Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Old Geezer

Regulars
  • Posts

    230
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Old Geezer

  1. here are some excerpts from the Nationally recognized code of Social Work ethics preamble that shee might find objectionable. Environmental forces in social work generally refer to anything outside of the individual (friends, family, communitty, school etc) focusing on them as the creation of value is anti objectivist I am inclined to think that objectivists tend to view social justice and change as an investment in their own future, something not done for the sake of clients objectivist ethics is abilities based, not needs based. **** That being said, I don't think Ayn rand was against all social workers. For instance a clinical social worker can do private therapeutic work... or a private service may hire them because they know how to get reimbursement from insurance companies (as at a hospital) another job of a social worker is to manage care teams. also, there are some social work principles that Social workers share with Rand (self determination, a value of the importance of human relationships etc, a distaste for discrimination are some examples)
  2. I dont feel a "responsibility" to help him. I WANT to help him. At the very least I don't want to actively contribute money to people who are actively hurting someone who is of value to me. He understands this and is actively working to act on it. But any action that is not futile or suicidal involves inspiring people around him to identify with his struggle. And that is precisely what he has done, inspired me. Can you explain this in a little more detail, or link to a site that does? Also, what if my objective is not to effect the price of Saudi Crudde, but rather to reduce the amount of dollars I give to a corrupt theocracy?
  3. Thanks fellas...Ill have to digest those sites OS Im a regular GR fan
  4. Saudi Arabia has been bothering me for some time now. But having read Robert Baer's sleeping with the devil and seeing a Saudi Friend struggle night after night to find an effective way to work for his freedom, and seeing him sometimes CRYING when I inadvertantly mention some freedom I take for granted, I decided enough is enough I believe that it will be several years before we can start seeing more Oil from russia, and even then I wont be jumping for joy as the "Russian Oil" will probably be coming from those failed states known as the "stans" the same applies for Iraq, and ANWR, (even if ANWR was opened completely for drilling today, it would be several years before seeing sizeable results) I am beginning to think that I ought to use my consumer dollars to help my friend. (either by limiting my usage of fuel, patronizing a company that pours less money to the House of Saud and its terrorist subsidiaries, or financially supporting some pro reform group) can you guys poke some holes for me?
  5. " Now you know thats not true! he wore a sweater and turned down the heat in the white house too! JK
  6. LMAO how fitting that the socialists would give an example of LITERAL SLAVERY as "cooperation" On a more serious note, Desmond Morris has some worthwile reading on evolutionary theory and cooperation/competition (and how it came to be that human nature synthesized the two concepts)
  7. Old Geezer

    Animal rights

    It seems to me that people can enjoy the taste of meat for two reasons; Either they can Crave the nutrients. (I would imagine that Cravings stem from "Biological causes" such as someone's need for vitamin B, or sugar, or a smoker's yearning for an increase in dopamine) Or they can can crave the "taste". It seems that tastes vary from person to person because their sensory experiences and the judgement they pass on them varies. While most people are not always fully conscious of what value judgements they are making when they like food, it seems that a Randian approach would suggest that this always occurs. (the judgements may not always be rational, but they exist) Some examples include a hunter who sub consciously savors his Deer more because of the sport and effort and struggle involved in obtaining it. a lover who sub consciously enjoys a meal more because she was taken out to a restuarant by someone she loves a tourist who detests the taste of dog meat because she associates dog with companion a soldier who enjoys an MRE after being rescued. **** if tastes are driven by judgements, tastes are subject to change. Example: I once went to a friend's house, and noticed she had a cool looking lamp shade. Upon closer observation, however, I noticed it was one of those collars they give to Neutered dogs. Now there is nothing Immoral about her putting the "lamp shade" there. But I no longer found it in good taste. (I think probably because Neuter collars are meant to be neuter collars, not lamp shades) When I talk to "part time vegetarians" (i.e. those that abstain from non certified organic meat, or meat they don't know the source of but don't object to eating meat in general)they often make the argument that they simply didn't like meat after seeing how the animals were raised in "factory farms"(in other words, becoming aware of the conditons the animals were raised in changed their tastes because some element of the conditions was not in line with their idea of the excellent) most often when vegetarians have tried to "convert" me, they have asked me to merely become knowledgeable about how they are raised, and have asked me to be sure that cognitive dissonance does not hijack my thought process. **** any comments?
  8. Bearster I recognize that, and believe me I have no intention of setting up Booby traps. But humans are innovative enough that the threat of forgetfullness or faultiness etc would not necessarilly be a deterrent for them. Is it moral for THOSE people to make booby traps? Does it Constitute an initiation of force? (what about if the property is not clearly labeled?) Does it matter if the Booby traps are planned for Deadly force? What about force that is purposefully harmful??(an electric fence for instance is meant to shock, but not permanently harm an individual, meanwhile a bear trap could do nasty things to my leg.) Should the government make Booby traps illegal? Can this be done on the grounds they constitute planned threats to police should they need to enter the property?
  9. Microsoft has spent years and hundreds of millions of dollars fighting antitrust litigation. This is not known as "turning the other cheek"
  10. this essentially is what I was trying to get at in the Microsoft EU thread. Microsoft's actions were not heroic, but that doesn't mean they were disgusting. If Reardon's initial ambiguities and fence sitting were "disgusting" I don't see how he could have been admitted into a utopia
  11. I hope you know some that are different. If not I can post some links. My point is that they coulda lost much bigger.
  12. You are potentially correct. Assuming for a moment that you are correct about the woulda coulda shoulda's this still does not make them "disgusting" apparently the army of lawyers felt differently.
  13. Is the Use of Booby traps with purposefully deadly force to protect one's property moral? Can it be made illegal on the basis that Police must be able to access private property without fear in emergencies or when it is suspected that someone's rights are being violated inside the property? What other issues are involved?
  14. Where is that written into their contract? Microsoft's obligations are to make as much money for its stockholders as legally possible. "By sanctioning the looters, by naming them moral, Microsoft abdicates all the good that it stands for." the purpose of a business is not to "stand for good" the purpose of a business is to make money. I suppose the argument might stand for particular individuals within the business, but they haven't been named by anyone on this post, so that argument has not yet occuree. "This is in fact a case of victim-blaming, because this is indeed a case of the victim making possible its own victimhood" Microsoft could've filed a brief saying up is down and it wouldnt have mattered, the fine would have still been there.
  15. Miscrosoft's approach is not disgusting. They have a contractual obligation to try to make money for their shareholders that is what they are doing. They have no "Moral obligation" to fight the good fight beyond what they feel is worth it. Using emotional invectives like that against microsoft seems to be a case of victim blaming.
  16. has anyone read the onion lately? I like this quote ""I'll be able to sleep easier knowing that another motivated, powerful woman is off the streets."LMAO I guess I should add a disclaimer here. I like the quote because its from a spoof paper, not because I agree
  17. I was wondering if anyone had some good links to any stories about the testimony yesterday... (comprehensive summaries and analysis of testimony) PS. Sysop... Feel free to self destruct this thread in a day or two or earlier if you feel its not appropriate....
  18. Old Geezer

