Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

ironworks soundlabs

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • School or University
    hvcc, suny albany
  • Occupation

ironworks soundlabs's Achievements

Junior Member

Junior Member (3/7)



  1. I'm an INTP/J (Sometimes I come up as perception, sometimes judgement).
  2. thank you I only found two locally, and sent them brief emails last night.
  3. I am bipolar, and get severe depression. I also have extreme social anxiety that was turning into agoraphobia. Interestingly, litterly on the day I decided I was just going to cut the world out, as it didn't seem like anyone gave a shit about me, I met the most amazing female. She is the first person besides my family who cares about me, and she has really helped me find a reason to change. I deal as best as I can, and Objectivism has helped very much. Sometimes, however, no matter how rational I try to be something will just click in my head and I will get severely depressed, and borderline psychotic. These attacks used to last for weeks at a time, and occasionally I would be very happy. Nowadays I can usually get back into a normal state of mind through rational thought by the end of the day the attack occurs in. When I first started studying Objectivism I was actually getting more depressed because I couldn't control my feelings with my rationality. Its getting better now...
  4. I really need to see someone about some things, and perhaps give medication another shot. I, however, can't seem to find a cognitive psychologist around here, everyone seems to be psychotherapists. Can someone perhaps point me to a directory where I may be able to find someone relatively local? I live around Albany, New York (Capital Region). I would appreciate any help very much. Thank you.
  5. Thank you very much. All three posts were very informative, and make total sense. Chris really cleared up the confusion I had, I must say. Now since I look at it, even though I played strictly by ear for years, I used a rather slow process of trial and error to develop my musical abilities. For instance, one of the first songs I learned was a Green Day song, when I come I around I believe, and I was 11. I had absolutely no knowledge of theory, I only knew how to play power chords. From there I figured out the song, and the melody for the solo. From that song I remember I mapped out the notes I was playing and created a pentatonic scale (of course I didn't know what that was at the time). I realized that I could play a couple notes in this scale, and they sounded good. I also realized that I had to resolve to the first chord being played in the case of this song. Soon I was able to use this simple knowledge, and my ability to pitch match to play any random melody on the radio. So the knowledge built on top of previous knowledge, and even though I didn't know the technical terms for what I was doing, I knew what worked and what didn't. After many years it has become second nature to me, like when I type on this keyboard. I am thinking of the words, watching the screen as I type, but not consciously paying attention to the keys I am hitting. I guess I must have known that, but never really paid conscious attention to what was going on. Hm, that certaintly motivates me to learn as much as humanly possible about music.
  6. No, I never did. Hmm, my primary address is [email protected], if you want to try that I would appreciate it very much. http://www.nathanielbranden.net/ayn/ayn03.html Here is an essay that I feel brings up rather good points, especially about the dogmatic nature of Objectivism. Even though every one here bashes this man, he knew the philosophy, and Ayn Rand better than any one here. I am also unconvinced on the case against animal volition. To me, this is something neither side of the argument can prove, and I don't think it is logical to reason, "Animals don't have volition because Ayn Rand says so." I have also noticed that through the literature I have read so far, I rarely ever come across proper citations. In general, the treatment of the philosophy as a closed-system, I feel, is quite lame, and that gives me a dogmatic impression of it. I have yet to see a serious Objectivist take into any consideration a view point that doesn't coincide with the Objectivist stand on a certain issue. This, to me, is intellectual suicide. With my current view of reality, I have spotted the forementioned items as being wrong (amongst others). For lack of a better comparison, when I argue with many Objectivists I feel like I am arguing with Christians. No matter what kind of contradictory evidence is shown against their beliefs, they have a completely closed mind to taking it into consideration. This, I find very lame, as being objective calls for an active mind, not a closed mind.
