Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

ZiggyKD

Regulars
  • Posts

    102
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ZiggyKD

  1. Yes, I understand now. Didn't see the connection earlier.
  2. Excellent point, Bearster. I agree. About the Marxist professor, a friend of mine thinks that forming an argument against Kelley based on this example is engaging in a straw man. I don't agree with him as Kelley himself used it to support his own case. What do you think?
  3. I see no reason to take joy in their financial troubles. I'm not a supporter of theirs, but I don't seek happiness at the expense of others. Not directly anyway - I would be quite happy if militant Islamists were wiped off the earth, but only as a result of the cause of this: justice. My happiness here is only a consequence.
  4. As a child, I would hide or cry (or both) when church activities were even mentioned, and only on rare occasions was I forced to go. I'm glad I hid
  5. I've read many comments on this subject scattered around the board in many threads. I created this thread so that we could put all relevant material on the subject in one place, along with a good discussion on the schisms (if such a thread already exists, admins, please forward me to that thread and feel free to delete this one). For those who do not know anything about this subject, the links provided below are a good start. If you find some material elsewhere that would be relevant, please post a link. ------------- There are two main issues that I'd like to discuss here: open/closed system, and moral judgment. Fact and Value, Leonard Peikoff A Question of Sanction, David Kelley Do you side with either of these individuals? What is your view on this subject? What is your support? Do you consider this issue dead?
  6. Cheers indeed. Let's give a welcome to my brother Felipe. (No really, he's actually my brother )
  7. Stephen Speicher, I have read your three part series and wanted to thank you for putting the time and effort into creating it. I tried going through Little's paper initially, but had a hard time grasping the concepts he puts forth. Your series was a joy to read.
  8. By 'possible' I assume you mean, "would it be rational to..." What would you say to this: would it be rational to enjoy a Nazi movie where the Nazi's are glorified? Say this group of Nazi's was quite goal oriented, and the movie is about them acheiving their goals? This isn't to say that I agree with your first point (movies like Goodfellas being inherently wrong), I just don't agree with your reasoning in support of the second. I too have thought about this issue before and have yet to justify my own position (that I also enjoy movies of this kind).
  9. Wow, I'm surprised no one mentioned "Gladiator." Granted, the supernatural element (Maximus, the protagonist, speaking to figurines representing his family, for example) detracts from the heroism that makes the movie so good, but I don't think it's enough to deem the movie "bad." I also especially enjoy the soundtrack (which I have a copy of), very heroic and inspiring. I would definitely recommend this movie.
  10. Back to the topic, I agree with Richard Halley, the line "rational self expression demands no rationality" is contradictory. Art is emotional expression, it is a representation of the artists view of reality, but a (for lack of a better word) "mishandling" of emotions will lead you to the problem Richard Halley is hinting at: that to appreciate art, you must feel, not think. In appreciating art, if one does not think about why one has certain emotional reactions, then one fails to identify their causes (the values one holds). If this escape from "thinking" is done, then it is a reflection of one's (lack of) rationality: that one goes through life never seeking to identify these emotions means that discovery of truth, reality, is never seeked -- only evasion of life.
  11. Ah, sounds very familiar. I knew someone who loved abstract art exactly because it was not a representation reality in any form. I remember her saying, "it's just so free from logic and reality, it's pure emotion." She had convinced herself that happiness was only possible outside (the jail of) reality.
  12. I see your point, and agree. I actually meant to put across what you said, but worded it incorrectly.
  13. that's a new one, personal happiness justified as a duty to others, a new species of altruism.
  14. There was a discussion on quantum theory here a couple months ago, it might help: http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.p...wtopic=241&st=0 (I believe the second page of that thread has the most useful information)
  15. A quick look through the Lexicon shows that she explicitly defined her view on the nature of femininity, so I believe she took it to be a part of her philosophy. I didn't find anything on masculinity. From my own reading of her other works (and please correct me if I am mistaken), the only thing I can recall is her mentioning something in a comparison of the two: where the male, as the penetrator is sexual relations, holds the leading role -- the female, in contrast, is the one being penetrated, the one submitting to the other, and therefore holds an inferior role by nature. Does anyone else remember this? Edit 1: in review, this has more to do with sexual relations than defining the concept of masculinity (and thus little to do with the discussion at hand). Edit 2: actually, the Lexicon (on femininity) quotes the same excerpt I posted earlier (For a woman qua woman, the essence of femininity is hero-worship...)
  16. you mean d180586's right? I am also eagerly awaiting this stunning argument.
  17. If you have The Voice of Reason, it's on page 267. Here are some quotes from that essay: (All bold added by myself)
  18. The Universe a closed system? - I had been wondering what open and closed systems were for a good while. Objectivists need a church, too - had a discussion somewhere along these lines recently with another objectivist. Quantum Reality and Objectivism - I've had an interest in quantum mechanics since I was in early high school when I picked up "A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking.
  19. Hey, my name is David Sediles, student of Objectivism from Tallahassee, FL, though originally from Miami. I'm 20 and currently attend Florida State University, where I'm a mechanical engineering major. I've known about this site for a while, though I never really browsed the forum much until recently -- a couple of very interesting threads here convinced me that I should join the forum.
  20. I don't think the ends justify the means.
  21. Andy Bernstein is giving a lecture at our campus this month on Global Capitalism, and one slogan I've been considering for advertising the lecture is: Help the poor! Support Global Capitalism! This is very similar to the bartwart slogan, though I think I used different reasoning in coming up with the slogan. The full title of the lecture Bernstein is giving is: "Global Capitalism: The Solution to World Oppresion and Poverty" I just reworded the title a bit. I haven't decided to use this slogan yet for the same reasons andrew gave above.
  22. wow, this is a whole other world, css... definitely worth looking into. seems like it's got a bit of a learning curve, I might pick this up after my finals. thanks for the link feldblum.
×
×
  • Create New...