Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

dbc

Regulars
  • Posts

    56
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by dbc

  1. While in the chat room a few minutes ago, Ogg_Vorbis was kind enough to let me know that he does think their is an answer to his question about universals and that all of this, to use his words, is a "paradox". I enjoyed the back and forth but given his foregone conclusion on the topic, I think I have had enough. Dan
  2. The "class property" you refer to is a particular way of regarding an attribute shared by the entities in question. The attribute exists "out there"; regarding it as a "universal" reflects the human method of knowing. Rand spells this out in the first chapter of ITOE. For Objectivists, there is no "class property" separate or apart from the attribute(s) under consideration. I recognize your statement that you regard this, Rand's treatment of attributes, as deficient--at least as it relates to the problem of universals. Be that as it may, that is the answer to your question: The answer you find unsatisfying has already been provided numerous times: The "manness" is identical in each man because the only thing under consideration is the relevant attribute(s)--with their particular measurements omitted. Dan
  3. I agree; your right to recover does not hinge on whether the guilty is able to pay. The existence of a right however is not synonymous with being successful in being made financially whole. Again, I agree. My point still stands: you are not being forced to pay for the protection of your rights when you pay a fee for that protection. Dan
  4. Property rights are absolute; protecting that right is conditioned on a great many things. A "right" is not self-executing; men must establish governments to protect the rights. If those who seek the protection offered by a rational government do not pay, who will? Dan
  5. Your statement is incorrect. You do not have a right to have your property recovered for free. A "right" recognizes that sphere of action where you ought to be left free to act. It does not mean that someone can be compelled to protect your rights without compensation. Dan
  6. This is why I asked Ogg V (and have not yet received an answer) if he read Rand's account of measurement omission and whether he agreed with it, and if not, why not. It is Rand's discovery of the connection between measurement and conceptualization that is revolutionary. OV, if you will not address the role measurement omission plays in this process, then we are talking past each other. Dan
  7. A couple of good ones, both with Robert Redford: Three Days of the Condor and Spy Games. Dan
  8. The "property" you refer to is still an attribute; it is our ability to regard the attribute as a unit that seems to be at the root of (at least one) complaint. A particular apple may not be bruised; yet, as you correctly point out, the property of being easily bruised belongs to all apples. What allows for this shared "property"? The apples are easily bruised because of their chemical makeup--they share the same chemical composition that allows for being bruised. We may properly regard the apples' chemical composition as an attribute and all apples (all apples that ever existed, exist now or may exist in the future) share the attribute. Dan
  9. What part of the transaction is not voluntary? Dan
  10. The only way to determine who "gets . . . more benefits" is how many man-hours/use of equipment, etc is used on behalf of each person. It is possible that the fellow who only pays $1,500 in fees gets more benefits because of the number of times he calls the police. If that is the case, there is nothing wrong with assessing a usage fee. The protection of liberty, like every other value, must be paid for. Dan
  11. I do not know what you mean by "idelize[ing] them into a mental comparment". It appears you are suggesting some kind of classification of men based, not on observable similarities but on some kind of psychological convenience. Yet, we cannot intellegently speak of a "degree of rationality" without assuming the existence of a rational faculty. Have you read Rand's account of measurement omission in ITOE? This is a key tenet to Rand's theory of concepts. You seem to either not be aware of the role of measurement omission in her theory of concepts or you have dismissed it out of hand. If you have read it and disagree, please tell us what specifically you find objectionalbe. Dan
  12. What is that you mean by "straight"? Doesn't straight refer to a particular shape? A relationship between two or more points? What, specifically, is the "impossibility" you refer to? Dan
  13. As she stated in the Foreword, Rand intended that ITOE be a "summary of one of its [Objectivist epistemology's] cardinal elements--the Objectivist theory of concepts." Dan
  14. First, it would be helpful if you told us to what you refer when you speak of one man having "the same" rational faculty of another man. Regardless, Rand tells us that the fact that men possess rational faculty is a characteristic that justifies us in regarding them as members of the same class. The degree of a man's intellegence (assuming that is what you were refering to) is not an essential characteristic.
  15. Amen. Fellow Objectivists should welcome the effort. Nothing wrong with asking questions but if we are serious about exploring ways to spread the philosophy, we should encourage Atlas and save the ridicule for those who preach explicitly irrational ideas. Dan
  16. Whether you seek a paralegal certificate or a J.D., you should concentrate on the topics at hand and seek to integrate them with your philosophy. You will not have many opportunities to argue for Objectivist principles in your papers. In law school, the majority of your writing will take place in the context of end-of-semester tests. The exams will consist of the professors presenting you with fact patterns and asking you to analyze the facts under legal concepts specific to the class (torts, contracts, real property, etc.). With few exceptions, you are not presented with an opportunity to argue for what the law ought to be. There are some exceptions to this. A Philosophy of Law (Jurisprudence) class will likely require you to critically analyze some particular legal philosophy. Law reviews also offer a place to present a particular way to address some legal issue. Good luck! Dan
  17. Thanks. I called the Journal last week and they had it up shortly after that; I downloaded a copy as quick as I could. Dan
  18. It's also worth remembering that this is the same John Edwards who was the first Democrat to refuse to appear on a previously agreed to Fox News debate. Something about the questions being too slanted. Good point. Ayn Rand once observed that the continuing spread of socialism was not a conspiracy of men but rather a "conspiracy of ideas." Dan
  19. Patience??? Ok, I'll give it a shot. Normally, how long does a reboot take? Dan
  20. As a lawyer who really wants to read the article, I am getting frustrated that my link is not working. Any suggestions? Dan
  21. Excellent news. Objectivism's reach continues to grow. Dan
  22. dbc