  7. No, I have not received the Fisk transcriptions. I would like to see them, but it is not a big deal. I am going off the violin sheet music, and just working out the fingerings myself. The original tabs I was using had very illogical fingerings. When playing something at such an intense speed I like to use the the easiest fingerings possible, and what's easy for me, might not be easy for the next person and vice versa. I totally agree, and these are my prime motivations for studying Objectivism. Where as I used to look at the music making experiance as being spiritual, I know see it as one of the most intensely rational experiances possible for a human. When we are creating music, we are witnessing beauty few people will ever have the chance to experiance. I find that the harder I train, the more intense the feeling of making music is. I absolute love that. This is very true, but also one of the few things that deters me from the philosophy; particularly the bolded statement. I see many people that are so passionate about this philosophy that they have closed their minds to any dissenting statements that are made about the philosophy - regardless of any evidence that disagree. I, however, don't ever see my active mind closing off the potential for some disagreement in the philosophy anytime soon. I am amazed at how many Objectivists just look the other way at evidence that disagrees with the philosophy.
  8. I have been studying Objectivism for several months now (Even though I have been into Objectivism for over a year, I haven't begun to take the philosophy seriously until recently), and I have recently realized that I do not comprehend many of the definitions needed to grasp this philosophy. I have since decided to go through all the Objectivist literature I own very thoroughly, and I came across this information I completely missed the first time I read OPAR. The following quote completely describes where I have gone wrong. (From pg. 133) I seem to do this in many aspects of my life, particularly in college. I have a 4.0 GPA, but I forget a lot of the material I learn, primarily in the sciences. I find that I study very hard, but I am memorizing the material, and not really grasping the concepts presented. Fortunately, I have a pretty good ability to figure things out, so when I am presented with problems that involve thinking (as opposed to rote memory) I can usually solve the problem using the limited techniques I have available to me (I do this in math all the time). This is not a major problem yet, but I find that I have to study more and more as I am getting into the more advanced classes. It is obvious to me that my conceptual structure is flawed and needs immediate fixing. I am wondering if anyone has any advice on how I can begin rearranging my methodology for learning material? Since we are on this topic, I am confused on one other aspect here. Peikoff states that one must “establish the requisite base,” before they can understand the higher-level concepts (p. 133). I, for instance, am very good at using my senses as a guide to improvisation over music. I can pick up my guitar, put on a tune, and within seconds I have the main melody figured out and I can improvise over it very fluently. When I am playing like this, I am not paying any attention to the theory involved. I do not understand why all the notes I am playing work, I just know they work. This does not seem to involve higher-levels of cognition, as it seems I am only using my senses of hearing and touch. It is as if my senses instantly guiding the actions of my hands. This concept is pretty hard to explain to anyone besides a musician. Maybe I can clear it up; when I am improvising, I am paying little attention to my consciousness. It seems that this activity, which is a very complex activity, is using very little of my mind to perform, and in a sense, I am not using a "requisite base" to create music. I only recently learned that a chromatic I though sounded nice over 7th chords was because it was the 7th chord tone. I had no "requisite base" of what was going on, I just knew it worked I am curious as to why something like improvisation overrides our conscious acknowledgement of our existing knowledge base? Is it perhaps because the hierarchical context has such a strong attachment to reality that during the process of reduction we are able to transfer a signal from our senses to a very complex motor movement at a speed that makes it seem unconscious? (edited for clarity I.W.S.L.)
