Gnomer9

I personally can’t speak for this situation, but I have a roommate that is a Philosophy / Political Science major for a local university. Part of the required curriculum is that his is to take several classes on understanding cultures like Islam, China, Russia, etc. I’ve looked through a few of his books and for the most part it’s mostly promotes these cultures as equal if not superior to our own due to the fact they haven’t changed in thousands of years. He also must take many philosophy classes that promote ideas and thoughts that, as an Objectivist, he does not agree with. This however does not keep him from taking the classes but rather gives him an arena to promote Objectivism. From was I gather the classes are a sort of open forum where the teacher throws out a question and the students discuss it with each other. Numerous times he would come home and be mad because the class was learning about some altruistic philosophy and he is the only one there fighting against it. In his papers he would answer the idiotic questions asked by the teacher such as “if you had to re-write the Constitution using Taoism, what would be some major changes” then he would refute them with Objectivism. He wrote a 5 pages report on a similar topic and then wrote a 3 page paper explaining why it was irrational. If the teacher marked off a point for something that was right, my roommate would write a response and give specific examples and books where he found them. What I'm trying to say is that don’t be afraid that you won’t learn anything from a philosophy class if it doesn’t support Objectivism. If you truly value Philosophy, and especially Objectivism, then learning about what else is out there and confronting at the source will only help in the long run. I’m not saying go into the class guns blazing, my roommate has read practically all Objectivism literature twice and knew what he was saying, but if you know what is being said is wrong and can prove it speak up.

I wouldn’t complain so much about the movie being “too much talk” if the previews leading up to the movie didn’t portray it in a more horror movie light. It was more like Law and Order than a horror movie. I felt and I thought it was pretty obvious that the movie was a case against facts and reality and propaganda for the “possibilities,” as the defender closing argument was about, for the existence of god. They made the prosecutor, who was presenting facts and proof look cruel and disrespectful, while the defender kindhearted in the end, asked the jury to use their feelings to make the right choice. As far as the scenes with Emily as a possessed women go, I thought the actress did a great job playing the part. The body contortions, movements were all great in bringing the scene to life. The part where here boyfriend woke up to find her on the floor was great. My favorite part would have to be when their all out in the barn and she listing off the names of all the demons and when she says “Lucifer” and everything goes dark except the shimmer in her eyes.

Correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t Rand say that if you compromise with evil, evil still wins?

What I’m hearing you say here is that the government is responsibly for some aspect of your lives. Correct me if i'm wrong or I missed your meaning. If you’re standing in a road with a car racing at you, are you going to wait for the government to create an escape plan to save you? I’ve argued this point with several other people and the greatest response was “that’s ridiculous, this was a natural disaster, this was different.” Different how? Because it happens on a larger scale? At what point do you stop being responsible for your own wellbeing and the government steps in to hold your hand. The point I’m trying to get at here is that the people elected these officials; they made the choice and voted. If they where concerned about they’re safety and that of the others around them then they should have taken more of an interest or made more noise in the creation of an efficient evacuation plan. Instead they sat back and just assumed that some one else would think about it for them. You’re free to make any choice you want, but you’re not free of the consequences of that choice.

As tragic as the situation is down in New Orleans, this is a direct result of people not taking responsibility and accepting the consequences of their own actions. Thought no one can accurately predict how bad things will get, science and past events haven given us the ability to make a plan that will reduce the problems that have befallen New Orleans. 1.) As a frequent visitor to New Orleans and having several friends that live in the area you would be hard pressed to find some one that didn’t know that the city was below sea level. Being so, it is constantly flooding. Everyone that lives there or plans on moving there would know the risk that home ownership would bring. 2.) An evacuation order was given. The severity of the storm and the devastation it was projected to bring was made clear to everyone. I heard on a news report that some 80% left the city while the remaining 20% percent decided to wait it out. The biggest complaints that I head from the people to the roaming reports in the area were “I can’t afford to get out of the city.” Which leads to my third point. 3.) Poor planning on the part of the residence of New Orleans. I say the residence because it’s not the city, states, or governments respociblity to protect you from your own ignorance. You might plan for other things, in case of a fire; you get out of the house and meet some place. If a tornado comes through; you go to a basement or bathroom. If you live in a city that is below sea level and is predict to sink into the Gulf in the next hundred years, you find higher ground. In the end I don’t feel sorry at all for the residence left behind in the wake of this disaster. The 80% that left may have lost most if not all their belongings but they had a plan to save the most valuable thing they have, their lives.

The scene that I laughed the most at was the one with the Beast beating the guy into the ground after he hit him with the table leg. Then he asked “why did you hit me?” and the guy reaches up and smacks him the face with a stick. The scene where the two con artists are trying to throw the knives at the landlady was good too. Stephen Chow did a great job with this movie. I saw an un-subtitled version of this film before I saw it in theaters and even though I could not understand the Chinese I could understand what was going on just by the tone of the scene, and the acting. I also loved his mix of marital arts and almost Warner Brothers cartoon style. The combination of the two was perfect making the film that much more enjoyable.

