Mimpy

Aww, happy birthday! Make it a great year.

I like Walt Whitman's "To You" a lot. Whoever you are, I fear you are walking the walks of dreams, I fear these supposed realities are to melt from under your feet and hands; Even now, your features, joys, speech, house, trade, manners, troubles, follies, costume, crimes, dissipate away from you, Your true Soul and Body appear before me, They stand forth out of affairs—out of commerce, shops, law, science, work, forms, clothes, the house, medicine, print, buying, selling, eating, drinking, suffering, dying. Whoever you are, now I place my hand upon you, that you be my poem; I whisper with my lips close to your ear, I have loved many women and men, but I love none better than you. O I have been dilatory and dumb; I should have made my way straight to you long ago; I should have blabb’d nothing but you, I should have chanted nothing but you. I will leave all, and come and make the hymns of you; None have understood you, but I understand you; None have done justice to you—you have not done justice to yourself; None but have found you imperfect—I only find no imperfection in you; None but would subordinate you—I only am he who will never consent to subordinate you; I only am he who places over you no master, owner, better, God, beyond what waits intrinsically in yourself. Painters have painted their swarming groups, and the centre figure of all; From the head of the centre figure spreading a nimbus of gold-color’d light; But I paint myriads of heads, but paint no head without its nimbus of gold-color’d light; From my hand, from the brain of every man and woman it streams, effulgently flowing forever. O I could sing such grandeurs and glories about you! You have not known what you are—you have slumber’d upon yourself all your life; Your eye-lids have been the same as closed most of the time; What you have done returns already in mockeries; (Your thrift, knowledge, prayers, if they do not return in mockeries, what is their return?) The mockeries are not you; Underneath them, and within them, I see you lurk; I pursue you where none else has pursued you; Silence, the desk, the flippant expression, the night, the accustom’d routine, if these conceal you from others, or from yourself, they do not conceal you from me; The shaved face, the unsteady eye, the impure complexion, if these balk others, they do not balk me, The pert apparel, the deform’d attitude, drunkenness, greed, premature death, all these I part aside. There is no endowment in man or woman that is not tallied in you; There is no virtue, no beauty, in man or woman, but as good is in you; No pluck, no endurance in others, but as good is in you; No pleasure waiting for others, but an equal pleasure waits for you. As for me, I give nothing to any one, except I give the like carefully to you; I sing the songs of the glory of none, not God, sooner than I sing the songs of the glory of you. Whoever you are! claim your own at any hazard! These shows of the east and west are tame, compared to you; These immense meadows—these interminable rivers—you are immense and interminable as they; These furies, elements, storms, motions of Nature, throes of apparent dissolution—you are he or she who is master or mistress over them, Master or mistress in your own right over Nature, elements, pain, passion, dissolution. The hopples fall from your ankles—you find an unfailing sufficiency; Old or young, male or female, rude, low, rejected by the rest, whatever you are promulges itself; Through birth, life, death, burial, the means are provided, nothing is scanted; Through angers, losses, ambition, ignorance, ennui, what you are picks its way.

I know how you feel. Sometimes I get way too passionate about things and let them affect me more than they should. If you know what you want to say but can't find the right way to say it, it can become very frustrating indeed. When I'm in those kinds of situations, I just take a moment to collect my thoughts and formulate my argument. Then I begin speaking.

That's exactly how I feel. I know that he was an irrational leader that sacrificed people's lives for his own gain...but just the thought of a life ending is so chilling because I value my own life so much, guess that doesn't mean that I have to value other people's lives, as well...not when they don't value their own lives. But I think that to value life in general, you need to value your own life first. And clearly Saddam didn't do that when he committed such brutal and unethical acts.

Could you still elaborate a little on that statement, please? I'd really like to understand what you mean. By that statement alone, I think you're saying that though one should not be so picky in life that he never finds someone good enough to seek physical pleasure with, he shouldn't try to get just anyone in bed, either. I don't understand where that line is drawn, however....so if you could elaborate, that'd be great.

if you're having those kinds of problems, then a program like the one kaplan offers is probably a good one to take. it really drills into your head what to look for, what not to assume, etc. it'll give you the standard by which you should judge the passage and make inferences. no, i didn't get in. but it's their loss good luck!!

I drive a silver '98 Toyota Corolla. It makes funny noises and squeals a lot. But I love it all the same.

Does anybody else absolutely love the quotes that appear on top of the forum everytime you access the message board? They're such a great collection of sayings...they always perk me up and give me focus when I need it. Sometimes I simply keep refreshing the page to read new quotes. Just wanted to share how much I loved them! Happy 2007, everybody.