    Admirer or Stalker?

    "Hard to prove", "easy to prove" is not the point and the police officers know this. You have a right to file a complaint with the police regardless of what they think the likelihood of obtaining a conviction is. First, go back and tell them (politely of course) that you want to file a complaint. Emphasize the physical assault but put in all the details you shared with us. Keep in mind that you want to give every possible fact that would establish that this guy is the one putting the roses on the car. If the officer(s) you speak with refuse to take a complaint, you can see your city's District Attorney. Actually, you will probably see an Assistant District Attorney or one of the investigators that work directly for the DA. (Given your previous experience with the police, you may want to start with the ADA.) You can go to your local Justice of the Peace and apply for what (here in Texas) is called a Peace Bond. The basis for a Peace Bond is a fact-based concern/fear of physical assault or damage to property. Like the complaint, you swear to the particulars in a form the JP court will provide you. A constable will "serve" your application for a Peace Bond on this guy. The Court will require him to post a bond (in Texas, it can be as high as $5,000) to guarantee that he will not approach you or your property. (The Peace Bond will spell out the specifics, but check it carefully.) If this guy approaches you or roses appear on your car, you immediately 1) report this to the JP Court and 2) the police/ADA. A constable for the JP Court will haul him before the Court where he will likely be held in contempt (for violating the Court's order via the Peace Bond), will forfeit the amount of the bond he had to deposit with the Court and may face jail time for his disregard for the Court's order. (In some states, the police are authorized to write tickets that order a person to stay "x" number of feet from a person or property. If that person violates the order, he is subject to arrest. I do not know if your state grants the police such authority but it is worth asking about.) Once he violates the JP order, the police/ADA will likely be more motivated to get involved: the police hear, and sometimes become indifferent to, the numerous complaints from people claiming to be harassed or stalked. Sometimes officers will take a violation of a court order more personally than a complaint from a "civilian". Now an obvious point: whether you get a Peace Bond or a ticket issued to this fellow, they are only pieces of paper. K-Mac made a couple of excellent suggestions regarding personal protection. If obtaining a gun and a concealed handgun permit is too much, you can still purchase a pocket-sized container of mace or pepper spray. If you have the time, please let us know how it goes with filing the complaint and whether you were able to obtain a Peace Bond. Dan
×
×
  • Create New...