I think beauty, as it relates to the body, depends strongly on the pride and confidence that a person has in them. A person that takes pride in their body will take care of it and take the necessary actions: exercise, eating right, grooming, etc to keep it worthy of that pride. Your body in a way is a piece of art and should be treated as such. Seeing a person that is fit, standing tall, and a look of confidence give you a different sense of the kind of person they are than a person that is flabby, hunched, slouching, and unsure of themselves. With that said, I think that make-up is ok if only used to accent a women’s beauty instead of covering it up. When I see a women with loads of make-up on I see some one that isn’t happy with themselves, so they try to cover it up, mask it, trying to hide the part of them they dislike. It’s a form of deception. Plastic surgery can be the same if the results are ment for others and not for you. In the end think that confidence and pride on the inside are key to beauty on the outside.

I humbly back down from my claim, I apologize for my rudeness. To get back on to topic, most people are unaware of any other meaning and in most cases won’t go looking for it. They hear their teachers and professors use it in there science and math classes and assume that is the only place it has meaning. Plus I think it has something to do with laziness. I know from personal experience that some people will do what ever they can not to think about something. They will just accept the response that they feel is the closest to what seems right and stick with it with out even knowing what it is. Just imagine what the world would be like if people put as much effort into thinking as they did into not having too.

first you said then you said Whose nitpicking? It was a correction to make you post more understandable. Yes this is a discussion forum but the members of the forum shouldn’t have to decipher you misspellings because you lack the time to proof read it. We discuss serious topics here and take a serious attitude towards the answers we give. I don’t know what it is you do for a job but what ever it is you’re not going to send out a product with flaws and tell the customer “lighten up” when he/she points it out to you. fine then, leave

In the Members Writings Forum, a member put up a story of how they came to Objectivism. http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.php?showtopic=2347 It made me think about the path that I took to get to Objectivism. It was a path through religion, politics, and philosophy until I found what it is I was looking for. It also made me wonder how others on the forum came to this philosophy. I am starting research to see if we, as Objectivists and students of Objectivism, share a common background or if each of us experienced it in a different manor. So what was it that lead you to find Objectivism? Was there a certain book, a quote, or a friend that sparked you interest? Did you have to go out and find it, or did it come to you? With a clearer picture of how we all came to Objectivism we might be able to see where future Objectivists may come from, or find a better way of introducing it to those who have never heard of it. Also, if you have any information that might help with my research it would be most appreciated.

That’s very similar to my progression to Objectivism. It makes me wonder how many others found their way to Objectivism along those same lines. Would be an interesting study.

In the end it comes down one opinion that matters the most, and that is your own. I am sure that many of us, myself included, have had to face the same situation that you propose. I have had several friends who are very religious tell me I was wrong for my choice and that I will suffer the consequences of them in the end. My own family lives in denial of my decision, making claims like “your just finding yourself” or as a previous poster has mentioned “its just a phase.” you will receive this treatment for the rest of your life I’m afraid. Not everyone like the truth when it is told to them. Infact most will do what ever they can to avoid it. Don’t try to convince your brother that what you have chosen is right because he might never accept it. The best thing you can do to one day change your brother’s opinion about your choice is to live your life to the best of your ability. Live your life dedicated to your own happiness, your own achievement. Live to be an example. No one ever said doing the right thing was easy, and the road ahead will be tough, but stick with it and take pride in yourself and you will do just fine.

In our current society the court system uses voter registration to determine who is selected for jury duty. Voting is not mandatory so it leads me to ask the question is registering to vote an agreement between the voter and the court system saying they give their time to be a jury member, or does jury duty go against the principle of service to others according to Objectivism? If the second is true how, in an Objectivist society, would the court system handle selection for trial? I and a fellow student of Objectivism have tried to determine the answer to this question on our own. I have search the site but was unable to fine much in the way of a clear answer. Between the two of us we think that the first part of my question would be true because of the statement before it, but we seek other views in order to help us get a better understanding.

I am a 25 year old from the state of Indiana and currently work as a production technician for a multimedia company. More specifically I am a 3d artist. Although I have only known about Objectivism for the last year I have been living by it for many years. My father, a business owner, had instilled in me from an early age the importance of Capitalism and individuality that still sticks with me today. He never heard of Ayn Rand or her philosophy, but understood the importance of what it stood for. After reading Anthem (then Atlas Shrugged and many other works by Ayn Rand and Dr. Peikoff) I found what I had been trying to put a name too for so many years, Objectivism. It has inspired me to read more and really think reasonably, logically about everything around me. There are times though when I must be the “bad guy” for what I believe. I’ve been called heartless, greedy, and selfish. Objectivism has shown me the true meaning of these terms and I am happy to have them given to me. I look forward to reading this forum and learning all I can from the different points of views that may be offered. It may be sometime before I venture to comment on any thread as I have not fully grasped all of Objectivism. In time though and with more understanding I will be able to provide my own contribution to this forum. If you have any questions for me feel free to ask. Thank you for your time. -Bradley Peters