Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

abott1776

Regulars
  • Content Count

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by abott1776

  1. I saw this on Listverse: http://listverse.com/2015/06/28/10-potential-alternatives-to-the-conventional-capitalist-system/ Objectivism is number 2. It is one of the fairer characterizations of Objectivism I've seen mentioned on this site. I guess this isn't exactly news, but I thought it was worth sharing.
  2. When a country defends itself against an aggressor, innocent people will surely die. Let's make this more fundamental. When you assert that one kills innocent people,you are implying that we are depriving them of their right to life, etc. When a country goes to war against you they lose all rights until the threat is ended. In the context (key word here, look into Ayn Rand's placement of importance in context) of international aggression similarly when it comes to some thug trying to kill you, the actions necessary in order to survive require you to forget distinguishing between innocent and g
  3. I have to separate war as such and war in the middle east right now. War in general: Let's look at the truly "innocent" people in an aggressive nation. The children perhaps, the people who abhor their regime, who want to see it fall. First off they would want to see it fall, if the defenders we're not involved this would require tremendous amount of casualties on their side anyways. Second, do you fully understand the nature of war, what it takes? You have to demoralize the enemy. You have to take the war to them and their whole existence. You have to basically make them see that their mot
  4. Your first example boils down to "should I sacrifice another life for my own?" No you should never do that, as a rational egoist you would be trying to simultaneously hold the principle of the right to life and its opposite. This assumes a civil society though. Ayn Rand talked about emergency situations and how one cannot talk about ethics in those situations. From my understanding war like self defense can be thought of in terms of an emergency situation. Once a nation tasks itself with its own defense it has to end the threat as soon as possible, obviously with as little deaths on its si
  5. Interesting topic. From what I know about history in general, not a detailed analysis of each nations economic history, the British Empire changed from a mercantile system to a more free-market, free-trade economy (not systematically but generally). The mercantile policies before and during the American Revolution (or as I like to call it The Second English Civil War) was what driven the American Revolutionaries to rebel. They saw it, and rightly so, as hindering their prosperity. Mercantile policies viewed wealth as basically static, if one nation gained, another lost as opposed to the free-m
  6. 1) The U.S. is "whimping out". It has failed to identify its enemies, today primarily islamic states and organizations that support (financially and intellectually) and carry out attacks against our country. It has failed to properly eliminate those enemies precisely because of what it fears will happen to the region if we did carry out massive assaults on countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran (both of which have attacked us in the past). We fear stepping on toes, hurting peoples feelings, and yes killing "innocent" people, probably many of them. Stabilizing the region would mean keeping the st
  7. One of the most annoying sights when watching the news lately has to be the endless international bullshitting going on between nations, for example the "tension" between the Ukraine and Russia. To me it is a huge sign of the shift in global culture. Objectivists tend to talk about changes in the American culture, rightly so because it can be argued to be the best we have right now. But the global culture probably says a bit more about man's fundamental beliefs, especially since the world is more interconnected, people can know within minutes what has happened on the opposite side of the world
  8. JASKN, Thanks for everything. I will try to chew those links. Alex
  9. Sometimes I obsessively think about wasted time or money. I repeatedly regret not making a decision sooner, coming up with an interest or idea sooner, and with money I will obsessive about how it could have been spent more efficiently. The how it is spent takes over to some respect the enjoyment of it. It will usually go away after neglecting to think about it, but when I do think about it I find myself being annoyed about it. This sounds like I have no control of my mind now that I think about it, but I guess it is just that thinking back upon my thought processes it is something that I f
  10. It just reminds me of that character in the Fountainhead, a writer that just writes her peculiar crap, just to make it peculiar, odd, "challenging conventions". This reminds me of it, it is fun to listen to every so often, I'll admit. But that still does not preclude aesthetics judgement, I would think, or even moral judgement on the part of the creators of it. Would you not do something similar to a drug addict, wasting their life, this music is just a waste of talent to some extent.
  11. "And I don't see how asserting that a hypothetical volume could truly be "empty" is an assertion of nonexistence; it's only asserting that there are 'no existents here" That is what I contend when talking about "empty space", but LP argues that is asserting the existence of non-existence. The universe to him has to be filled to the brim with entities, what we consider "empty" no electrons, protons, etc. is just space filled with some undiscovered entities. "So if I were to declare that at some spot in space there is an "edge" of space, that would be a reification of the zero. Specific
  12. When googling "void" I get on the top of the page: "a completely empty space" I don't see how that is essentially different from the way I was using it, "space stripped of entities, existents". I don't know what you mean by the third sentence. I don't really care for the moment how chemistry or physics uses the term plenum if it is different from LP's. Existents = Entities = protons, neutrons, electrons, etc. all the known things to exist Plenum, by LP, and this is all I care about for the moment, defines as to be existence filled to the brim with entities, there is no space b
