Jason Fowler

Stephen, I'm glad you stopped making direct replies. You have been more than accomodating and patient with your opposition.

Despite the name, hybrid cars are still primarily gas powered. The engine helps store electrical energy, along with other factors like braking, that allow the electric motor to run. In stop-and-go traffic, mileage will always be less because energy is constantly being wasted through braking and idling.(idling, the engine gets a rich mixture to maintain a certain temperature) The difference in hybrids in this case is basically that less energy is wasted. I agree that hybrids are not a clear choice for now, I doubt if there are many mechanics even qualified to work on these vehicles for the time being. If you really want mileage with an established technology my best guess would be to go for small diesel operated cars. On a somewhat related note, fuel-efficiency doesn't come close to stopping with what car but with proper maintenance and maintenance items. Tire pressures, motor oil, oxygen sensors etc....

From dictionary.com, the most appropriate meaning for "meta-" was: Physics studies the fundamental building building blocks of matter, and what would be more basic and comprehensive than that? Metaphysics studies the fundamental nature of reality.(reality being all that is or exists) Objectivism holds three axioms, or self-validating positions, in the field of metaphysics; existence, consciousness, and identity. To but them into a simple descriptive statement: Things exist, I am aware of them, and they have a certain identity or makeup. Epistemology is the theory of and nature of knowledge. As you might be thinking now, metaphysics and epistemology are the building blocks of physics and science in general. Objectivism holds reason as man's sole means to knowledge, and that reason integrates the material provided by sense perception into concepts. For more information visit, here. You might also want to check out the introductory videos to Objectivism.

ARI's website looks fine on my setup, windows 2000 SP4 using IE6 SP1.

Hmm, actually in your situation I would definately suggest Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand, not only will capitalism at its base be explained but also Objectivism. Simply for the sake of convenience and being thorough, this book is your best choice as it will answer your questions step by step and from beginning to end. I would also suggest, after a reading of Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand, George Reisman's Capitalism which fleshes out the matter. It is available free online from capitalism.net(but as I said, read the other book first).

My quote was from Branden's essay, The Stolen Concept, which is included at the end of my original post. Hmmm, I looked through OPAR and found a reference to it(#17, ch4 Objectivity) which then referred to me to AS, pg 964. Skimming over that page all I got out of it was Galt talking about the moral/practical dichotomy and the unprincipled cowardice of evil. I will look it over again in more detail later... As far as I know, it was Branden who discovered the fallacy. I have not read ITOE and a few other non-fiction works of Ayn Rand, but what I have read has not provided any indication or evidence that she originally discovered it.(though Peikoff does state the opposite in OPAR) Link: The Stolen Concept

There are numerous ways to go about this. One could say the same about science as well. Science is not measurable, it is a concept summarizing and systemizing man's knowledge of reality. So, in his reasoning, science does not exist because it is not measurable. Oddly enough it appears as though he is trying to label you as an advocate of primacy of conciousness when in fact he is guilty of such. Statements that claim something can only exist if it is measured or measureable and testable amounts to: perception is reality. Without the inclusion of axioms and concepts it means that what is seen is and what is not seen isn't. Ask him to measure emotions or reason. When he cannot validate reason from a scientific method(because science relies on reason) state that now reason does not exist and that therefore any claim of knowledge is impossible. Experiments are subject to subjective interpretations of the human mind.(Socratic method anyone?) It could also be that he knows little of the use of metaphysics, that it is the most fundamental aspect of reality that all things share. Ask him questions regarding identity and conciousness and clarify the meaning of "existence exists". I do not have much time left but I will leave one last method specifically for an Objectivist mind and perspective. It concerns the fallacy of the stolen concept, that is, in Nathaniel Branden's words "the act of using a concept while ignoring, contradicting or denying the validity of the concepts on which it logically and genetically depends." I will leave it at that so that you and others may relate and reduce the Objectivist positions on your own. http://www.nathanielbranden.net/ess/ton04.html

It is unfortunate that he has taken, more or less, a shortcut in the understanding of Objectivism. More than likely the bulk of his reading has been in fiction rather than the explicit and clear cut non-fiction. I think the source of his shortcut was perhaps due to a great need of his to have something or someone to look up to and that he has finally found that in the fictional charactors of Ayn Rand. I think it all just overloaded his mind.(like finally seeing through the fog, a blind person being able to see for the first time) The good news is this is more than likely just a phase he will go through. In the meantime, I would suggest you ask about what books he read. If they are in fact, fiction, pick up a copy and read for yourself to try to understand him better. Better yet, pick up a copy of Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand and CHALLENGE him on the fundamental facts of Objectivism.(like asking him to define reason, emotion)

