Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

MisterSwig

Regulars
  • Content Count

    2458
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    80

MisterSwig last won the day on February 25

MisterSwig had the most liked content!

3 Followers

About MisterSwig

  • Rank
    Radical Animal

Previous Fields

  • Country
    United States
  • State (US/Canadian)
    California
  • Chat Nick
    MisterSwig
  • Real Name
    William
  • Copyright
    Must Attribute
  • Biography/Intro
    YouTube show, Welcome To Reality! https://youtu.be/YEQTs3ovbtc
  • Experience with Objectivism
    Extensive

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    https://freewilltheory.blogspot.com/

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Los Angeles
  • Interests
    Biology, Volition, Values, Rights, Music

Recent Profile Visitors

5570 profile views
  1. He's not a conservative. In an interview with TAS Williams rejected the label "conservative" and called himself a "radical for individual liberty." What's interesting to me, however, is that both Rand and Williams were popular with conservatives. To this day many people think of them as conservatives. Williams died in December, and he had spent so much time with conservatives that his NY Times obituary called him a "conservative economist" in the headline. I think it's a credit to conservatives that they find value in the ideas of radicals like Rand and Williams. And it's a telling
  2. I see. Well, then, perhaps I can interest you in a bottle of my new perfume.
  3. If you accept the essence of Objectivism then you're an Objectivist in my view. Just like people who accept the essence of what Christ said are Christians.
  4. This doesn't eliminate the "interaction problem." You framed the problem in terms of how the material interacts with the immaterial, not in terms of how separate things interact. Compositing the material body and the immaterial mind into a whole human being doesn't explain how the material can now affect or be affected by the immaterial, nor how the two can be a composite in the first place. How are they connected or integrated?
  5. People interested in how a leading religious (Jewish) conservative thinks can watch Dennis Prager chat with Craig Biddle. They cover some hard topics and find common ground. I hope more Objectivists get on more conservative shows like this.
  6. No, I'm talking about the current Party and their current platform. Have you read their platform? It's actually the 2016 platform because they didn't update it for 2020.
  7. Sure, but I would argue that Republicans are better on the major issues of the day, like race, gender, climate, culture, energy, etc. Even where I think Republicans are mostly wrong, regarding abortion, their position is framed as "pro-life," and the reasonable faction allows for abortion to protect the health of the mother. Democrats like Catholic Biden are massive hypocrites on abortion. Biden believes that life begins at conception but refuses to "impose" that view on others. And during the campaign in 2019 he flipped his position on the Hyde Amendment, so now he supports federally fun
  8. Now? By your definition I've been a "liberal" for decades. I want to make big changes to the Constitution.
  9. I don't believe Rand's philosophy is mine to revise or expand upon. I have, however, criticized her position regarding public property. And so I think her definition of capitalism is mistaken and partly accounts for some of our rifts when it comes to politics.
  10. A timely article given recent discussions. Regarding the appeal of rhetorical closure, I think the truth of the statements is an important factor. If it's true that you would be evil for doing something, then it's not necessarily an attempt to stop communication by pointing that out. It could merely be an attempt to point to reality.
  11. So your hypothetical voters voted for a party/president that did not improve the lot, so now they have to vote the party/president out? Just because they vote out the party/president in power that doesn't mean their new choice has a chance of making good policy or law. The two things are separate. Not really. They want to legalize marijuana and criminalize fossil fuels. Which one do you think is more essential to our freedom and standard of living? Besides, this isn't a major issue anymore, as many Republicans are now on board with legalizing pot and other drugs. Again,
  12. One problem with Binswanger's position is that he mistakes religious conservatives for dead Catholics. He reads an old passage from a long-dead Pope, as if it represents the religious conservatives in America. Catholics are a religious minority in America. There are twice as many Protestants here.
×
×
  • Create New...