems damaging. Keeping international agreements and maintaining a reputation for honesty seem important even when dealing with horrific miscreants. But no one seems to be picking up on my main point: these North Koreans--who admittedly bear some responsibility for their sorry state--are suffering worse than any other large group in the history of man. Every time I study this closely I just want to cry. It isn't "altruism" to acknowledge their unprecedented agony and is an evasion to completely ignor it. How many people does Kim Jong-Il have to starve before America does something here?

The bargain was completely corrupt. They implicitly threatened to go nuclear, and indirectly threatened to nuke America after they did. To forestall this America gave in to blackmail and gave them a massive bribe in order to save our hyde. But the deal was even worse than that because the American nation was not negotiating with the North Korean nation but rather their evil "leader" slave-masters. Thus the bargain was: You monsters who hideously violate the rights of 23 million can go ahead with our blessing provided you don't hideously violate our rights. What you demons do with "your" people is not our concern -- so torture away, boys!