Life is satisfying and it is because Rand provided a reality based system integrated in a manner which allowed the moral to be achievable.(rather than either insigificant or impossible) Value and virtue are clearly defined and hence become realizable and, well practical. Objectivism rejects this reason/emotion dichotomy and I did as well even before I was into the philosophy heavily. Both sides of the dichotomy miss the point on this, one thinks of emotions as anti-rational, while the other views emotions as a method of cognition. Objectivism regards emotions not as a plague on the mind nor as a mind in itself, but an expression of an individual's values and sense of life. Not as an end in itself, but I do value it as a sense of being rewarded for something. I do not *seek* joy itself consciously, but it is certainly not something I am devoid of. See the Objectivist virtue known as justice, that is, rationality in the evaluation of man. Very simply, there are no qualms associated with admiring others or sympathizing/supporting one who has been wronged. Not in the sense which you have formulated the question, which smacks of dogmatism. That is not the case and is counter to what Objectivism is at its core. It is a rejection of subjectivism and intrinsic theories and, as a positive, is a consistent upholding of reason as the sole source of knowledge.(rather than whim, faith, and fallacies like appeals to authority) Having read primarly the fiction and non-fiction book publications of hers rather than her magazine works and other heresay, I can honestly say she 100% right. Not because of who she is but what and how she says/writes it.

It was indeed rhetorical. To take it even further, what has the EU done against terrorism? Am I to believe that the EU regards MS as a greater threat than Al Queda? (as evidenced by the degree of their efforts against each party) It was meant to provide some evidence as to the motives of such a decision.

??? I thought this would have been obvious. First and foremost, Bill Gates, and then there is another name within the link provided, CEO Steve Ballmer who is quoted by myself and other posters clearly responded to his comments as well. I don't think anyone here will give much regard to your comments on the purpose of business. The reason is that Objectivism does not accept compartmentalization as a valid aspect of philosophy. Hence, concern only for making money isolated in regard to the means to that end, pride, and why one makes money will not be accepted either. Additionally, I don't think Microsoft's stockholders will appreciate their company losing 14% of its expected annual income.(especially when it just rolls over and takes it.)

"We respect the Commission's authority" What a grand capitulation. I wonder what the EU hopes to accomplish by attacking the most successful software development company in history? What's next? The EU suing automakers for integrating rear view mirrors and trunks into their vehicles.(and thereby snuffing out third party add-on mirrors and trunks)

The 'objectivist' he referenced was more than likely myself. I stated that there exists certain things which are non-material, such as relationships between matter/material things.(ie. maths, ratios, concepts) It would appear that he believes that the metaphysical concept of existence and the scientific concept of matter are equivalent. These relationships exist by virtue of representing reality in one way or another and are identified(rather than contrived).

Hmm... where do I start. Okay, first and foremost, the sections for discussion do not include epistemology or metaphysics. In fact, there is really not even a section for ethics, the new board cut down the possibility for abstract philosophical content quite drastically.(which is what made the old board so popular and interesting to begin with) The blatent mistakes and equivocations regarding Objectivism are tiring, at one point someone actually claimed that biblical morality and Objectivist ethics have much in common. There have been strange deletions of posts, for no apparent reason. While some threads and trolling are deleted, what I'm talking about is nothing like that. One of my posts in a thread about the super bowl commercials was deleted, all I said was I enjoyed the cadillac commercials. All in all the new capmag forums are nothing compared to the old ones. Also, I have been told that RadCap was a very notable member of the old capmag forums and, in fact, I remember him and miss his style. Oh, and a few other minor things, the functionality of the capmag boards is not even complete. Sigs don't work, smilies were turned off, and various board information pages do not work.(such as the members page) Then there is the 10 minute delay between posting, which really gets on the nerves of the turbo posters there.

Good to see you here Charles T. I can assure you that no less than a week ago the price for that CD-Rom was well over $100. (and for international orders it was $150 before shipping costs) Apparently, the AR bookstore not only changed its pricing for that product but also put it on sale at the same time.

http://www.aynrandbookstore2.com/store/pro...aitem=2&mitem=5 There is a sale now on the Objectivism Research CD-Rom until March 31st. It includes various fiction and non-fiction works of Ayn Rand, and non-fiction of Peikoff. In addition to that it includes journals, letters, and Objectivist publications. It is by no means complete though, it is missing Marginalia, Ayn Rand's margin notes from various intelectual works including Mises, Hazlitt, and others. But with the vast amount of text it holds, the sale price is a mere 50 dollars. For those who read this after March 31st, the price will, presumably, go back to its original around 130-150 depending on location. For savings beyond 3/31/04 try http://www.objectivism.net/ari_order_cdrom.htm Price. 64-70 dollars depending on location and that price includes shipping. Looks like it is a nice early Christmas present for someone as well as a great gift to oneself.

Hi, I'm Jason Fowler, a student in St.Cloud Florida. I have quite a variety of interests most of all philosophy, automechanics(specifically lubrication), and basketball. I come from the capitalism magazine forums. Now, I am pylon_man on capitalismforum.com, formally Jason Fowler of capitalismmagazine.com/forum, and things have gone quite downhill and I am hoping this forum will get back to the quality I'm used to.