  9. Thanks man! I just bookmarked you'r forums as well, and will definetely be checking that out, as well as the theory site again. BTW, your theory site was really helpful. I have since been implementing the 7ths in my blues improvising. I just put together a couple real tight blues mix CDs to jam over, and I noticed that those notes work very well! Thanks again, as I know have another piece of information to enhance my playing that will be with me forever... I will definetely check out the counterpoint examples as well. The songs I create generally use a good amount of counterpoint already, but I don't really know the theory behind counterpoint yet. I just create melodies that sound good on top of eachother. I definetely would like to know why they sound good. Also, my 5th caprice is going quite well. I have most of the song down, and can play most of the parts at 100 bpm at 16th notes. I have been doing alot of sweeping work, and can bang out a good amount of the minor and major arp shapes at 125 bpm now (triplets). So I have been improving quite much recently. I have been getting alot of practice time in. On the weekends, since I don't have to work, I am getting in about 20 hours of practice Anyways, I haven't been posting much because of conflicts I am having with certain members of this site who obviously have more knowledge of Objectivism than me, and seem to talk down to people who don't agree with every aspect of the philosophy. I am studying the philosophy quite hard, but since I don't know it very thoroughly yet, I can't say I agree with everything. So I have chosen to browse this site and not really post much untill I get a better personal understanding of the philosophy. I just wanted to post this to let you know that your help has been greatly appreciated, and useful! I.W.S.L
  10. These are the main reasons I am looking to purchase it. Since I have only been in school for two years, and have several to go, and since I had been living on 22 years of bad philosophy, I feel I need to create a good mindframe to absorb, and intepret everything I have been learning. Before I discovered Objectivism I was into mysticism (Sufism, and Taoism mostly, but I picked up bits and pieces of irrational beliefs from many systems). I feel my methodology is severaly flawed, and I need to fix that problem before I take in any more flawed information. After reading your post, it seems that lecture is exactly what I am looking for. Another one I was curious about, that is number 2 on my list now since I have found it, is The Art of Thinking, by Leonard Peikoff. Will this be better for me to go through before or after Objectivism Through Induction?
  11. This is very helpful, thank you. I have thought of doing something along these lines, but I never get past the first couple days. I think I will just start doing this in a notebook, and then try to eliminate the things I really don't need. I know that this is my greatest downfall that prevents me from saving money.
  12. That definetely looks like a good one. I will put that on the list. Thanks!
  13. Has anyone listened to this lecture? I need some opinions on how much this lecture has helped people in developing a better methodology for learning. I have just finished the Melody in Music lecture, and have realized these lectures may be well worth the money they cost (that one was at least, as I learned so much new material to apply towards my musical compositions). I am a second year college student, who plans on attaining multiple degrees and attending graduate school. I currently make a decent amount of money, so I can spend whatever I want really on developing a good learning methodology now. My income will be changing dramatically less when I transfer schools next year, as I have to quit my job and start working part-time. I want to buy up as much material as I can now while I have money. I also have a problem following through with financial goals, as I am very compulsive with my money. As I matter of fact, I don't even set long-term financial goals anymore because of my inability to save. This is one of the main areas of my life I need to develop a better grasp on, as I am excellent at strategic planning, but I am awful at actually implementing the plans when they involve money. This is another area I am looking to purchase lectures on. I am wondering if anyone has any other suggestions for additional lectures on these subject matters. The other ones I have on my list so far are: Setting Goals to Improve Your Life & Happiness Part 2 By Edwin A. Locke http://www.aynrandbookstore2.com/store/pro...tem=18&mitem=24 Study Methods & Motivation (book) By Edwin A. Locke http://www.aynrandbookstore2.com/store/pro...tem=20&mitem=24 Induction In Physics and Philosophy (I will be studying neuroscience after I finish my music degree) By Leonard Peikoff http://www.aynrandbookstore2.com/store/pro...tem=38&mitem=39 Objectivity in Writing By Robert W. Tracinski http://www.aynrandbookstore2.com/store/pro...tem=10&mitem=12
  14. Okay, I'll admit I'm wrong for now, as I am looking at this argument from a whole other viewpoint than everyone here is. Two questions though... 1. What is going on when a chimp is using sign langauge to communicate? One chimp has been documented being able to use over 150 signs to communicate effectively. http://www.as.ua.edu/ant/bindon/ant270/sit...with_chimps.htm 2. What kind of proof would be needed to show that some animals are volitional? If this was proven, what would happen to the Objectivist philosophy? Would anyone here actually accept that some animals were volitional if one could prove it?
  • Create New...