lindagarrette

Yes, It does not say that a collective noun is a concept. In fact one of the patrons in that section of the forum makes the distinction. I don't agree with everything in any philosophy. That would preclude my right to think independently or to examine alternatives. I follow the scientific method.

I agree that conciousness is not a physical object but "emergent quality" is not very definitive. Neural network research is uncovering the mechanisms of consciousness. The current theory is that a central nervous system that reacts to external stimuli creates the brain activity we call consciousness. The great challenge is to replicate the effect in machines.

Furniture is a collective noun. It's pretty preceivable at least to me. The term chair, however, is very unclear as it may have significance on several levels. The definition is determined by context.

Mitrochondrial DNA did not exist in the first life form, prokaryotes. (Life began from a non-life form.)

That's very circular and contradictory. How can something physical (deterministic) cause something not caused (not deterministc)? Outside from what we know about quantum interactions, everything (space time) in the universe is causally determined.

Quite clearly, the placebo has no medical effect, thus it is called a placebo.

Corporate profits and assets are taxed first then the dividends paid to owners out of the remaining profits are taxed, and owners also pay capital gains on asset growth. The workaround is expensing everything possible. And that's not very hard to do.

Now that's an idea I never heard of before. I suppose you already know corporations pay a lot of fees to government agencies already and of course pass the proceeds along to the consumer. The advantage of sales tax, on the other hand, is that the coporation is involved in the transaction only as a middle man. The problem with it is that the tax is regressive, which means everyone pays the same percent of their assets. Now, if you eliminated sales tax and income tax, replacing it with a fee, what would be the base for allocation? Volume, cost, profit? Some businesses provide high volume, low cost goods and services. Others, just the opposite. Some profit margins are very high, others are zero or even less. Since businesses can usually expense most of the profit away, they can easily avoid paying taxes, anyway. The nation had few taxes in its early history. From 1791 to 1802, the United States government was supported by internal taxes on distilled spirits, carriages, refined sugar, tobacco and snuff, property sold at auction, corporate bonds, and slaves. The high cost of the War of 1812 brought about the nation's first sales taxes on gold, silverware, jewelry, and watches. In 1817, however, Congress did away with all internal taxes, relying on tariffs on imported goods to provide sufficient funds for running the government. In 1862, in order to support the Civil War effort, Congress enacted the nation's first income tax law. It was a forerunner of our modern income tax in that it was based on the principles of graduated, or progressive, taxation and of withholding income at the source. We're firmly entrenched in the system now. Libertarians believe we can survive again without federal taxation and there are some sound reasons that's possible. Look at their platform for the details. The main problem we have currently is the gigantic defense budget and the high crime rate in our cities. If we could eliminate those very negative causes for nonvoluntary expenditure, we could probably set up an insurance type of system that would cover basic community needs.

Actually, evolution is caused by successful mitochondrial DMA mutation.

What? EVIL is a concept. A city, a horse, a country... those are entities. In some cases, a thing could be called by its conceptual name. Civilization, for example.

You say that the objectivist theory is unique. Does that mean it does not rely on the scientific method? Why is reality any different from "the nature of reality?" Why do you think the workings of the human consciousness is beyond our grasp? If you investigate the research on neural networks, you may change your mind. How can one learn anything from faith? (a logically unsubstntiated belief). Otherwise the matter would be fact, or evidence.

If I understand what you mean, the mind is a separate entity from matter (the body, or central nervous system) but somehow depends on it. That's very confusing. It means the disembodied mind must have some supernatural capability, similar to a soul.

As a scientist, in my opinion, the use of placebos is essential in testing the effectiveness of treatments for medically treatable ailments. In other circumstances, it is unethical. If part of the treatment is stress relief or other psychological device, then the patient should be so informed.

Faith and reason, like religion and science can't really be compared with each other because there is no common ground. One is metaphysical (something that doesn't really exist) and the other is physical reality. Was surfing for the latest on observing quantum wave collapse and it dropped me into this forum somehow. I read Ayn Rand's books long ago, Atlas S. at about age 14 so I have some familiarity with the philosophy, if that's what you call it. My question as a newcomer is about metaphysics and how it fits in to objectivism. I don't get the connection between a rather realistic point of view and the supernatural. After reading a few posts, I take it other members of this forum might agree. Answers?