Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 03/05/21 in all areas

  1. I don't think so. It requires processing two or three tons of ore in order to extract a single ounce of pure platinum, worth around $1150 today. That's nowhere near what it would cost to transport 4000-6000 pounds of ore to Earth's surface and then process it under environmental and political conditions here. At least two multimillion-dollar companies looked into this problem and failed to find a solution. Best case scenario is processing the ore on the asteroid, and even that is too expensive given how much equipment would have to be transported to the asteroid, only to be abandoned afterward. Mining asteroids for water seems to be the more likely pursuit after space tourism. In addition to being necessary for human survival, water can be used to create propellant for refueling ships already in space.
    1 point
  2. Boydstun

    My Verses

    "Hardness of Happiness" (Click on photo - poem March 2021)
    1 point
  3. I'm not sure if you noticed, but the main problem is that women are not treated as anything much more intellectually complex than a dog. "Don't get mad when women manipulate you, that's just in their nature. They can't help it." It's abundantly sexist.
    1 point
  4. I'm reading a good book that deconstructs all this anti-woman/ PUA mentality, and offers an alternative approach. One that is respectful of women without putting them on a pedestal, and congruent with Objectivism. In fact a lot of it seems to be written from a partially Oist perspective (the author fleetingly mentions that reading Atlas Shrugged in college changed his life, in the book, as well). It's from Mark Manson (who's known for "The Subtle Art of Not Giving a Fuck", which is the second best "life advice" type book I have ever read in my life), and it's titled "Models: Attract Women Through Honesty". ( I don't think "models" refers to fashion models, but rather "things to model yourself after"...but it is an ambivalent title, on purpose...pretty sure it's meant to mock PUAs). The two books are very, very different. "The Subtle Art..." is short, it's written in a provocative style (lots of cursing), it throws flashy, provocative ideas around somewhat carelessly, and uses a wide lens to look at life in general. But it's very interesting, and frames a lot of good life advice in some very surprising and original ways. The "Models..." book on the other hand is longer, analytical, detailed, carefully thought through, and focused on the subject at hand. But, as you go along, you find out something very important: the subject at hand (getting women) is as wide as life itself...because you get women based on who you are, personally and socially, not on what "techniques" or lines you use. So the book actually sets out to encourage the reader to change their entire life, and become an interesting, opinionated, provocative, well dressed and groomed, physically fit, healthy, independent, well traveled, knowledgeable, well read, sexually uninhibited, confident, courageous etc. person. Do that, and women won't be able to resist you...no aggressive, fake alpha behavior needed.
    1 point
  5. Two points: 1. In general, men are sexually attracted to women, and women are sexually attracted to men. You don't have to do anything to turn that switch, it's on by default. You just have to avoid doing things that turn it off. The most common way I see even rich, good looking men turn that switch off is by making women uncomfortable (or by projecting a sense that they won't be able to maintain a comfortable relationship, in a more intimate setting...by avoiding one on one interaction, or failing to respond comfortably to small gestures of intimacy, like a hug or a touch, for instance). And I can't imagine a single thing that would accomplish that faster than trying to play this "game" you are describing. It doesn't work. It's a scam. Only time it ever works is when the guy doing it is already someone who's comfortable around women (and therefor doesn't flip their switch off). If you wanna become that guy, BE friends with women. Seek them out, on ANY terms. Pushing them away when they just want to be your friend, in an attempt to mimic this mythical alpha behavior would just deprive you from the only learning tool you have, when it comes to developing confidence and a comfort level around women: actually getting close to, and staying close with, women. 2. I haven't been friends with anyone since high school, who fits into this "alpha male" category. This is how juveniles behave, and what young girls who haven't had time to know any better fall for. This is not how adult men and women behave. If you behave this way in the adult world, you'll just be locked out by everyone around you. Even if you find a woman willing to put up with you, she's gonna be your only link to the rest of the world. I actually work with a young couple like this, where the guy is a charming, good looking prick, and the girl couldn't be nicer and more personable. Which, ironically, makes the guy even more dependent on her than if he was a lowly beta who seeks her approval at every turn. Only reason why he even has a job is because the company doesn't want to lose her, by firing him.
    1 point
  6. Jesus, this entire thing reads like the screed from the next Elliot Rodger. Hateful trash. I mean... I recognize that Objectivism has its own unresolved issues with "masculinity" and "femininity" -- and I believe that Rand made many missteps on this issue that have continued to mislead Objectivists (who, imo, often have a hard time disagreeing with Rand with respect to anything) -- so that's why we sometimes countenance these sorts of arguments. Still, I would love to have had her response to the idea that a woman "hero worships" due to her PMS, lol. Noble, self-made souls indeed! From what perspective is this written, and for what audience? Who needs to hear that "the only possible response is anger"? I'd guess the angry. But when I look back at my past relationships, I don't feel anger. And when I consider my present relationship, I feel great joy. How do I manage to do this without buying into the bullshit represented here? Has the person who wrote this ever met a woman? What was their experience, I wonder? And, taken at all seriously, how could a man ever respect a woman or feel anything other than contempt for the entire gender? No wonder there's such great anger associated with this perspective. Fortunately for me, I've met women (but I shudder to think what this might have done to me, if I had read and bought into it at a sufficiently tender age). Maybe my wife is some sort of unique creature in this regard? But I doubt it. The spelling of feelings here exemplifies the level of seriousness and also briskly conveys the underlying hatred and contempt (for, of all things, the feelings of the woman that you love and have married -- your "highest value"!). I'm done here -- I've given it too much attention already, perhaps. What must it be like, to see half the populace in this way, as some sort of inscrutable and irrational alien presence? How demeaning. How poisonous.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...