LaszloWalrus

Here's the clip: http://youtube.com/watch?v=wECRvNRquvI

Ask the person to keep in mind clearly the concepts he is using. "Faith" is belief in the absence of reason. For your yardstick measure, you point at a length that is a yard, and you say, "By yard, I mean something of lenght equal to this." (Such concepts are defined ostensively).

I thought that Sandberg added great value to the forum. I'm sad to see him go. Oops, I'm being dishonest again.

Wow. That's as if the US were to go to war against some country in the Middle East, and then give that country massive foreign aid, schools, hospitals, and elections at the cost of American soldiers' lives. Oh... wait.

I used to like D'Souza (I've met him several times, as his daughter attended my school), and he lives near me, but after what he said there... ugh. Doing a search for some articles of his, I found this, arguable more repugnant article: http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1121/p09s01-coop.html

Here:

This is a bit of a sidetrack, but shouldn't "quotes" read "quotations"? I'd fix it myself, but I don't know how.

Your attacks on the ARI (and on Stephen Speicher) are injust. The whole philosophy does rest on each point in a sense, because Objectivism is an integrated whole. If you disagree with part of Objectivism, don't call yourself an Objectivist (because you aren't). If you are not sure if you are an Objectivist, and need to learn more or investigate a given issue in a more indepth answer, call yourself a "Student of Objectivism." (There is nothing inherently morally wrong with being uncertain about certain points in Objectivism or even disagreeing, but one can't honestly call oneself an Objectivist in those cases).

I agree completely, and there's were certainly the dominant voices, in the media and on campus.

In regards to the comments on the Duke non-rape case: I disagree with the claim that the case was fundamentally about rape (except from a legal standpoint). The media circus was about the fact that apparently wealthy whites raped a poor black woman at such a university. It would barely have gotten a mention in the papers if there hadn't been those economic and (especially) racial elements. It probably wouldn't even have been prosecuted without those elements, since the DA Nifong is essentially a rabble-rouser, playing off racial tension in Durham, NC. I also disagree with the claim that no professors supported the lacross team. A number did, publicly and privately.

I believe Larry Elder and John Lott make the point that in many cases, merely brandishing a gun prevents a serious crime, and that such crimes prevented by private citizens wielding guns are greatly underreported.

It's not as if the murderer would think: "Well, I really want to kill a lot of people today, but I dare not disobey a gun law."

I don't think Ayn Rand wrote on it, so I would avoid the formulation "Objectivist opinion." I have no views on it myself, as I know nothing about it.

In Junior High, we covered the Holocaust ad Naseum. I don't really see the value in such treatment if it doesn't penetrate to the root philosophical problems that allowed the Holocaust to occur.

Incidientally, Euler did much of his work while completely blind; he lost sight in one eye, and then in the other, and relied upon his powerful memory to remember all of the equations he had worked out.

I agree.

I've also heard that many think she's mentally ill.

I don't disagree; I was just defining the term.

"Reverse racism" is a term that denotes racism by minorities against whites.

You might want to link to a different version of that video — that one was put up there by David Duke's associates and advertises for his website.

Hmmm. I don't think the "tipping" thread has covered how to tip people you dislike.

I haven't have the same experience, and even if I had, I wouldn't generalize it to the country or the world as a whole. From my experience, white racists are more subtle: their racism manifests as a patronizing attitude (i.e. affirmative action and diversity advocates). Black racists are more overt (i.e. Al "Diamond Merchant" Sharpton). I don't understand the basis for saying blacks are generally more racist than whites.

Give me an example where the "bromide" does not apply.

NOT everything is a proper target for humor; the evil and the insignificant are, but not the good. Imus's joke (even without the racist component) was wrong. (I do find it strange that some of the players' feelings were hurt; I understand being insulted, but having one's feelings hurt?)

I see fit to respond. The question hinges on whether or not believing in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as a single being is essential to being a Christian. I think Mormons might be the platypus of Christianity: impossible to classify as wholly Christian or non-Christian.