Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/17/21 in all areas

  1. https://youtu.be/ssvSsMqTtjo Kibbe on Liberty: Pandemic imprisoning and the culture war. Perspectives from Britain and the USA. Great conversation.
    3 points
  2. Boydstun

    Atlas Shrugged

    For the New Intellectual Three years after Atlas Shrugged was published, Rand penned the essay “For the New Intellectual.” It is interesting to compare and contrast the analysis of philosophical and psychological archetypes in Galt’s Speech—Mystics of Muscle/Mystics of Spirit—with the types Attilas/Witchdoctors in FNI. In the present note I’ll not take that on, and I’ll not take on their relation to the broad philosophical types Peikoff frames in his book DIM. Certainly, in FNI and in Atlas, Rand was affirming, against many philosophies, the equal reality and virtuous unity of mind and bo
    2 points
  3. Boydstun

    Existence, We

    Once more I’d like to encourage anyone interested in seeing my fundamental paper “Existence, We” (EW), setting forth my metaphysical system and its relation to Rand’s and to others, to get your subscription to JARS at this time. I’ll post here a section of a paper that was to be a follow-on to EW and which—as the follow-on project has been redesigned—would no longer fit the follow-on paper.* This posted section is indeed built onto of the frame developed in EW. It gives a taste of some of what goes on in that fundamental paper. The material below uses that frame and some technical termino
    2 points
  4. When has this happened? I mean, it seems like the Magnificent Seven remake was the forgotten one... And if the original was forgotten, it's not because it was canceled. The logic seems to go like this: 1) companies that are rational make money 2) companies that are not rational don't make money 3) therefore companies that make money are rational 4) since it is not rational to make parasitic movies, the companies that make such movies won't make money 5) therefore the companies make these movies for reasons besides money 1-3 is circular (Why t
    2 points
  5. I saw it now. I assume some Prager people will have to integrate the fact that they are supporting an atheist with the fact that "Even though atheists have a bad record". It was very politically correct, no mention of selfishness or knowledge without God. It's nice that it was published and some may be swayed. But I see a trojan horse in this project. I hope it belongs to Objectivism. But yes, provided by a generous donation from "The Objective Standard Institute". Who knows, the next ally of Objectivism may be the church of Scientology. They believe in Capitalism too and they
    2 points
  6. Has anyone come up with a more precise characterization of who or what is or is not being suppressed than "rightist" or "leftist"?
    2 points
  7. I highly recommend this paper by Tara Smith. It is as an argument about anything we've discussed here, it's a paper about a conceptual cleanup regarding terms used when discussing freedom of speech. The Free Speech Vernacular: Conceptual Confusions in the Way We Speak About Speech
    2 points
  8. Boydstun

