Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by WGD

  1. No you didn't. Most of the world has never written a critical word of Rand. I've never said Miller was orthodox Objectivist- you keep calling him a neo Objectivist along with anybody else who mentions they like Rand. Check the date on Millers writing for toc.
  2. Big jump. You still haven't said what a neo-randian is.
  3. 1984. Good example of "Begging the question." "He wouldn't mind..." Gee I guess that why he asked her to be a visiting fellow.
  4. Follow your link and read the date! WHILE HE WAS STILL ORTHODOX, OH MY! Eric Mack doesn't view himself as a "neo-Randian." Check out his web site, I think its called Catholic. "did she not?" She did not. How is that intimidation. I don't think there is an "argument from intimidation" do you mean Argumentum ad baculum?
  5. cwolf. You do not know what you are talking about in terms of Social Philosophy and Policy. You said "Neo-Randians run" it, they don't. Its respected because of that. I didn't say some people can publish crap. Is your argument, something gets published so it is good? "neo-Randian heretics" that doesn't make any sense. But yes, I agree they are a bunch of "characters." "...thus there would be nothing wrong with publish an "orthodox" article." What are you talking about here?
  6. Social Philosophy and Policy is very respected because Fred Miller doesn't allow it to be associated with the likes of sciabarra and kelley. Gladstein can't get dates right. "Novels by..." I though you said, "making progress in academia"? Eric Mack has written over 70 articles on Objectivism in academic journals? Journal of Ayn Rand studies??? LOL Your argument seems to be, if anybody anywhere mentions Ayn Rand, even people that don't understand Objectivism(Eric Mack, etc.) thats academic advancement. cwolf-- since you don't understand objectivism, you are not qualified to speak on it. Let's not be second-handed. Whereof one cannot speak, one must be silent.
  7. What is a "orthodox Objectivist" and a "neo-Randian." You say "shall we say" does that mean you don't really know. Are you Bob Dole using "we" when talking about yourself? If you knew what you were talking about you would know Social Philosophy and Policy is run by Fred Miller at Bowling Green and is "allied" with Gotthelf if anybody. Go to their site read all the "orthodox Objectivists" that have been visiting scholars. Yes, I glad you agree with me that ARI is serious.
  8. C-wolf, "and the like"? Why don't you give some examples of their progress. David Kelley's book isn't "a respected book" in the field.
  9. Argive99, I wouldn't waste money on toc. Yes. Yes. Lindsay Perigio's record is were the discription came from. Bidinotto is one of the best minds at toc, and that's not a compliment.
  10. At the Summer conferences: ARI had a panel discussion on the progress of Objectivism in academia. The most important news is Dr. Gotthelf will be publishing in a top philosophical journal, a paper on Ayn Rand's epistemology. I think that's a first! toc had a panel discussion on whether ...wait for it..."Objectivists should abandon the term libertarian because it has been hijacked" by nuts (lewrockwell.com, etc.) Wasn't toc set up so they could call themselves libertarian, form united fronts with libertarians, and be nonjudgmental togeather. I got the above quote from L. Perigo, who was on the panel. He defended libertarians with "should we really eschew cooperation on a political level with libertarians who believe rights come from God, or from nowhere?"
  11. How about the movie about Michael Moore. www.michaelmoorehatesamerica.com
  12. WGD


    So a miscarriage is fetus suicide?
  13. Why are you here if you think Objectivism is dogmatic? It would be of no use to you. When DPW shows your wrong about the philosophy, you change your argument while ignoring his post. From "Objectivism is dogmatic" to "most Objectivists I've met are extremely dogmatic."
  14. Did they call you a fool or did you pick up a non-verbal vibe from their aura? Maybe it's just you and not society.
  15. So you don't really believe your own arguments? Like in the anti-drug commercials, this is your mind on "emotion, intuiton, and experience?"
  16. 1st: Your problem is you have an erroneous view of Capitalism. How do you go from -the government should leave you alone- to -I can't help anyone-. How does a political system decide if you should give to charity? 2nd:Now that's the evil of altruism, forcing on others an unearned expense. Why is "value" to you only economic? I'm sure that's not the reason you help your child.
  17. What is the certification process in telling some one not to eat? What is the "stamp of approval" this organization can give a doctor? How could anyone lose their certification? Catching their patients a McDonalds?
  18. I didn't know that people who quote Ayn Rand are "pompous loudmouths" you seem to have set the bar kind of low. But are you calling yourself a loudmouth-know nothing, because the first words you use for Grasso was he "actually resembles Orren Boyle more then anyone else."(I think that counts as an insult) You didn't understand Nietche's statement until now? Your example of what I should have said is kind of mental. Why would I say, "...Grasso is an example of a political businessman...NYSE is a quasi-governmental." These are YOUR arguments, and there wrong! But, How does Grasso "actually resembles Orren Boyle more then anyone else?" How is "the NYSE is not a free market entity?" I can't really have an "exchange" with someone who does not know the industry.
  19. LOL You didn't even know the NYSE is a private institution. IT IS a SRO under government regulation, not "euphemistically known as." How does Grasso "actually resemble Orren Boyle more than anyone else?" How is "the NYSE is not a free market entity?"
  20. This information, and your posts, make you and Luskin resemble Orren Boyle. ECN's want to "produce Rearden Metal" after the NYSE creates it. Again you imply the NYSE is equal to "the commons" of the middle ages. It is a business.
  21. You obviously you don't know how the exchanges work. The NYSE is a business. Grasso was the CEO. He was paid to make the owners money. He made them billions. Your argument is he didn't sacrifice his business to the collective of weak competitors. Give ONE example how he is like Orren Boyle.
  22. I guess you won't be keeping your word?
  23. Vickirusell said on may 18th: "Sorry for my ignorance but I am somewhat new to Objectivism."(top of p.5) A day later she's talking about the "Ayn Rand lied about Nathaniel Branden," Ayn Rand is God, Atlas Shrugged is the bible, Objectivism is a cult. She's also an authority on cults. Not only a fool but a fraud.
  24. I guess "scholar" Sciabarra is following this topic because now he has posted a "What I really meant..." statement. I should have called his teachers and asked them what classes he took in college, to see if he was necessitated by his exposure.
  25. Chris Sciabarra, self described as a "Rand Scholar" hasn't seemed to have read Atlas Shrugged. He's promoting this news/cultural item: "A John Galt is attemping "to launch an unlicensed Denver radio operiation" which is "illegal under regulations administered by the FCC."" "I'm not quite sure if this new John Galt uses Atlas as inspiration, but it's clear that he and his colleagues, like Rand, have invoked the Robin Hood legend in trying to take back radio from privileged license holders." Anybody who's ever read Atlas Shrugged wouldn't connect Ayn Rand with Robin Hood. It's one of the realizations of Atlas that what people remember about the Robin Hood story is altruism. Like most Libertarians, he doesnt make any sense. Is he saying that the licenses were stolen from this "John Galt?" I don't remember the heros of Atlas trying to get assets that weren't their's.
  • Create New...