Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Epistopotamus

Regulars
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Epistopotamus

  • Rank
    Newbie

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted
  1. It's a classic example of demonizing the good for being the good and failing to recognize real virtue. Rarely do I find such a shining example, but this one is one of the greatest examples I've seen.
  2. I found this very interesting article criticizing Steve Jobs for pursuing his own self-interest and producing an awesome product. At the same time, it lauds Bill Gates for his philanthropy and his disassociation with his company in 2006 to better achieve his philanthropic goals. http://www.businessweek.com/management/idolize-bill-gates-not-steve-jobs-11012011.html?campaign_id=rss_topStories The article is clear evidence of the difference between Objectivist ethics and the prevailing philosophy today. Enjoy!
  3. Ok i got it; measures from "blue" to "meter-long" or any kind of attribute/adjective aren't concepts in and of themselves. I was mistaken that one could just point to "blue" or "meter" as and entity, which it isn't, as you've shown. Thanks, that point just through me for an unexpected loop.
  4. I came upon this critique of Oism, specifically epistemology: "In fact she left the problem of universals right where she found it. We can't even begin to apply her process of "measurement-omission" unless we can _already_ recognize lengths _as_ lengths, colors _as_ colors, shapes _as_ shapes. (In nature there is no such thing as a generic length, color, or shape. So how do we come by such universals? Blank out. The universals are here. How did they get here? _Somehow_.)" How would you respond to the point that measurement-omission requires an already-formed concept of measurement? How do we conceptualize "measurement"?
×
×
  • Create New...