Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

tadmjones

Regulars
  • Posts

    1541
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    30

Posts posted by tadmjones

  1. There is likely a better word than chaos as all matter follows specific physical laws regardless of its form. Maybe "unformed" is better to reflect the time before the formation of stars and planets.

     

    For example, the relationship between an electron and a proton in hydrogen atoms conforms to exactly the same physical law no matter where in the universe they are observed. This is amazing consistent uniformity when you consider the vastness of the universe. This is proof of a literally universal law governing the electron/proton relationship found in the most common element in the universe. Physical law makes the uniform template for all hydrogen atoms possible.

    Actually, you have it reversed, the recognition of the workings of the hydrogen atom, is what gives raise to the understanding of the  relationship between a hydrogen atom and the universe(the ultimate context, remember no contradictions).

  2.  

    Laws exist only as concepts. Things that exist move according to their own nature and if many things have the same nature than we may find laws that in a sence govern those things.

     

    There is no entity that we could call chaos. Also the Universe was less disorderely in the past than it is now.

    I agree with first part of the post in the sense, "nature to be commanded must first be understood", but what do you mean by the second part? Disorderly in what context?
  3.  

    In the view I chose, the only logical way order can come come out of chaos is for it to follow prexisting laws. There are specific laws which govern the orbit of every electron around the nucleus of every hydrogen atom.

    You posit only two choices for explanation of physical laws, based on a 'coming out of chaos'(~), could you define chaos? And provide an example of 'when' it was?
  4. I read somewhere that if the 'red shift' is evidence of expansion and given the rate, that at some point sentient beings would not be aware or have any means to determine the expanse of the universe. They would be 'cut off' from the 'rest' of the universe due to the event horizon umm thingy(sorry layman here).

  5.  

    Nope.

    To me, if he wanted to stick it to the man, he could have made it public that he was able to design Cortlandt, as no other architect was able to, but refuses to have it built on public funds by the government. Then Toohey could work the masses with that one and Roark could have done some kind of speech about it in print or something like that.

    Did you stop reading the novel at that point? After you determined that Roark was immoral did you cease to have anything about you associated with the character in the novel? Or did you keep reading to find out if he had to pay for his transgressions?
  6.  

    Your comment opens to another question:

     

    Just as it is our own personal responsibility to know not to lie to others...

     

    ... is it also our responsibility to know when we are being lied to?

     

    For a lie to do harm, it must first be met with a matching willingness to believe it. Lies can possess an irrational "too good to be true" quality to them, so that they can appeal to a complimentary irrational quality of "getting something for nothing". This is like a key and a lock. They must fit together to open the lock.

     

    When a person realizes after the fact that they were lied to, it can be a valuable experience to discover the irrationality in them that wanted to believe the lie. This learning experience can make a person less susceptable to being lied to the next time... and there will always be a next time.

     

    The less a person lies to others... the less they will believe lies of others.

    Is it just me or is this line of reasoning leading the way for original sin in epistemology?
  7.  

    My point is that a social context regulates, but doesn't create a right to life.  The source of all rights is a right to life, but what is the source of a right to life?  Society??  No, the source of a right to life is the living individual, which includes hermits.

     Ok, so the hermit can hope that , upon meeting a meanderer in the woods, his rights will be recognized.

    Later by his campfire he can once again revel in his imbued trait of rights in perfect solitude.

    And society does not refer to an existential existent, so why would I argue that it can 'do' anything ?

  8. "Politics is a branch of philosophy that deals with human interactions. It is dependent and derived from metaphysics and ethics. The principles of individual rights are only applicable in a 'societal context'. If one lives in isolation there is no need of rights. What would a principle that sanctions man's action mean, if there was no entity to challenge or thwart one's actions?" ~ tadmjones, post #38

     

    The entity to challenge or thwart ones actions is oneself. A hermit has as much need for a right to life as a citizen because both must govern their own actions, and neither can do whatever they want to survive. The freedom to act isn't simply a freedom from the coercion of others, but the freedom to do what is correct and proper given ones situation.

