Dopaminergic

I wonder what Dr. Peikoff would say about O'bama, especially considering how adamant his stance is that O'ists should vote Democrat. It seems to be that O'bama would be a combination of the worst aspects of both. Not only an altruist, socialist, but a theocrat in some sense. The prospect of him winning disturbes me. He speaks well! That's it! I find it very frustrating that this is the only criteria by which he remains a contender in the polls. (Today they announced he's neck and neck with Hillary). He has no experience, just a nice suit, and a good voice... What would Peikoff suggest? If O'bama wins the primary. We know he's religious, and a socialist? I think that the global statement that voting left is the best way to go should be reevaluated by Dr. Peikoff, especially given that the Dems are going to try to use their religion to woe the voters in swing states that might be religious!

Outstanding points! I work in the business as well, and Pfizer's problem is more about the FDA, and the public's perception of an evil industry than anything else (so in some sense there is a shrugg here). However, what I've wanted to see for just 6 months, and it is pretty harsh, but I think it would give the public a reality check. I would like America's pharmaceutical industry to go on a sebatical for 6 months. No more manufacturing, no more drugs, just for 6 months. What would people do without their Prozac, or Viagra, or Lipitor, or Insulin, or etc? Wait, the drug companies keep me alive? Hmmm. But since they keep me alive, they have some MORAL OBLIGATION to set prices low... Just 6 months, would change the perception into a realization of the importance they have in society, vs the current EVIL mantra we hear on the new about them. (And lets start with getting rid of corporate welfare to all companies, so they can really make strong arguments/cases against the government).

As for water on Mars, the topic of this thread. As others have, I won't focus on whether or not public funds should pay for the endeavor. I would tend to think private funds would be more successful in the long run, due to competition. Anyhow water on Mars is an important, very important finding. It is only a step, but a critical step to understanding life on other worlds. But most critically, we could use the water in a colonization for many different technologies...with the ultimate goal of gaining or finding some resource on the planet. There are many theories on Mars. Some prominent scientists (that is, not dreamers) actually think if we could find water, that teraforming the planet isn't out of reach. Maybe that is a stretch, but the evidence is there for the potential of doing so. Furthermore, the technology that stems from exploration is unquestionable, and will only advance our understanding as we explore Saturn's Moon's, or Jupitar's Moons. It isn't just about finding a new species of ameoba, its about long term pursuits. And by the way, finding life (of any kind) on another world, would constitute one of (if no the biggest) scientific discoveries in history of man!

Central Market is one of THE most outstanding grocery stories I've ever shopped in...in fact, it has almost anything one could possibbly imagine from all over the world. It is globalisation at its utter finest...items from every corner of the globe litter the store. I no longer live in Texas, so here in Seattle Whole Foods, or stores of similar type are where most people shop. (Seattle loves this kind of thing, for obviuous reasons).

I may be incorrect about its success. I was just amazed at how full the theatre was in Seattle. But for a 39 million movie, 17 mil isn't the best, I concur. We'll see....maybe it will pick up steam. The DVD could be the kicker for its success. I'm sure that the Tv show is picking up steam in sales too. Interestingly, most of the reviews I've read were good in the papers, so perhaps, it will just take some time to get the word out, since the marketing hasn't been full force...given the budget.

It has been quite some time (since the first Matrix) that I have watched a "new" sci-fi concept film and really enjoyed it from an entertainment, philosophical, and artistic level. I haven't seen the TV series but have them Q'ed in NETflix to be watched ASAP. I assume there will be either a return of the series as mentioned above, or a sequal film. Since my understanding is that things are going well for the film. I went to an almost packed house...All in all, I hope they continue the story in one form or another. It was lots of fun.

I went to the link on MSN about Windows Vista. It looks like there will be some great features, including the translucent windows, thumbnail switching (Mac has this), and better over all visiability of open windows. They claim new security updates. But with most microsoft things, this will be great for the first few months, then its hacked, and basically worthless, forcing one to use other ways to protect their PC. Anyhow, I think it looks promising; however, I agree with the above. Waiting for service packs will be crucial!

Would it be consistent with Objectivism to think of God as the universe itself? A pantheistic view similar to the one Einstein held. It seems to me that if one were to "believe" in God, that this would be the most logical and accurate way to believe in God, since denying that existence would deny the existence of something rather than nothing, and therefore deny existence itself. This concept, however, relys heavily (completely) on the definition of God, and therefore may be inconsistent with the previous post's attempts to define God. I think it is something to consider in this discussion, if it hasn't already been discussed. Where would the law of Identity fit into this definition? This idea might be equally as, logical as Atheism, since it doesn't like most theologies rest on A is not A, but actually seems to define A as A. God is the Universe. This would mean that one could say ,"we don't understand everything about God", and be saying an accurate statement. One could say "God is non-man," and be accurate. Can anyone comment on this sort of definition of God? I think it is an interesting perspective to consider since the posted topic originally asked "if God can exist?" If one were to think of God as the universe, then yes the universe can and does exist.

I too have been perplexed by this and have been searching for an answer for several days. No one seems to know why, so far as I can tell. However, if you go to Objectivism Online.net you can access the live chat via that page (the link on the right).

The privitization of space implys that private companies have access to space. That is, that they are permitted to travel into and out of space freely. Does anyone know if this is the case? I also think that the role of government is defined as the protection of rights. I do not see government having much juristiction on a moon mining operation, for example. I would think that any sort of lunar colony or space group would need to establish a government or body of elected leaders in the event that a long term settlement (whether research, or industrial) is established. This would serve and function as a basic entity only. This would be analogous to the colonies in the early America's, in that simple governments and leaders were established. Like any wise investment strategy, any sort of space junk or waste would be something the companies address on their own without the regulation by a governing body. There would be reason to consider all possibilties during the planning stages as "space junk" could pose a problem for safety, or perhaps, some of it could be collected and recycled to become part of the colony.

I was actually interested in this sort of thing. I have been looking for a neuroscience think tank. I "think" that the amount can vary from average to very very high. It all depends on the type of think tank. Doctorates will be of greater value, so they will get paid more. But experience, and expertise are likely to be of high importance as well. I didn't give you numbers, cause I don't know for sure. But I know that many different types of tanks exists, so I would think many pay scales are out there. What area would be of interest to you? And who is the financier of the tank? Those questions might help to get a better idea of the pay.

Sorry David ...I meant Dan.

Sometimes you feel like when trying to even make someone understand Objectivism. They say " its not practical" or "balance is the only way." And The frustrating part is speaking about it with people that can't comprehend even the smallest amount of philosophy. You can't even get terms straight and such. I agree with David. One needs to simply pass on the books first to ground people in the ideas. Then try to discuss them after they've been read. That's what worked for me...