cards52ofthem

just read through this whole thread...indeed, you do lie buig. as for the quoting rand thing, you quoted her from an essay in the virtue of selfishness, in which she defines a system of voluntary government funding, and use to illustrate how she never definded a system of voluntary goverment funding. i suppose i could beleive you were naive enough to just flip open to a page in the book, and write down the one quote, but never read the rest of the page...but that's being a little naive myself. i do agree w/ what everyone has said so far. you seem to have a very big problem w/ context dropping, radcap was right. as a note to why it may seem like you're arguing w/ a bunch of religious fundamentalists. we objectivists share one thing in common w/ religious fundamentalists: we are absolutely certain that we are right. the difference, of course, is that we are right. you act as though its wrong to be sure that you're right. who was it? descarte that said he can only prove his own existence? nothing else? no certainty, a very sad outlook on life.

i've read about this before, an infinite regress. correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't that supposed to create a huge mess of problems? kalam cosmological argument ring any bells?

but what goes bang?

this is very true. the capacity for rational thought may arrise from evolution, but it must be exercised by choice. but then, from whence comes the choice? certainly some of the lower animals do not have the faculty of choice, they are guided entirely by instinct. so how does choice evolve?