Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

frank harley

Regulars
  • Content Count

    212
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

frank harley last won the day on May 29 2014

frank harley had the most liked content!

About frank harley

  • Rank
    Member

Previous Fields

  • Country
    United States
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • Sexual orientation
    No Answer
  • Real Name
    frank harley
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

4863 profile views
  1. The scientific method says that the only real content is that of a tested & supported hypotheses.
  2. Well, no. the arbitrary is just as good as any other notion...or 'concept'! That's because the philo-epistemo-metaphysical-logical status means nothing. What's only of importance is if the statement can be made into a testable hypotheses. Again, 'null hypotheses' means all unproven hypotheses are equally void of content.
  3. >>> Many-valued logic is not scientific or reasonable to Oist.>>>> ...etc... The key to science is the possibility that 'any' concept can be converted into a testable hypotheses. This would include those brought about by a mystical vision. To this end, we speak of science using 'null hypotheses' that 'all' hypothese are equally null from the start. it would therefore stand to reason that concepts, that form hypotheses, are all null in equal measure. Science does not favor binary logic. Rather the opposite case can be better made that tested results and internal co
  4. Well. no: naturalized concepts are those that purport to explain how nature works. The problem is that scientists don't like the term because it sounds philosopihical (mirable dictu!). Wigner spoke for himself, not for the community. His point, internally speaking, was that while most of his fellow QMers took a Godel-influenced Platonic view of math, they nevertheless insisted that their discoveries were subject-independently real. Again, Wigner's point was that the match was too close. There comes a point (long-crossed in his opinion) at which math ceases to become only a tool, rather
  5. Electromagnetic fields are just that, regardless of their source. There would be a measurable EM field due to the rather large nerve that creates an elecrochemical charge. that's because all nerves run on...electrochemical, auto-created impulses. When you get excited, or run a lot, or have sex, the nerve activity increases, telling the heart to pump more blood, faster, to supply tthe brain with more oxygen (among other things!). But this is high-school biology, not serious research. Moreover, a good high school biology teacher would never say, "bio-electromagnetic'. The info i obt
  6. People today have developed an anti-war mindset precisely because of the horrors of the two world wars. Otherwise, I believe that your suggestion that the US is somehow whimping out is far off base. To this end, perhaps you might explain DIM to the un-initiated, such as I Lastly in two specific cases that you mentioned: * I believe that 'bullshit' and 'tension' are poor words to describe the Ukranian situation. You have the overthrow of an unpopular, pro-russian government whose support was located in the Crimea, and Don Bass. Now it's evident that a regional majority want to becom
  7. Permit me to offer a Spinozan perspective into the debate regarding Walmart:in particular and coroprations in general: In his 'political tract' he noted that the '-cracy' in democracy, meant the people are empowered to change things,(kratos in greek means more like 'direct' than 'rule' as such). Having empowerment but not using it is a definite statement that one accepts the status quo--that there is nothing to direct. Walmart builds huge boxes, pays poorly and refuses to hire full-time--all in the name of economic efficiency. Oth, all corporations are chartered by the states,
  8. >>> the most fundamental nature of existence is conceptual, not sensational. By fundamental here I do not mean our reality<<<< I agree. To conceptualize is part of our DNA. Oth, there is nothing that assures us that our concepts will lead to science. Speaking of which....my experience in science indicates that its practitioners have a really hard time with the c-word. Rather, a 'concept' to science is nothing but an idea, or generalized thought that hasn't found it's usable form as a hypotheses. to this end, a 'naturalized concept is one that corresponds to how nat
  9. Post scriptum: heart/math is utter nonsense. for one, they're talking of ;'their' reserch, 'their' laboratories, ad nauseum... 'Unseen energetic level' ??? Please. Earth's energetic system interaction????
  10. The quantification of emotional response began in the 1930's with Schracter. it's a measurement of response from the optic thalmus. Things are far more sophisticated now; perhaps this is what the 'heart/math is all about(?), which I'll check out & respond accordingly. My particular pov is that economic transactions are far too emotional-- which is nothing more than to say that we're victimized by advertising into making the wrong purchasing decisions. <<sex is rational-emotional when money is rational-rational>> Perhaps you meant 'while' for 'when'? No on bo
  11. Thanks for the response. it would seem as if she's saying that 'unit' is a naturalized concept--ie gender and numbers are natural?
  12. Here i'm requesting an objectivist explanation: In set theory a 'unit' is defined as an aggregate of two or more facts or things that have something in common. Yet because we can find commonalities in any two things or facts, the number of units consists of a larger infinity than the infinite number of facts and things themself. The same can be said of 'concept' if we're dealing with qualities of things-- ie 'money' for all objects used as purchasing power, etc...at the same time they might be classed with either 'worthless trinkets', or "status symbol." In other words, the hum
  13. I would say that emotion contains volitional elements.that form the content of what's being expressed. Oth, the expression of emotion is not; we all know how importantly difficult it is to keep emotions under control. Aristotle wrote that we choose our children's emonal responses for them thru education (paideia). For example, if I were to say 'Dogaloo akbar- the dog is great', it would not definately not be in a mosque in Cairo among a bunch of teenage theology students. Money is nothing but purchasing power. That said, yes, there's a willfull, emotive desire on the part of a few to
  14. From the 'Organon', 'Peri hermeneis'. or 'Regarding interpretation' is the standard Aristotelian text that deals with propositions and language.. Most readers neglect the significance of Book 9 and the infamous 'problem of future contingents'; a sea battle either will or will not take place tomorrow. Otherwise, this is more or less proof that Aristotle considered cases in which null and negative values are as real as positive assertions. Therefore, a general theory of logic (which Aristotle never developed) would have to account for all possibilities. This would include 'null-A', Lukasiew
  15. Rand's literature is about the constitution of The Sunject. So without even having read her pure philsophy, her work would be deemed philosophically important because, after all, the most important question you can ask in philosophy is 'What accounts for subjectivity?' Galt and Roarke struggle to maintain an identity. As over-achievers, they (rightfully feel that their reward are insufficient. Moreover, both raise the issue as to how deprived the world would be without their services. Then I began reading the 'pure' philosophy. Since I do have a background in philsophy (masters thesis
×
×
  • Create New...