konerko14
-
Posts
297 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by konerko14
-
-
Screw it. I shouldnt have asked it in the first place.
-
It isn't so much that things are given to them, as that they're not taught the achievement of values is in any way important, significant or even relevant. this means they set no goals for themselves.
Without that, what's there to expend any effort on?
Imagine a youngster who wants to be a scientist. Then he will study, do research, publish papers, attend conferences, etc etc even if he's supported by his parents.
Is it the public schools' fault for not teaching these values, or it that something parents should be communicating to them?
-
What does living with your parents have to do with striving for success?
I dont know about America, but the reason more young people are living at home in Britain is due to the overinflated prices in the housing market. $250000 minimum for a cramped one-bedroom flat in a poor area of London? I dont think 'laziness' is the primary factor here.
I meant in America.
-
I guess I wasn't aware that modern youth are more lazy that usual. I do think that children are lazier than adults, but it doesn't seem to me that things have changed much over the past 40 years.
What I was referring to is the much older age sons/daughters are living with their parents, and not striving for success.
-
Is the cause for laziness in younger people today because everything is practically given to them already? Their parents provide them with a house,money,and most other material possessions. They see no need to work for themselves. Its a very selfless act, but do they know better and if they learned a rational morality code(Objectivism) would that change their means of production?
Eventually the money will not be "given" to a generation of young people from their parents(who had that resistance to work), and the work ethic is bound to appear once again. Yes, man does have a volitional mind but environmental factors influence him somewhat.
-
Im still reluctant to change my views but I cant address positively what emotion I am feeling over the issue. I think it may be uncertainty. Marriage is supposedly a life long commitment, but I doubt most relationships can have everlasting love. When its time for the divorce, that seems like it would be a very awkward period. Also having a marriage license may put pressure on the people in the relationship to fulfill the expectation for that lifelong bond.
-
Isnt there another way to receive all those legal benefits without having to get married, like a legal documentation you and your partner sign that acknowledges to the state you are a couple? If there isnt, I think its ridiculous to almost force people to choose marriage to collect any legal benefits.
-
I have never been able to think of a good reason to get married. Are there any? What seperates marriage from being a couple, besides documentation?
-
Think of a plant bending toward (acting) a light source (value); or a herd migrating (acting) to a better climate (value); or a man planting (acting) a crop (value).
I see. So a value is an action one makes to support his survival?
-
What does Ayn Rand mean when she says "value" is that which one acts to gain and/or keep?
-
That's pretty open-ended
Live by one's own productive work?
You can use specific examples based on your own life.
-
What are some examples of values that an Objectivist adopts?
-
I dont mean to be rude, but why does it matter? I can see why it would be interesting from a scientific perspective, but would the answer have any philosophical relevance either way?
Doesnt Objectivism pertain to science as well philosophy?
-
I found this segment on Wiki with the title called Conceptual Skills(of birds):
"Some birds, notably pigeons, have demonstrated the ability to conceptualize. In one study, conducted at Harvard in 1964, it was shown that pigeons have a general concept of "human," which includes male humans and female humans, individual body parts, and the human body from the back, from below, and from above. When shown photographs of all of the above, the pigeons recognized the photos as "human." They also recognized photographs of human beings in "disguise" (i.e, a human in the nude, wearing strange clothes, or shown out of proportion).
Another study conducted with pigeons showed that the birds were able to distinguish between the artworks of different artists. For example, they could tell the difference between a Picasso and a Monet."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_intelligence
Is this an example of conceptualizations or are they mistaken? Also, can you give me examples of concepts to help me further understand the word.
-
I read by an Objectivist author that birds cannot conceptualize. Their intelligence and mental capabilities seem to have shown experiences of them forming conceptualizations, however. I'm not fully clear on what a concept is exactly so thats why I cant figure it out.
Also I want to ask the more vast question of if there are any species that can conceptualize besides humans?
-
Im curious where you'd heard that beauty is not subjective. Was it something Rand said? If so where?
Isnt everything objective in reality?
-
I think beauty and sexual attractiveness are two separate (but often related) things. It may help to differentiate between the two in this thread. Also, you may want to more clearly understand the difference between the subjective and the personal. What is objective is agent-relative (if I'm using that term correctly), so be careful not to confuse it with the intrinsic.
Beauty is a sense of harmony that one recognizes in a trait. Thus, it is objective, meaning what one finds beautiful forms from an evaluation of the characteristics of the entity which are being perceived.
Here is an article entitled "What is Beauty" by Burgess Laughlin. This will probably help with your questions.
Yes, now I understand why beauty is objective. Thanks.
-
Does that mean you think beauty in the opposite sex is subjective?
-
You're saying its true because an individual "feels" its true and each person can "feel" something different. That sounds a lot like subjectivism.
-
What does it imply when people arent attracted to the same people? For example, an individual is attracted to the physical beauty of a certain person and yet a different person is not attracted to that same person. If it is not subjective, then what is it?
-
Can someone explain to me why beauty is not subjective? I am an objectivist and not very knowledgeable on subjectivism, so I would appreciate it if I could get an accurate response to my question?
If America Was A Laissez-faire Country, How Different Would It Be From
in Questions about Objectivism
Posted
What would the way of life be like? What things would be different? How much better would it be in a laissez-faire country?