Objectivism Is The Everyman's Philosophy
In the universe, what you see is what you get,
figuring it out for yourself is the way to happiness,
and each person's independence is respected by all
Rand's Philosophy in Her Own Words
- "Metaphysics: Objective Reality" "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed/Wishing won’t make it so." "The universe exists independent of consciousness"
- "Epistemology: Reason" "You can’t eat your cake and have it, too." "Thinking is man’s only basic virtue"
- "Ethics: Self-interest" "Man is an end in himself." "Man must act for his own rational self-interest" "The purpose of morality is to teach you[...] to enjoy yourself and live"
- "Politics: Capitalism" "Give me liberty or give me death." "If life on earth is [a man's] purpose, he has a right to live as a rational being"
Objectivism Online Chat
- 46 replies
- 387 views
- Add Reply
- 3 replies
- 1052 views
- Add Reply
- 2 replies
- 222 views
- Add Reply
- 41 replies
- 520 views
- Add Reply
Your first paragraph is altruism. Your second paragraph asserts moral equivalance between all political states. You should at least be aware of a crucial difference between some nation-states on the legal status of homosexuals, so thats rather hypocritical of you. Then theres the value equivalence of professing to not prefer any language or culture or even climate over any other. I don't think you are so robotically indiscriminate on your personal tastes that you can truly claim that for you no place on Earth is better than any other. You are not a citizen of the world. Most of the world in fact would reject you if it became aware of you. Even in China, setting aside homosexuality, just your Objectivist philosophical activities could get you or I imprisoned if we came to the notice of certain officials. Even the minor differences within the Anglo-Saxon legal tradition between the English speaking countries should be significant to a politically aware citizen. Does it not matter to you that Great Britain has no equivalent to the American First Amendment freedoms? Or the Second? I think it should. That's what I mean by country loyalty, not whether refried beans are better or worse than fried rice. **MOD EDIT: moved from http://forum.objectivismonline.com/index.php?/topic/30795-white-supremacist-protest-violence/ **
By Spiral Architect,
And we are back. I’ve been gone for a number of months now. Basically, I got that Flue that was going around at the beginning of the year HARD. It took me off the grid for a couple of weeks. After that I started an exercise regiment (actually trying a New Years resolution to loose weight before age really catches up with me) and have been training/moving into a promotion at work. So I guess the year started for crap but it is smooth sailing now. Anyway, life has returned to a semblance for normal and as I promised myself several months ago I’m back for in-depth discussions. In the interim I’ve managed to devour some free lectures from the CATO institute and some of the discounted goodies from ARI. Books have been Peikoff’s DIM (‘ll save the commentary for elsewhere), some fun from Edgar Rice Burroughs, to a wonderful review of Churchill from a leadership perspective. Otherwise I’m still the same guy who loves the Spiral theory of knowledge, long walks on the beach, Grey Goose on the rocks, and very loud music. Good to be back!
Neural Representations of Physics Concepts "Considerable advances have been made in developing brain-based theories of semantic knowledge, such as knowledge of concrete objects or emotions. Brain-imaging research has uncovered sets of brain systems that collectively contain the neural representations of such concepts, including information about the way the human body interacts with them (in the case of objects) or their intensity (in the case of emotions; Just, Cherkassky, Aryal, & Mitchell, 2010; Kassam, Markey, Cherkassky, Loewenstein, & Just, 2013). What has not yet been investigated with this approach is the neural representation of specialized abstract knowledge acquired through academic study, such as science learning. The current article addresses this issue in the area of physics knowledge. . . ."
Are we going to go to war with North Korea? The rhetoric on their side has always been bellicose, but it usually seemed to be more propaganda than anything worth taking seriously. Now that Trump is in charge, however, who is equally given to dramatic words, and who doesn't mind stirring the pot, and since North Korea is pushing the nuclear envelope to its breaking point... will this war of words escalate to an actual fight? If so, what would it look like? Would there be a nuclear exchange? Can South Korea survive? Would the war become more global in nature? Any thoughts about what might become the defining event of not only the Trump presidency, but perhaps our generation?