Nate_S

Sorry we bore you, I'll try to be more entertaining next time.

Modern history was invented by the West. Ancient Greeks during the Hellenistic period began placing man as the center of all worldly events. Prior to that the Hebrews felt History merely revealed the will of god, and prior to that early civilizations felt they had no power or control over their actions, that they were merely held to the whims of greater incomprehensible powers. Simply by putting man as the center of worldly events and gauging it in accordance to him you are acting on Western principles which are subjugated by a very strong philosophical foundation stemming from many of Aristotle's and to a lesser extent Plato's teachings. And of course many of Aristotle's teachings coincide with Objectivist values. It is impossible to study history rationally, meaning without mystical contexts or religious myths, without adopting a distinctly Western View. As such man as the center of the world as an entirely volitional being existing in a universe of order is a distinctly Western view, mystical ideology and religious myths are not. I don’t know what you specifically mean by this statement: “To analyze something Eurocentricly doesn't just mean that you favor the endevors of europeans, it means you veiw events with the values of the Europeans. Mystic self-sacrifice and all.” I’m guessing you are referring to cultural pluralism or contextual morality. Which if so, I agree are two of the most idiotic and detrimental schools of thought ever conceived. Both undermine the significance of values and their importance in gaining any knowledge of worth from studying the history and nature of cultures. As I was saying placing man as the center of Historical events is in some ways the practice of a value, that man is the most important factor in this world. To cast aside all values is a contradiction to the very nature of modern History and consequently destroys its relevance to our lives.

That’s great to hear. Not to diminish their efforts however, whatever principles available to these youths will most likely be systematically skewed, distorted, and ridiculed in their college years by the new socialists lefts strangle hold on America's Universities. I'm not completely sure an uncompromising vision of man as a Heroic being is as initially engaging to everyone as it was for me. Hopefully it's enough to instill an awareness of the fundamental significance of the realm of ideas, giving them an interest in enriching the philosophical defenses needed to withstand the influx of liberal vile they will be subjected to in their later years. And I guess I'm evidence of this possibilty. They will make fine Libertarians.

Yea, I mentioned that in my second post.

I don't really agree with your interpretation because in my experience Atlas Shrugged is anything but mainstream education and all evidence seems to conclude that that’s the general consensus among educators. But maybe this little series of events could be viewed as a swipe at the specific character of the sheriff as he is known to be an idiot and a bigot. However, the timing, as the closing comment of the episode, is a bit unsettling. [edit]

Slightly off-topic: I remember seeing a South Park episode about illiteracy. In the episode the town sheriff professed to being illiterate, to his shame. He went on to learn to read. However, after reading Atlas Shrugged (yes the exact novel was shown, with a mock-up of Nick Gaetano's cover art) he proclaimed I am never reading again after reading this worthless *bleep* or something along those lines....end of episode. I've also seen Futurama take a swipe at Objectivism. One episode took place in the cities sub-sewer where a mutant race of humans lived. The people of this realm lived off of whatever garbage was flushed into the sewers. When Bender observes the mutant's community library he notes that all that was there was Ayn Rand novels and something else (I forgot). I'm guessing the writers were implying that the novels were garbage. During the writer's commentary on the DVD edition they curiously make no comment on the little joke when its a pretty significant punch-line.

I never understood how someone could compromise the realm of ideas for such muddled emotional premises. Judging by his closing remarks though, I see him as a social parasite- someone who sees a ladder to be climbed. That I guess is the only supposed benefit to be gained from such behavior. I'm sure he will find condolence in the slimy embrace of those just as inept in living as him.

In a recent Interview I read (I can’t quite place which magazine it was specifically) Rob Lowe cited Ayn Rand as the woman he would most want to meet. He went on to say how fascinated he was with Atlas Shrugged. Hollywood trend?

Very exciting indeed. Great work. As a young Illustration student who is currently calculating how to move away from free-lance Illustration and into the realm of Romantic Realism I admire your conviction. The more and more my time becomes occupied by tightly constrained assignments regarding issues and ideas I care little to nothing about the more I feel the need to make my escape. Next year I construct my thesis, which is pretty open-ended. I'm going to do a series of Illustrations on the values of Ayn Rand. That way I can create a cohesive body of romantic realist work and at the same time get my degree.

Stuart Hayashi of Moorelies.com just posted a recent interview blogger Dean Esmay conducted with Cox and Forkum inspired by Dean's appreciation of their work and professionalism. Link: Dean's World Blog [edit fixed the credits]

Tzu's logic went something like this: if you attack from the west make them believe your attacking from the east, and other variations. Couple that with the belief that an effective army must constantly remain on the offensive and you have the jist of his teachings. Sure he dressed it up with pretty metaphors and similes but its all the same. He never made the affirmation of an objective reality with which absolute reason could be deduced. He never had the philosophical basis to understand the significance of man's life as a moral standard or the fact that his survival is dependent upon it. Your projecting a greater philosophical resonance to teachings that are far more rudimentary in realization and implementation. Tzu's teachings are all based on the physical manipulation of man's reality. Many of Tzu's techniques were merely illusionary fronts. Tzu's physical illusions and a substantial philosophical disruption of ones own reality are two very different things with implicit moral distinctions. Assuming that myself as an Objectivist would or should value his teachings on this premise is a hollow assumption. And what exactly is your enemies "mind-time-space?"

Yea I was definetely mixed up....I was referring to the OODA loop as Sun Tzu's creation. I fixed it in the previous post, but you responded before the final edit. Its late... And I was referring to Sun Tzu's 'Art of War' as a business application as gimmicky. [edit] It just puts a historical context on already established business practices...in essence its nothing new. [edit]

I've always found Sun Tzu's writings a little rudimentary. The O.O.D.A. loop is reminiscent of Tzu's tactics. What it basically boils down to is the establishment of a quick system of reactionary measures. You see and you act, rinse then repeat. Establishing an efficient O.O.D.A loop means you can barrage you opponent with an ever increasing stream of decisive measures. Of course [EDIT] Sun Tzu's measures [EDIT] in application, I'm sure, were nothing short of extraordinary in his era. 'The art of war's' reemergence as a business application mainly puts a warriors face on capitalism; an inspirational analogy...for better or for worse. Tzu's brand of ancient tactical warfare and its parallels with modern business models seem rather vague and indirect in application. It just seems gimmicky to me.

I agree. I just wish this whole ordeal was better documented. It seems extremely hard to validate sources. I have phone transcripts, recounts, supposed medical record summaries (all mainly from blogs), none of which I would feel comfortable posting on these boards as facts. The fact that the bulk of the media coverage is from independent bloggers, and some in-depth fox news bits, seems to allude to a curiously strong partisanship in the media. The only true measure of these allegations as of now is how the Kerry campaign reacts. So far all they have done as of yet is sidestepped the specifics and fall back on an ill-conceived republican party conspiracy theory. Perhaps the worst part of this whole ordeal is that it detracts from the very factual and very telling exploits of Kerry during his initial post-war political years.

And the signifigance of this issue not only partains to his character and integrity, rather there is also an issue of legality involved. Kerry opted out of his Vietnam service after four months only becuase his 4 purple hearts allowed him too, a technicality of sorts. If any one of those medals were to be found that without a doubt they were fradulent he could quite possibly be pinned as an illegal deserter (or whatever term the military commonly uses in this instance).