Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


dream_weaver last won the day on July 8

dream_weaver had the most liked content!

About dream_weaver

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Previous Fields

  • Country
    United States
  • State (US/Canadian)
  • Chat Nick
  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • Sexual orientation
    No Answer
  • Real Name
  • Copyright
  • Experience with Objectivism
  • Occupation

Recent Profile Visitors

38405 profile views
  1. dream_weaver

    Number of people in Atlantis

    It was a musing on "I can not refind it, does that tell you something?" "The Crow" is why I have to listen to multiple recordings over again to try finding something again. I generally don't remember everything I've ever heard and where, specifically, I've heard it. In this case, I don't have the book, you mentioned. The lecture it came from happens to be available on the ARI site.
  2. dream_weaver

    OCON 2018

    Yaron Brook Show with Greg Salmieri & Onkar Ghate Discussing Conversation with Jordan Peterson
  3. dream_weaver

    Number of people in Atlantis

    32:30<--->37:30, both the question asked & the answer given (as relates to this thread). It informs me that 'the crow' is real.
  4. dream_weaver

    Fallacy of Logical Omniscience

    If you picked up a log from a fire that was glowing with red embers for its entire length and circumference with your bare hands, I would expect the yell that followed to be loud. In order for concepts to be objective, two things must be present. The object of consciousness and the consciousness of the object. By moving closer to the fire, I can become aware of the heat radiating from it. The conceptual identification that it is hot converts a fact into a perceptual 'device' that can communicate to you, and be held conceptually by me, even after leaving the vicinity of the fire. The sensations only last for their respective durations.
  5. dream_weaver

    All About Evasion

    Nothing that I want to pontificate on at the moment.
  6. dream_weaver

    Objectivism in Academia

    Above topic split into thread: "Egoism and Others" by Merlin Jetton
  7. The Dispilio Tablet - the oldest known written text The tablet has been dated from the 5000 BC era. Depending on the merit of this assessment: Dispilio tablet deciphered – a proof of the oldest script in the world? the alphabet appears to be a mix of the Phoenician and the Glagolitic alphabets with a mention of a disputed Vinča symbols.
  8. This search turned up this link, suggesting film online.
  9. dream_weaver

    Biologists Replicate Key Evolutionary Step

    In the beginning was the phase separation A simple mechanism could have been decisive for the development of life Date: May 23, 2018 Source: Technical University of Munich (TUM) Summary: The question of the origin of life remains one of the oldest unanswered scientific questions. A team has now shown for the first time that phase separation is an extremely efficient way of controlling the selection of chemical building blocks and providing advantages to certain molecules. Molecules in the garage The effect can also be seen externally: the initially clear solution becomes milky. The lack of water in the oil droplets is like a protection because anhydrides need water to disintegrate back into carboxylic acids. [Chemist Job] Boekhoven explains the principle of phase separation with an analogy: "Imagine an old and rusty car: Leave it outside in the rain, and it continues to rust and decomposes because rusting is accelerated by water. Put it in the garage, and it stops rusting because you separate it from the rain." In a way, a similar process occurs in the primordial soup experiment: Inside the oil droplet (garage) with the long-chain anhydride molecules there is no water, so its molecules survive longer. If the molecules compete with each other for energy, again those that can protect themselves by forming oil droplets are likelier to survive, while their competitors get hydrolyzed.
  10. This is from the first night of the '76 lecture series: There are various areas of human endeavor where under certain circumstances it’s practical to accept the advice of an expert, and declare: "he knows best—this is not my field". But you cannot do it in philosophy. And this is so even if you found a certified, completely rational expert. It would be useless, for instance, to turn even to such an expert and say to him, I need a philosophy, you’re an expert, so I’m asking you, should I for instance be selfish? Just tell me, yes or no, so I can act. I haven’t time for discussion and proofs, just give me answer. Now that expert could just say, well that’s easy, just be selfish, and then leave the room, but would that do you any good? After all he told you the truth, but what else would you need? Now, just in pattern, just to give you a taste of what would be involved, just one example. You’d need to know what selfishness is. That would be very helpful. And how do you apply such a wide abstraction in particular in real life situations? And to be selfish, does that mean do whatever you feel? If so, what do you do if your feelings are irrational and clash with other people, and how do you know what’s rational anyway? And who can say how another man should live? Maybe what’s true for the expert, isn’t true for you. Or is truth objective, or what is truth? What is objectivity? And what’s the use? How do you know if you can achieve your goals in this kind of a world, so is there any point to being selfish, or what kind of world is it anyway? And if everyone was selfish, wouldn’t that mean cut-throat competition, and dog-eat-dog, and child labor? And how do you know the answer to all these questions, by what method of knowledge, etc. Now that’s just a taste, a sample of the pattern. The point is you need to know it all—the whole system, not on faith. Faith doesn’t work. It’s useless, even if what you have faith in happens to be true. You need to know it all firsthand with objective proof of each point on strictly practical grounds, to make use of it, to function, to live. In answer to the question: Does one have to create one's own philosophy?, the answer is no. Without validation, however, it is useless.
  11. dream_weaver

    Why follow reason?

    Nothing, I'm pro-reason. "[R]eason", according to Ayn Rand, "is not an axiomatic, but a complex, derivative concept". In the same paragraph she heeds against inquiring about a stand on the validity of reason. (Last paragraph of chapter 6 in Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology.) If the objective is to assess the rationality of Objectivism or of Ayn Rand, examine them for cracks in their foundation.
  12. dream_weaver

    Why follow reason?

    @sjw, What, if anything, would you propose using in lieu of reason?
  13. dream_weaver

    Why follow reason?

    From Hellenistic History and Culture: The reapers in Idyll 10 are a gruff, perhaps elderly workman called Milon, given to coarse rustic proverbs, and a lovestruck young man, Boukaïos, whose name suggests a cowman and his song: in the Iliad Hector uses it as an insult to Ajax, as Antinoös does to Iros in the Odyssey. Homer says βουγάïος, not βουκάïος, and the two citations confirm one another, but the difference of spelling is nothing. It is typical of the freakish pedantry of the Alexandrians to use a Homeric word in a corrected form. Bougaïos or Boukaïos has fallen for the girl from Hippokion's farm, the daughter of Polybotas, who must be a farm slave if not a wage laborer. She plays the flute for the reapers, and Milon's advice about her is “Take what you want and pay for it.” Boukaïos sings a song about love: If the translation of Milon's advice is accurate, it provides a source of the citation of greater antiquity than the 1920's. To know how or why, or even if, this is true, is hardly axiomatic. As was pointed out in Introduction To Objectivist Epistemology "reason" is "a complex, derivative concept." This translation of the Tenth Idyll of The Idylls of Theokritus provides Milon as having said: "God finds out the guilty. You've been asking for it."
  14. dream_weaver

    Why follow reason?

    "Take what you want and pay for it." Found this on The Straight Dope: It appears in Agatha Christie's 1938 novel Hercule Poirot's Christmas It is also presented in 1920 in The University of the State of New York Bulletin: Sixty-First Convocation Proceedings There is an old Persian proverb which runs: The Gods said to the mortals, "Take what you want and pay for it." In other words, the choice of your life is yours, but the resulting success or failure, happiness or misery accompanying the choice is yours also.
  15. If memory serves me correctly, one of the tie-ins he made was to consciousness in general, and another to the terms of order/disorder as being epistemological.