Brian

I think you'd guys would be better off moving to a really miniature-sized country and/or island. My top picks would be: Liechtenstein (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liechtenstein), Isle of Man (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isle_of_Man), and Jersey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jersey). Isle of Man is definitely the best pick, due to its combination of low taxes, low population, location next to Great Britain, and being English speaking.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/06/world/eu...oice&st=cse Apparently the House Foreign Affairs Committee voted to name the killing of 1.5 million Armenians in the Ottoman Empire during WWI as genocide. Is there a difference between the mass-killing of a particular ethnic group and genocide? Is this simply a matter of semantics? Moreover, I never knew there were resolutions that dealt with definitions of events in an historical context. How does this work exactly? And what does it have to do with current foreign affairs?

I'm sorry if this question has an obvious answer, but why would Target agree to settle the case? Is there some benefit of settling a case instead of fighting it out? It would have been nice to see them fight at least based on principle...

I don't know any good books, but I do know of an article written by Adam Gopnik called "The Big One" from The New Yorker publication. Here is the link: http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2004/08/2...currentPage=all

I second my right to a free iPhone! I'm pretty sure it's in the Bill of Rights somewhere. TracFone Wireless may have been offering this service for a few months, but the idea has been around a lot longer than that. In Michigan, my ex-girlfriend's sister had one in the summer of 2008. How was it used? Everything except in the pursuit of finding a job, of course. (Which, I assume, is their definition of "individual success" - but maybe not).

Those comics were pretty good. Are there any other O'ist-leaning comics out there? And are there any other comics in general which should be given praise? I would say Calvin & Hobbes is up there.

Hi, Rational_One. I didn't know you are from the Detroit area. I live right around the Detroit area and was wondering where you lived exactly. Myself, I'm on 13 mile in Fraser, 5 miles away from the Gangs and all the warfare. lol. Btw, what is that gang that has been painting those turtles everywhere??

As for myself, I've just turned 17 - and I'm a junior.

That is why Rand created Galt's Gulch in Atlas Shrugged - they weren't able to deal with the world.

He is one of the worst Americans! Yes, he was anti-communist, but he accused people of being communist that indeed were not. Just like The Crucible by Arthur Miller.

There was a guy from MIT who took two years to figure that puzzle out.

Thanks, David. You seem to have hit the nail right on the head, so to speak. I will have to think about this a little more. Cheers! --Brian

I had no idea where to put this post, so I decided to put it in the Basic Questions section. I am concerned when many people on this forum (and else where) go into lengthy detail on why Objectivism, properly, should be typed with a capitalized 'O' whenever someone makes this mistake. Granted, I type Objectivism with a capital 'O' due to force of habit - but I want to make the argument as to why it should be typed with an uncapitalized 'o'. I think that Objectivism with a small 'o' is the highest compliment that one can pay Ayn Rand's system. We do not capitalize intrinsicism or subjectivism, do we? This is because they are accepted terms of understanding - look them up in the dictionary and one will see. If Ayn Rand has indeed discovered a third way of fundamental thinking (I do not have a problem giving Rand the credit for understanding this new way of systematically thinking), then to DISassociate the system from her exclusively and place it in its rightful category of legitimate thought immortalizes her right there with Plato and Aristotle. Before Ayn Rand, there was no explicit assertion by philosophers that objectivity was not only a standard, but a system. As far as I know, she is the first major thinker to raise the concept of 'objectivity' up to the ultimate abstract level (with the other two). Prior to Rand, 'objectivity' was something that was applied to abstract thought, not the basis of it. With this given, can anyone convince me (and others) why it should be spelled with a capital 'O' - even though objectivism has been a word even before Ayn Rand came around? Furthermore, even if you beleive it should properly be spelled with a capital 'O', why do you take it as a personal insult when someone does not spell it to your liking? Personally, I am indifferent when I read someone's spelling of the word - to me, they are the same. Best premises, Brian

What's this for?

When did he die?!?! Edit: I just found out the answer. This last Thursday. Reason: Heart failure.