    Animal rights

    The burden of proof falls on you to provide evidence to back up your assertion with evidence. He could have just have easily have said that you could eat more complementary proteins. Science and ethics are not divorced. In fact one must understand the nature of reality in order to judge good actions. what if the food contained arsenic? What if the food contained human flesh? I agree... Did I give the impression that this is other than my opinion?
  19. Old Geezer

    Animal rights

    why should I think of food as a painting? I do not need paintings to live, nor do I crave paintings if deprived of them for some time, Is the "virtues" you refer to cost efficiency? Most people I know are aware of the price differences for certified organic foods. Those countries suffer from lack of capitilism, not lack of factory farms (an analagous situation... you should read/watch the condititions of countries that dont have many tv's) What is the non arbitrary reason to ban sensory experiences and the consequential judgements/abstractions from our judgements of more sensory experiences?
  20. Old Geezer

    Animal rights

    Why do you consider taste the standard of excellence?(Side note, have you ever tasted organic beef? I like it) Value Judgement implies reason, and reason is open to change with the introduction of new sense data. When I talk with secular vegetarians they most often tell me that they became a vegetarian after reading/watching factory farm conditions. It seems to me that SOME Vegetarians who became exposed to Factory farm conditions decided that taste was less important to them then eating food obtained in alignment with their respect for the good(Aristotlean sense) and out of awe for the struggle for existence Good presumption It was meant to be a joke, I wont quit my day jobs
  21. Old Geezer

    Animal rights

    Proving a negative is difficult, OS... Which amino acid are you refferring to? I am an avid weight lifter and am not aware of any amino acids not available via a vegetarian diet. Please Name an Amino acid that cannot be obtained from a vegetarian diet.
  22. IMO the insurance industry would have taken a major hit with or without g regulation. But gov regulation made it a lot worse (sort of like mixing beer and cocaine the interaction was disasterous) Thats not how most insurance works. (even if it was unregulated) imagine fire insurance in a town of 100 people. Every year approximately 1 house catches on fire. Each person pays for the rebuilding of say 2% of a house. The insurance. company keeps the money which it is not obligated to pay to rebuild a house.
  23. Old Geezer

    Animal rights

    Me too. what of it? A)it necessarilly implies nothing B ) the issue isn't the well being of the animal, but rather respect for life itself.(not deference to animal life, just respect for life's struggle for existence) If the issue was well being than there are certain ways in which the animals are better off under a factory system (higher weight, preventative antibiotics) i) If the standard of excellence for the food is taste than I have several questions; 1. Do you feel that food preferences are a rational choice?? If they are than might exposure to new information lead to different choices? If they arent, then why do food preferences vary? ii) if the standard of excellence is cost, than a veggie diet is cheaper. iii) if the standard of excellence is health, the jury is still out in my mind. iiii) if the standard of excellence is cultural, YIKES! anyway, what do YOU consider the standard of excellence for food?
  24. I make that a habit when possible. (one of the reasons why on line discussion boards hold appeal is that at least the primary source can be posted/accesssed.) Sometimes. For instance when the assertions are statements of observations. as rummy says (paraphrased) "there are known unknowns and unknown unknowns" I am usually pretty aware of what I think I want to find out about a particular policy or scientific debate, ... but if somebody introduces new potential evidence into a debate, I like to read up on it, even if how they use the evidence is skewed. Sometimes the irrational debator consequentally does research irrationally, and when I read up on what they give me or post this becomes apparent quite quickly
  25. ba dum chhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh your on a roll
×
×
  • Create New...