    Atlas Shrugged

    No. Or anyway those would be secondary parallel patterns. I am not referring to any analogical relation to ‘Primacy of Existence to Consciousness.’ Simply to Rand’s thesis in Atlas: “It is only the concept of ‘Life’ that makes the concept ‘Value’ possible” (1013). This is introduced before Rand’s layout in the Speech of her axiomatics of Existence/Consciousness and Identity/Identification, and it is fully understandable in its context without having yet been introduced to her most fundamental metaphysical scheme. Her use of “concept” in the sentence quoted in the preceding paragraph
    1 point
  9. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aV4tMvr7xZY
    1 point
  10. Kristoffer Polaha played John Galt in the movie Atlas Shrugged. It's movie trivia to me, but a comment that arose from one of the viewers in the audience.
    1 point
  11. Zuby noted how he liked to keep it real, as opposed to saying what he thought his audience might want to hear, and associated keeping it real as a contributing factor to his growing fan base. (around 20 minutes.)
    1 point
  12. Rand started writing AS on September 2, 1946. I don't suspect her of using numerology. Just self-reference. The reason I think Chinese numerology might be relevant to Firefly is because the Chinese language and culture are components of the show. The Alliance is really a union of the American and Chinese core planets. So like all the other yin-yanging in the show, Whedon also depicted the West and the East joining together. Yeah, that's a whole debate on its own. I don't think Fox understood or appreciated the show. The person who cancelled it, Gail Berman, said the show was expen
    1 point
  13. Thomas Reid's theory of ideas
    1 point
  14. Back to the future. The discoveries of an unprecedented theory of concepts, a metaphysical basis for morality, treatises from the roots of war to it's counter-part in the yet unknown ideal provided by capitalism, await more minds that value them. The Verunca Salts are singing "I Want It Now", while the Oompa Loompas are queueing up for their retort of " Who Do You Blame When Your Kid Is A Brat."
    1 point
  15. Yes, I like to think I see most of the themes including freedom. I've watched the series and movie multiple times, but it's the sort of show where I notice something new with each viewing. I hadn't read the Wikipedia article by the way. The family theme hit me when I realized the brother-sister symbolism of Simon/River and Mal/Zoe. Also, if you're into numerology (which normally I'm not), you might find it curious that Simon and River both have five letters in their names, Mal and Zoe have three. In Chinese numerology 5 is either good luck (Simon) or bad luck (River). The number 3 means life a
    1 point
  16. Rand stated in Atlas Shrugged about Aristotle's incomplete formulation "existence is identity" with her offer of completion "consciousness is identification". There are really two parts. The identity that is given by existents. The identification that is provided by consciousness, which also help to have it be maintained for future reference. Peikoff added something for me in his introduction to logic about A cannot be both A and non-A at the same time, and in the same respect. As you point out, reasoning it out as you are grasping it is helpful. In talking to others, you cannot r
    1 point
  17. Additional, from beyond the armchairs: How Brains Make Up Their Minds by Walter Freeman (Columbia 2000) The Neural Basis of Free Will - Criterial Causation by Peter Ulric Tse (MIT 2013)
    1 point
  18. So another way to put it would be: "What I know is mutable, allowing me to bring my knowledge into alignment with what is true."
    1 point
  19. In "what you know to be true is mutable" I think he is using "what you know to be true" to mean "what you think according to your knowledge (or assumed knowledge) to be true" and not using "what you know to be true" (in this context) to mean that "the truth in reality of which I actually know".
    1 point
  20. Never go full Parmenides
    1 point
  21. PragerU and the Objective Standard Institute present:
    1 point
  22. "lies, damned lies and statistics" The list of the top ten strongest men in the world, that is the ranking of the participants in the competition of the same name , not the actually ranking of the strength of men on earth .
    1 point
  23. Violence with sexual attraction; violence with humor. These achieve what the script writer wants, that we second-guess and negate the ugliness of violence to find hidden motives. Instead of violent acts being the last recourse, when reason has failed, violence is - normal. Or sexy or funny. It's in fact the substitute for reason. Which is why there's hardly a film made now that hasn't a fight scene in it: Muscles over minds. In a distorted pursuit of the hero values people inchoately still need, the last man(woman) standing *must* be somewhat better, 'heroic', than their antagonists, by
    1 point
  24. Yikes. I've listened to "The Money Making Personality" more than once. This is a detail I had not attenuated to in the process.
    1 point
  25. The two papers I posted treat different aspects of this. The first attempts to ground modal logic in the concepts of act and potency, arguing that a potency is a dispositional property and thus entails the existence of a possibility. The second is a part of a dissertation that criticizes the "logical possibility argument" that treats a possibility in terms of what can be imagined without contradiction.
    1 point