    In the case of a hermit or a man in isolation, freedom from whom or what? Do you mean freewill or a volitional consciousness that is free to function? I don't understand your point.
  9.  

    I saw Pulp Fiction. I did not get anything positive out of the characters immoral actions.

    I get nothing positive from Roarks immoral actions he took such as - dynamiting, lying, and the fraud he committed. But yeah, I do get some positive things from the book, despite that.

    C'mon in Roark's case, not even an iota of 'yeah, there ya go, stickin it to the man' kinda thing on any level?

    Any 'take that one for Henry' ?

  10. I think the OP is a good example of what Reidy pointed to as Rand's and Aristotle's meaning, infinity is a potential not an actuality. You simply add another placeholder indefinately(potentiality), but the number of specific placeholders at any one time is the actual amount you have(actuality).

    As to subatomic particles and the smashing thereof..smashin' em is probably easier than countin' what you get

    Wait on second thought perhaps the points and line example is not good. Numbers refer to quantities of existents, just saying you can ascribe a number doesn't mean there is actually a quantity to refer to, even you want to. Infinite points on a line does not actually refer to an existent quantity outside of the maths. (??)

  11. Devil's Advocate, on 27 Feb 2013 - 13:14, said:

    The social context for individual rights is politics, which means the sanctioning or prohibition of interactions between members of a group. However there remains the individual context of self-preservation, which means the individual recognition and selection of actions necessary to survive. A hermit doesn't gain a right to life by entering society, or lose it by departing. His right to live is regulated by social interaction, but not created by interacting socially, or alienated by living alone. I use the example of a hermit because he is self-governing, which means he responds to his environment by choosing (sanctioning or prohibiting) his own actions. A hermit isn't free to do whatever he wants in isolation and remain alive. He must still choose to remain alive and act accordingly, and those actions demonstrate his right to live (or not to) according to his autonomy as an individual. It would be as correct to say that the hermit sanctions the social regulation of his right to life by choosing to interact with others, which means his right has a social context but isn't delimited to a social context.

    Politics is a branch of philosophy that deals with human interactions. It is dependent and derived from metaphysics and ethics. The principles of individual rights are only applicable in a 'societal context'.

    If one lives in isolation there is no need of rights. What would a principle that sanctions man's action mean, if there was no entity to challenge or thwart one's actions?

  12. That was an example of a negative feedback control.  There are plenty of negative feedback systems in nature without a scintilla of consciousness. 

     

    It is the -principle- of negative feedback I was getting at.  

     

    Here is a climatic negative feed-back loop.  The earth gets warmer,  the oceans evaporate off lots of water vapor,  lots of clouds form.  The clouds reflect the light of the sun back into space and that acts to cool of their earth.  Evaporation and cloud formation moderate temperature increases.  It is a cooling system that works by negative-feedback and there is not a bit of consciousness to it.

     

    ruveyn1

    agreed, my point is that WAP and SAP must be based on the primacy of consciousness if they supposed to give 'reasons' for existence, or perhaps I don't understand them correctly. If they are intended to give the 'reasons' for existence, I reject them both for the reasons I stated.
  13. A planetary federation based on objective law, quite Heinleinian. Hard to imagine the amount of cultural change that would require, we have a hard time  in the West not forgetting principles let only learnin' new ones. Way off topic but are there still vestiges of the caste system in India and/or how westernised is India culturally?

  14. How does running a background check force people to provide additional personal details to the government?  The gun purchase is registered with their name and the serial number on the gun in either case, and the background check (as I understand it) does not add any information to government databases.  It simply searches the existing data and notifies the gun dealer of preexisting criminal records.

     

    As to individuals having to demonstrate their innocence, is this not what a proper border policy would do by screening for criminals and enemy combatants?  Is this not what the government does when considering hiring individuals as government employees, or what a private employer might also reasonably do

    In New Jersey to gain a purchase permit for a handgun one must get fingerprinted($80) and provide references. The references I provided were contacted and asked questions portaining to the applicants character along with whatever checking the government agencies do or did without my knowledge.

    When the handgun is purchased (if you receive the purchase permit) the serial number of the item is then registered and recorded with the buyer's name.

×
×
  • Create New...