  13. "To exist is to be something, as distinguished from the nothing of nonexistence, it is to be an entity of a specific nature made of specific attributes." Ayn Rand Lexicon So the existents between my hands, could be something other than entities (electrons, protons, neutrons, etc.), like floating attributes? I think you have made a fault.
  14. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VCCiY17hKw How would you explain this phenomenon? It's funny, yet sad if you think about what sort of mind would think to make it. Sort of good background sound, for something, I don't know yet, maybe studying.
  15. He says that in his history of philosophy course when talking about Heraclitus and his idea, in which LP agrees, that the universe has to be a plenum because "there can't be nothing", nothing cannot exist. LP goes over some questions on the Universe in these links: http://www.peikoff.com/page/6/?s=universe#list http://www.peikoff.com/page/5/?s=universe#list In the first link, in an answer, he makes the claim that there is existence, a plenum by his accounts, filled to the brim with existents, whether that be protons, neutrons, electrons, and presumably some unknown other stuff
  16. A void is a volume of space (space meaning say a distance between two protons, or two hands or two galaxies, space as a relational concept) that contains no thing, no entities. An "absence of entities" is a void. Maybe from what you were reading in wacky philosophers they tried to make a void, a thing. All I am saying a void conceptually is is an absence of entities in a volume as compared to a volume filled with entities. If there was a volume of oxygen filled to the brim, then all the oxygen molecules were extracted out, you would have a void, an absence of all those molecules. Is t
  17. By those first two questions, you seem to be putting the question of a plenum, in the realm of science. According to LP, it is in the realm of metaphysics, which is it? Omniscience, so does a plenum.
  18. I answered those numbered questions of yours in the beginning. I know you can't have the concept of space without the precondition of concepts of entities. I know it is a relational concept. I think it is important to make the distinction between space and a void. Space is a relational concept between existents. A void is the concept that given (in a simplified example) two entities, that do not touch, there are no other entities in between those two entities. I am not referencing space as being a non-existent. Space in that sentence merely relates the two entities, not the nature of what
  19. You are treating space as an existent, in that second sentence. All that space is is a relationship concept between existents. The space between your two hands is a distance. The plenum argument says that there must be other existents in that space (distance). I am saying that is not necessary. When I say space is a relational concept, how is that affirming that non-existence exists? This is how I would think about the subject of eternity Eternity is a kin to saying the universe is infinite in size.It seems to me that there is a problem with both the universe having a beginning or it bein
  20. You are treating space as an existent, in that second sentence. All that space is is a relationship concept between existents. The space between your two hands is a distance. The plenum argument says that there must be other existents in that space (distance). I am saying that is not necessary. When I say space is a relational concept, how is that affirming that non-existence exists? This is how I would think about the subject of eternity Eternity is a kin to saying the universe is infinite in size.It seems to me that there is a problem with both the universe having a beginning or it bein
  21. After thinking about this I don't see where you are going with this. Was my usage of the concept space wrong? Explain any errors in my original post about plenum, space, etc.
  22. 1. The basic facts are existents in reality (a floor, a computer monitor), and they can be positioned in any manner in relation to another. 2. You needed the concepts of actual existents, and relational concepts such as apart (they are 3 feet apart). 3. I think that is the same as 1 and 2. 4. That would take a longer time to explain.
  23. I understand that their are no actual infinities. The infinite in mathematics is just a potentiality. I understand that the universe has to be eternal, meaning outside of time or always existing, because the opposite, that it was "created" is nonsense and violates A is A, etc. Same thing with its finiteness, there can't exist an actual infinite amount of things. I don't understand, however, why the universe has to be a plenum, that every nook and cranny has to be "filled" with existents. I just don't see why that is necessary, from how I believe LP explained it, that to say their is "empty
  24. Yep, the issue of taxation was not the only rift between the colonials and the motherland, but what to do about the natives, and settling westward. I love Daniel Day-Lewis in most of his films, and despite what some may say about There Will Be Blood, it is one of my favorite movies as well. Yeah, I think consumerism has morphed from a healthy American obsession with the new, and with material wealth in general. Comparing culture then and now, I am more disheartened with the lack of longterm thinking, and of principles, by just ordinary people (not talking about idealistic hippie colleg
  25. I read the Sparrowhawk series, like a crack addict, it was really engrossing, and I would resent reading his books too fast because I didn't want them to end. Him as well as Terry Goodkind, rereading his books right now. I am also reading Ed Cline's detective novels too! Yeah, watch the movie, you won't regret it. Besides the historicity of it, it is a good story itself. Very romantic aesthetically, grand vistas, brave men and women, people taking action according to their judgement.
×
×
  • Create New...