  26. Trying to understand that question. There seems to be two fundamental definitions of possibility, one that relates to the future and one that does not. Also found this article that I am looking at. https://therealistguide.com/blog/f/metaphysical-possibility-vs-logical-possibility#:~:text=To summarize%2C metaphysical possibility is,real existence outside the mind.
    1 point
  27. The reason could always be put on low standards for writing. It's not that changing the expected look of a character is inherently bad. It's about what about the characters identity is important for the plot. I don't think Annie as a character should have any particular race. Same with Catwoman. It doesn't matter what race they are. But their sex matters, because those are factors that are meant to influence who they become (as related to how people react to them or judge them). Ghostbusters is not dependent on sex of the characters for conflict in the plot, but the writing was terrible anyway
    1 point
  28. Exquisite. The smooth canvas a superb choice for the subject. She's almost hyper-real.
    1 point
  29. At the end of YT URLs add this code: &t=1h12m24s But replace my madeup numbers with the particular hour, minute and second you want to start the video.
    1 point
  30. That company does not strike a bell with me. The movie "Wanted" (2008) comes to mind.
    1 point
  31. Yeah, if you're Amazon you want to raise the minimum wage to ass-out smaller businesses trying to compete with you.
    1 point
  32. How are you defining "leftist" and "rightist"? Where are you hearing about this? How many Objectivist pov's have you heard of being silenced?
    1 point
  33. An election can be stolen without "widespread and pervasive" fraud. Sometimes just a few thousand well-placed fraudulent votes can be enough to flip the outcome. Yes it is possible as in Gore vs. Bush. But this election would have required multiple states committing the fraud. No single county or state could have changed the result, Biden was too far ahead in electoral votes. And of course, the fraud had to be meticulous enough to give GOP and edge in congress but not for the presidency. All in all, the evidence is weak.
    1 point
  34. I've been thinking about this overall topic for a while, and I am beginning to think that Leftism is indeed the greater evil. My reasoning might be different from Bernstein's, though. (I read his article but I was never able to watch the debate.) To review what Peikoff said in OPAR: Objectivism holds that existence has primacy over consciousness, but most philosophies hold the opposite, i.e., that consciousness controls existence. For them, the question becomes one of whose consciousness controls existence, and the classical answers are: God, society, or oneself. I've posted before t
    1 point
  35. You think that's obscene? Watch this! It's okay to leave up all the videos of Dems accusing Trump of collusion but dare to say the election was stolen and your channel is terminated. This isn't about "severe violations," it's about protecting favored classes of people.
    1 point
  36. "We The Dying", perhaps? To be taken as metaphor, but "better to die on your feet than to live on your knees". As the character Kira showed. I only caution to pick your fights carefully. I'm afraid this is one that no one can immediately win against the weight of 'public opinion' (emotions). Live to fight another day.
    1 point
  37. Okay, Joker. If you mean also Republicans who wanted to "stop the steal" as well, sure, everyone got what they deserved in the end (I think all of Congress is pretty responsible for the overall distrust throughout America). But to correct anything in the future, this is bad. "There are goblins on Mars that study Hegel's dialectics" is metaphysically possible, but without any kind of evidence to say that this claim is true, it is arbitrary. You need something in reality, something observable, not just possible stories you came up with. This is not a valid way of thinking. You n
    1 point
  38. Arbitrary. You need some kind of evidence here. The best you have is that "one time, there was an attempted kidnapping, it turned out they were antifa type people". That's not evidence for your claim. What you said amounts to "it's possible!" Because of that, anything else you say is storytelling. I have some wild and fantastical ideas as well that would really expand on what we saw today. I'm not going to pretend they are anything other than flights of fancy. They aren't hunches, they are fantasies. You are definitely one of the more rational minded I've interacted with here, so
    1 point
  39. Maybe this will actually help provide clarity. I don't think we're having a conflict of interest, at least not in Rand's sense. I take Rand's sense of interest from the VOS introduction and "The Objectivist Ethics" to refer to ones good as a human being. (Or more precisely, to refer to the scope of one's good.) I take this because she uses self-interest and selfishness interchangeably (or as selfishness as concern for ones own interest), and refers to them as "the values required for man's survival qua man." I don't think my good and Merlin's good are in conflict. We don't have to agree t
    1 point
  40. Her philosophy was very much influenced by her exposure to Marxism, both in the Soviet Union and the U.S. It can be seen as primarily a refutation of it. Both are materialist in the sense that there is no appeal to the "supernatural", but a primary difference between the two has to do with epistemology (see Rand's Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology). Marx held an individual's ideas to be formed via a dialectic process between and individual and his class and it's relationship to the material means of production in any given age. Marx also saw history as unfolding to a finished st
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...