Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

fourtytwo

Newbies
  • Posts

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Country
    Not Specified
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted

fourtytwo's Achievements

Novice

Novice (2/7)

0

Reputation

  1. I don't think anyone can consistently fight half a million years of evolution to become totally unselfconscious all the time therefore you *have* to accept reacting to being watched - but in a good way as post #5 above by Ludicious describes.
  2. in post #26 above IIya Startsev said:- I recommend you read Atlas Shrugged. It will change your life.
  3. The first definition in Google to a:- define: persuasion is:- In other words "persuasion" stinks, likewise "the techniques of persuasion" - you weaken your own case by attempting it. Instead Ayn Rand wrote Atlas Shrugged, a romantic fiction that a critic sneered "It's just a love story." to which Rand replied "That's all it ever was."
  4. Music is a special case anyway - you can do what you like there - but evidently you are simply altering and adapting your knowledge (integrating your concepts) in such a way that life is getting better for you, hence you get more happiness i.e. you are doing the right thing, objectively. Try "The Art of Fiction by Ayn Rand" because, although it is not about music, it is about art, in depth, with examples and explains very well all the art we see around us everyday, why it works and why it does not - it applies generally. I see you used to be religious, try the-best-bits (if that exists) of the St. Matthew Passion by JS Bach (not the long boring solos) e.g. the eight bars of Truly this Was the Son of God - its a knock out, and I am not religious at all.
  5. Try:- We the Living That says it all, by saying nothing (about Objectivism).
  6. This is so staggeringly wrong, Objectivist-wise, that we don't share anything in common at all - as this thread shows. Good luck trying to persuade folks with your "primary rhetoric", if the above is anything to go by.
  7. Hi, my name is Rob and I discovered Objectivism completely by accident a year ago and this is a life changing event, as I am sure you know too. I usually rudely blast-in with some sort of error-of-haste and learn afterwards e.g. I noticed this introductory part of the forum after I made a post and some replies but now I know better. I was thrown out of university, a long time ago, because I had no philosophy - I mean, they threw me out for not doing any work but that was not the real reason, the real reason was that I had no sense of self-worth. Gradually, after 40 years of self-education, I learned some electronics and some programming and some other things but never anything so mind-blowingly "obvious" as Objectivism even though, by then, from experience that is what I had become i.e. an Objectivist with a definite sense of self-worth. The educational system allows philosophy to begin, unchallenged, in the playground, litterally, with pressure groups and bullying and that continues on into adulthood, into politics - that was the part that I avoided hence my adolescent rejection of (modern) philosophy (I now realise).
  8. If Scotland votes for independence, why would it be morally wrong for her to use the pound rather than invent her own currency?
  9. By avoiding any sort of rhetoric yourself, you become invincible (from rational attack) - that is the strength of Objectivism.
  10. The answer I am looking for is:- "Who is John Galt." It's a sort of brilliant anti-rhetoric that only the best can invent.
  11. I am breaking a golden rule of Rand's of never allowing one's tacit approval by ignoring an attack. In this case your rhetorical-accusation of my endorsing a "New Science". Science by definition is a primary, there can never be a "New Science", only additional knowledge incorporated into the existing knowledge according to reality i.e. by repeatable-experiment
  12. Do you have an example of rhetoric in Atlas Shrugged? What is it?
  13. Objectivism is devoid of rhetoric - the philosophy is about the precision of concepts i.e. of words. It's the scientific basis of the humanities (and the scientific basis of science) - the basis of everything i.e. of everything human. How we think (conceptually) and why we think (survival). We do these things best by constantly adjusting and correcting our concepts to agree with reality i.e. with existence. This is not a rhetorical activity. In contrast, the philosophies of non-existence are circular by definition and inherently rhetorical i.e. ambiguous.
×
×
  • Create New...