Julian

Some people think Enron has some connection to our troops being in Iraq. I don't know if that assertion is true though. Anyway, I'd just like to know what would prevent war funders from using the American military to initiate force?

I've read that article in VOS. I just wanted to see if I could get more information here. By "Enron situation", I meant a situation in which business attempts to use military force to control foreign markets. If a very wealthy person or a corporation pays a considerable sum of money to the armed forces, would they be able to direct the armed forces, even if their reason is irrational? What is to stop them? Who is to decide?

How would war be funded in an Objectivist society? How would it prevent Enron situations, a result of a mixed economy's foreign policy?

Thanks guys. I have been reading The Art of Consciousness by Nathaniel Brandon. It's been helping me a lot. I've decided to not wear the shoes.

I want them because they make me feel more masculine and attractive. Females want to be dominated in a relationship, and taller men look more dominant. I'm a handsome guy, but the height thing always bothers me. I wore them out today for a test drive, and I was feeling really good. In other words, it had a positive effect. Positive results don't come from flawed premises though, unless my emotions were misleading me. I've been wishing that I would grow more, but my wishes were irrational, since there are no genies to grant wishes. I decided to take it into my own hands. There's no way for me to obtain the value of height. I can't command my body to grow more. It's biological. So my thinking is that I'm not achieving something deceitfully, since it is something no one can achieve through effort. I'm still the same guy, so I'm not being deceitful about who I am. If someone asked if I was wearing shoe lifts, I would deny it though to avoid embarassment.

Okay, so I have another related question. I'm a short guy. I'm 17 years old and am around 5'5". Since everyone in my grade got their growth spurt last summer, I've been feeling pretty insecure and intimidated. I come from a short family, so it's out of my control. Since it's out of my control, I get fustrated. I don't think it's rational to be insecure because of my height, or anything else outside of my control, so I'm working on that. However, I do have a pair of shoe lifts which can immediately and comfortably increase my height by 1 inch. That combined with the initial shoe height, brings me to about 5'8", which I am more than happy with. If I do wear them, I'll start my first day back to school, since it is reasonable that I could have had a growth spurt over Christmas break. Should I use them, even though I have not yet addressed my insecurities?

Economist Lant Pritchett claims we do in an interview he did in Reason Magazine. My understanding is no. A right is absolute, and it belongs to an individual, not a collective.

Not only are most of the kids in my school incredibly superficial, but their discussions are limited to sports, video games, and TV shows. I understand that someone could have fun doing all of these, but why be so obsessed? I watch TV, but I don't use last week's episode of South Park to strike up a conversation. Either they're using it as a crutch, or they don't want to think. Do you think this is due to a lack of confidence? I'm trying to figure it out myself. I've never understood it.

Sorry, I was questioning both. I wasn't concerned about dealing with an immoral person, simply assisting them. Great way of putting it. That's why I'm drawn to the field as well ; ) You just helped me find the words.

I don't think I am anymore. I used to picture a big nothingness, which always made me uneasy. However, I know now that that nothingness can't exist. Although we follow a creed of life, we'll all die one day. So, are you afraid of death?

*** Mod's note: Merged with an earlier topic - sN *** Is it immorally deceptive? My current opinion is that it's not. I mean it would take a completely different world view to accept imperfection as the moral ideal. The premises might make it immoral though, especially if low self-esteem is the motivating factor. I'm kind of stuck on this issue. What do you guys think? It's important to me because I'm thinking about a career in plastic surgery. Right now, I go to a pre-med high school. In college, I plan on majoring in psychology and then going off to medschool.

You know what, I think the problem is that I've been thinking out of context. In a world where everyone was rational and objective, there would be no need for the term "atheism."

And that's exactly why I won't call myself "amoral." For an Objectivist, amorality would apply to Subjectivists, not himself. Morality is something an Objectivist would practice, whereas murder and theism they would not. It is also permissible to call a Subjectivist anti-life, but that doesn't mean anti-death is the right way to describe me. "You seek escape from pain. We seek the achievement of happiness. You exist for the sake of avoiding punishment. We exist for the sake of earning rewards. Threats will not make us function; fear is not our incentive. It is not death that we wish to avoid, but life that we wish to live." Anti-pain, anti-punishment, and anti-death are not ways we describe ourselves in. We have a different standard. Should we invent terms for everything we don't believe to be true? Should we have a word for not believing in the Devil or ghosts or everlasting gobstoppers? Why is God so special to all of you?

I am not denying what I am. If everyone were an Objectivist , the term "God" would not even exist. It would not exist because there is no objective evidence for it. "Do you think that actually happened?" "If it didn't happen, then there's no that is there." In the same pattern as atheism, it makes no sense to say I am an anti-murderer. None of us would refer to ourselves as such. Only in dealing with the irrational, does it become necessary to identify others. When this happens, even though we may identify someone else as a murderer, we still don't identify ourself as an anti-murderer.

I agree that it is okay for a theist to identify us as atheists, but to self-identify yourself as an atheist, to think in your own head, that you are an atheist is misguided, backwards, and irrational. I see.