Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

MisterSwig

Regulars
  • Posts

    2780
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    105

Everything posted by MisterSwig

  1. We interviewed Robert Tracinski about his journey from teen Kantian to Objectivist Intellectual, and his views on the movement and its schisms. Check it out!
  2. For our new episode we interviewed Michael Niren, a longtime Objectivist who learned from John Ridpath in Canada. We discussed Objectivist rhetoric, and methods of outreach to non-Objectivists. Check it out!
  3. Is this the fault of the people running the election or the fault of the post office? I blame the election officials for instituting a crappy process. What did they expect would happen with the post office trying to deliver a mail-in ballot to everyone. Is this the fault of the people running the election or the fault of voters who messed up the address on their registration? Definitely the fault of the election officials for keeping people on the register when they don't even live at the address anymore. I don't know, that would be an interesting study. It depends on how much cheating went on, which is hard to calculate if you don't look at the mail-in ballot policy and the signatures closely. Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia and Arizona were very close races, but I'm not sure whether they automatically mailed ballots to everyone. Presumably this is something that could be discovered. It looks like in Pennsylvania, for example, you had to request a mail-in ballot. This probably reduces the likelihood of cheating, though I wouldn't guess by how much.
  4. Scott and I spent a couple hours analyzing ARI's new article on schisms. Check it out!
  5. It's a scheme to radically increase the opportunity to steal an election through fraud. And once you start googling cases of mail-in fraud, you realize that some people got caught trying to take advantage of that opportunity. But how many didn't get caught? If there's a 40% chance you'll get away with murder, what is the chance you'll get away with election fraud?
  6. No. You have to request an absentee ballot, and in some states provide a reason for the request. Mail-in ballots were automatically sent to every registered voter. At least that's what happened in Los Angeles.
  7. Read this and please explain how there is no evidence of a stolen election. There is at least some evidence. But if you ignore the evidence and don't thoroughly check all the ballots, then you rely on the assumption that the process was legitimate, and I can easily prove that the process was not legitimate. Also, consider that 2020 had the highest voter turnout since 1960, which I find suspicious on its face. I doubt that 5% more people actually turned out for Trump vs. Biden than Obama vs. McCain. Many old people were isolated in nursing homes during the pandemic. And the review in Montana found that twenty-eight envelopes from one nursing home allegedly had the same signature. Montana has a small population compared to other states, so I wouldn't be surprised if such election problems were greatly magnified in more significant voting regions.
  8. There was already a safe way to vote. Anyone can request an absentee ballot. And voting in person wasn't dangerous as long as you followed certain precautionary measures. I witnessed the mail-in ballot littering myself, so it's not hyperbole. Do you really need details? I live near condo complexes where the ballots were left outside the community mailboxes along the sidewalk. Also, I personally received ballots for people who don't even live at my address.
  9. "The burden is on those who claim fraud..." The burden is on anyone making a claim. Not just those claiming fraud took place. The burden is also on the officials running the election to convince me that they are honest actors who ran an honest election. And they have failed that basic criteria in several ways, namely by littering the streets and mailboxes with "mail-in" ballots and not checking IDs at voting centers. It doesn't matter if people can't prove fraud when the people running the election can't prove legitimacy.
  10. We interviewed Alexandra York, author of both fiction and nonfiction. We focus on her latest book, Soul Celebrations and Spiritual Snacks, which presents her idea of secular spirituality and how to practice it. We also cover some of her articles published at Newsmax, dealing with the battle of ideas against cancel culture and the woke left. Check it out!
  11. We take a look at the Callao oil spill in this episode and try to answer the question of whether rights were violated during this disaster caused by the Tonga tsunami. Check it out!
  12. We interviewed Roger Mayhem from the "Healthy Debates" group on the Clubhouse app. He's an "unapologetic capitalist" and Rand fan since reading Atlas Shrugged in the '90s. He's built up a following and a debating community on Clubhouse. We talk to him about Clubhouse and debating and Rand and much more. Check it out!
  13. I don't think the mother "hosts" her child. I know that's a common way of putting it, but really she grows it, creates it. She's developing her offspring. The offspring isn't developing itself until after its born, after which it's physically separated from the mother and must rely on its own processes for further development. Also, the fetus "becomes someone" due to its physical connection to the mother, not despite it. The fetus would not become anything were it unconnected to the mother via the umbilical cord. It is the mother that makes her fetus what it ultimately becomes at birth. Mostly I'm interested in what you mean by "someone." It seems like a fuzzy concept to me, and it doesn't seem to require being an individual organism. Yes, the fetus has a brain and brain activity, perhaps even sensory awareness. But that doesn't mean it's an individual being or individual life form. It's living as the mother's fetus. It's not living as its own self, or "someone." I wonder if you're equating "someone" with a particular consciousness. If so, then that can't be one human, because a human is more than