merjet

Here is a paper by Gregory Salmieri, who has written for ARI and spoken at OCONs. In chapter 6 of A Companion to Ayn Rand Salmieri portrayed Ayn Rand as trying to reform selfish similar to others “who seek to reform language that they think reflects and reinforces widespread prejudices” (p. 145). He cites examples of other people doing something similar with “slut” and “queer.” He also says that Rand’s statement about the dictionary definition of “selfish” pertained to what she thought the word ought to mean (p. 146) as opposed to what it does mean to most people. In this paper he argues or suggests that Aristotle did a somewhat similar thing with the Greek word philautos, which has most often been translated as “self-lover” or “lover of self", and less often "selfish." I have no strong opinion on how truthful this is. I don't have a broad and deep understanding of Greek philosophy, can't read Greek, and have no grasp of the cultural and intellectual milieu during Aristotle's life. I haven't read the entire paper yet, but might post some more here as I read more of it.

The longer title is Mystique of the Intellectual: Heroes of Ayn Rand's Dystopias and the Ron Paul Revolution Much of the article is about Ron Paul, which one could skip to save time and focus on what is about Ayn Rand. The article is more or less psycho-epistemology. The author invokes three terms new to me, though what they mean is not new. These are knowledge inflation, funneling, and prediction-fulfillment. Knowledge inflation is essentially 'some implies all' and/or argument by authority. If Ayn Rand is deemed correct about one thing, one should assume she was correct about something else. Funneling is essentially simple solutions to complex problems. Prediction-fulfillment is self-explanatory.

Killing The SAT Means Hurting Minorities

Cryptocurrency outlook #4

Cryptocurrency outlook #3

A Companion to Ayn Rand is a book and "Egoism and Altruism" is a chapter within that book. "The choice of the beneficiary of moral values is merely a preliminary or introductory issue in the field of morality. It is not a substitute for morality, nor a criterion of moral value as altruism has made it. Neither is it a moral primary: it has to derive from an validate the fundamental premises of a moral system" (VOS x). Her saying "merely a preliminary or introductory issue" doesn't jive with how big an issue she made of egoism versus altruism.

No. I thought of saying that earlier but didn't. There is only one reality, too.

In math multiplication of scalars differs from multiplication of matrices. There is standard symbolic logic versus term logic.

Cryptocurrency outlook #2

Cryptocurrency outlooks. http://merjet46.blogspot.com/2021/02/cryptocurrency-news.html?m=0

I look forward to reading it, Stephen. I also will have an article in the July JARS. The title is Selfish vs Selfish. (There are two legit meanings.)

Law, blockchain, cryptocurrency

Another possibility: https://thesecretofthetarot.com/angel-number-115/

GameStop again

Open mind vs. closed mind vs. active mind. What matters to the author is open or closed. Style vs. substance. Truth??? https://www.academia.edu/34121016/Rhetorical_Closure?email_work_card=view-paper

That nobody asked does not imply that nobody is interested in knowing where specifically Aristotle wrote about teleology. Why don't you ask 2046 why he felt the need to be sarcastic?

Huh? My writing "gibberish," which was flippant, referred to the numbers in the following.

Frustrating banking experience

Gibberish to some people. Are you one of them?

Aristotle, Generation of Animals 5.8, 789a8–b15 Aristotle, Physics, 2.8, 199b27-9

Read the link.

Per my understanding: A rock has no final cause when it's just sitting there. A final cause is teleological. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleology A rock is given a final cause if a living thing imparts one, like David slinging it at Goliath, or a chimp using it to crack nut shells.

Thanks, Stephen. Being in-formed matters.

https://merjet46.blogspot.com/2021/02/david-french-on-abortion.html

California passed AB-5, and a judge ruled it applied to Uber and Lyft drivers, treating them as employees rather than independent contractors. Then Proposition 22 passed, supporting and supported by Uber and Lyft. The California state government and unions are still fighting to treat the drivers as employees. How control is divided between the drivers and the companies makes the battleground. Control by the drivers favors them being independent contractors, whereas control by the companies favors them being employees. Uber Lyft Taxes is no small part of it. If employees, the company would pay half the drivers' payroll taxes which fund Social Security and Medicare. If independent contractors, the drivers pay 100% of the payroll taxes. Income taxes for the drivers are also quite different for the two statuses. Qua employees, they get W-2s and do not file Schedule C. Qua independent contractors, they do not get W-2s and do file Schedule C. The W-2 status provides a lot more oversight to the IRS via info provided by the employer; the independent contractor status and Schedule C provides a lot less oversight to the IRS. One of the advantages of Schedule C is being able to depreciate the vehicle used for work and take the standard mileage deduction. This often gives a bigger tax deduction than cash-incurred expenses for gas, maintenance, repairs, etc.