his particular consciousness. The physical processes become very relevant here. A fetus will not survive its mother's death, not without immediate, surgical intervention, because it's still part of (and dependent upon) the mother's life system. A newborn, however, might be in a different country from its mother and be in zero danger were the mother to die in an accident. Why? Because the newborn is an individual. The fetus is part of an individual, a pregnant individual. A fetus could be performing Tai Chi in the womb and it still wouldn't be an individual. But we might have to invent a new concept for such an abnormal mother-fetus life form, kind of like how we have "Siamese twins," which also have two minds and one undivided body. I don't. You could imagine (or conceive) the fetus apart from the mother but that's strictly imaginary. Being within the mother's body is essential to the valid concept of a "fetus." It is a pregnant mammal's unborn offspring. Let's say I agreed that the consciousness of the fetus isn't part of the mother. How would that support the conclusion that life begins in this unborn state? Consciousness itself is not life. Life is a process that might or might not include consciousness. How do you define "life"?
  14. Thank you. During the podcast I wasn't sure whether Binswanger voted for Trump in 2020. He did, but quickly said in January 2021 that he wishes he didn't.
  15. Dave Goodman returns as our guest on the show to discuss the politics of Leonard Peikoff and how his thinking has changed over the last couple decades since he formed the DIM theory. We cover Peikoff's statements on voting for John Kerry in 2004, his immigration debate with Yaron Brook, his voting for Donald Trump, and his most recent support for the Freedom Convoy truckers, compared to Brook's objection to the truckers' tactics. Check it out!
  16. If you agree that Trudeau and his regime are in the wrong, then the truckers have not gone far enough, because the people have not changed Trudeau's mind or removed him. Trudeau did not magically appear as dictator of Canada. He was elected and is supported by the majority of the population. Part of the truckers' battle is against the people. The citizens who make Trudeau possible deserve every minute of lost sleep due to honking, and every minute of lost travel time due to jammed roadways. Any "innocent" citizen is on the side of the truckers.
  17. Let's start with Biden and Trudeau. In response to the truckers demanding the end of vaccine mandates so they can perform their jobs and live their lives, these leaders ignore the truckers' plight and promise further abuses if the truckers don't stop making a fuss. Psychopaths.
  18. What is the "one" you refer to here? There is a fetus and there is a newborn. These things are very different, not just in terms of "connectedness," but in terms of processes. Ask yourself what it means for a fetus to be connected to its mother, and for a newborn to be unconnected. Why is a fetus connected? Because it's still part of the mother's system. The mother is growing the fetus. She feeds it oxygen-rich fluid, it doesn't breathe air on its own, like a newborn. The fetus is not fully individuated yet.
  19. These new fascists are basically psychopaths. Playing nice doesn't work with them. You're right. We don't need Brook to tell us that. I think Scott often wants to respond to Brook's takes. That's pretty much it. He sees Brook as representing the mainstream wing of the movement, so it's important to address what he says. We need to help others understand how it's a question of tyrants and revolution. I don't think it's very obvious to most people, including many Objectivists, because Trudeau and Biden don't look or act like Hitler and Stalin. This is the problem of soft tyranny that gradually creeps up on you. You grow used to having less and less freedom, until eventually you're perfectly comfortable doing as you're told. You don't mind having to wear a mask or show your vaccination card, because it's so easy and free to just go to the street corner and let some stranger inject you. The government makes it so easy to be compliant.
  20. We welcomed a friend of the podcast, Allie Welch, to help us analyze Rand's article "What Can One Do?" Check it out!
  21. Lev knows a lot about food, so this episode is mostly me picking his brain about how food cultures develop, including American food culture. Check it out!
  22. We had a very philosophical conversation with Roger Bissell, discussing free will vs determinism, Rand's take on music, the fallacy of frozen abstractions, and other topics, including how Roger was introduced to Rand, and his experiences in the movement. Check out our new episode!
  23. Are you always high on drugs or something? Why is your mind unreliable? Even if I had scientific proof of your own consciousness, you would need to use your consciousness to look at the proof presented. That was Dream Weaver's initial point.
  24. Check your premise. Rage, dependency, mooching, these aren't necessarily irrational--if your survival objectively requires rage, dependency or mooching. Mysticism and emotionalism, however, are most likely irrational because they are theories of knowledge that contradict the principle of reason. They seek knowledge from supernatural beings or personal feelings. A person who lives mainly according to unreason can't live for long. Even an idiot mainly uses reason, otherwise he'd succumb to the elements within a few weeks, being too stupid to eat, drink and find shelter. He might be the most irrational fool when it comes to knowledge of little significance, but when it comes to the important things in life he needs to be rational most of the time.
  25. How do we know it's real if you don't have a scientific explanation? Introspection. If you're like me then you are aware of your own consciousness. You know that you're aware of this sentence. You don't need people in lab coats to perform an experiment on you and publish a paper on it. Science is for stuff that cannot be known introspectively, like the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow.
×
×
  • Create New...