I hope everyone has a great year and makes some good progress in their respective goals!!! Don't abandon those New Year's resolutions.

I guess they're probably scared of death...and may even think that if they were alive, a chance of escape would still be possible. But how often does that happen, anyway? And I don't know much about jail life, but I've heard that they're not treated too badly. Still, though, wouldn't the fact that you're caged up and confined to a certain area just make you go crazy after a certain while?

Wait, so if you suddenly had some random hallucination that God had come to you and was showing you things, you'd believe it? Wouldn't you doubt your rational self for even one moment that it might have just been a dream...that your desire to believe in a God caused you to dream of his existence?

I know he was an evil dictator and killed many people. But did he deserve to be hanged? I mean, if he would have rotted his life away in jail, would that have been so bad? I'm very unsure about this topic. I don't know if he deserved to die. I mean, if I think about myself....I don't know how I could ever kill someone, take away their everything in one rash act...and it'd be unchangeable. I could never kill someone! And I know that he killed people himself...but does that justify his own death? Wouldn't it have been more torturous for him if they would have made him stay alive but live a meager life in jail? Thoughts, my Objective friends! What are your thoughts?

But you had reason to believe that your car would make it home...from previous experience, etc. And you could predict about the weather...again, from previous experience. That isn't faith. It's concluding from reason. Just like when scientists had reason to believe that atoms were comprised of three different componenets: electrons, protons, and neutrons. But they couldn't see them. You still have not answered my question. What reason can you use to prove the existence of a superior being? And if you take it on faith first, then what reason do you come up with to validify your belief?

What city are you in, Ehre?

Here's a definition for you. Faith is the absence of reason. What are your thoughts on that?

Like the Islamic fundamentalists who say that the Koran permits the killing of innocent people and that Allah wants his followers to fight for Islam through any means necessary

Let's say we wear clothes only to keep warm (for the sake of argument). So everyone I meet during the day sees me with a sweater and jeans. That is commonplace, the norm. In my own home, however, with the provision of my heater, I can roam naked if I wish to do so. Being an Objectivist, the people I'd allow to see my nakedness would be people chosen by a rational and conscious decision. I wouldn't let just any beggar see it. The fact that our bodies are almost usually covered makes the concept of the people we eventually reveal it to of much more significance. If we all walked around naked, this wouldn't be such a big deal. But the fact that we don't...creates the importance of when one does show the naked body, he must show it to the people he values, to the people who, in his opinion, deserve to see it.

I can understand the logic behind that. But aren't you basing your knowledge on a public poll? People can lie in polls. People can choose not to voice their opinions. Polls can easily reveal skewed results. Unless you knew for fact exactly who was voting for who, you couldn't use that logic effectively. You can only know the true results after the voting has been done, obviously. So how can you vote based on the results of a poll that may have skewed results? There'd be no way to logically go around finding out the truth about who'd vote for who...even if you asked people personally, they could lie. If we lived in a truly Objective world, I'd know that everyone would be honest. But unfortunately, I wouldn't be able to base my vote on a poll taken in the kind of world we live in today.

I see. Is that not choosing the middle ground, the lesser evil?

These conversations remind me of Dominique Francon and how she destroyed the things she valued because she did not want the rest of the world to see them because she knew they could not value those things in the same way she did. She destroyed a beautiful sculpture she once owned...and then she tried to destroy Howard Roark.

By what rational process do you conclude that a supreme being exists?

Being Mormon means to most that you're a Christian? Do you consider yourself a Christian? If so, how can you not find a fundamental contradition between Objectivism and Christianity? Or is your view of Christianity much different from the norm....in which case, you should completely separate from that faith because you are being improperly labeled. There are many contradictions between the two philosophies. The fundamental one is the moral premise from which everything else stems: faith or reason. If you think that reason is superior to all else, then you are not a true Christian. If you think faith is superior to all else, then you are not an Objectivist, which you "freely identify" yourself as. You cannot "choose" the meaning of Objectivism to fit your own purpose. "Objectivism" was coined by Ayn Rand to represent her beliefs. If you disagree with her main argument, then you cannot identifiy yourself with true Objectivists. Also, you cannot hold faith and reason at the same level of importance because they contradict each other.

So you would vote for someone just because you thought they had a chance of winning? That's not right. You should vote for the candidate you feel best represents your beliefs...that's the true meaning of democracy, is it not? If everyone voted Republican because they thought the Republican candidate would win, then of course that person would win. Only by taking a stand yourself can you make a difference...and that difference won't happen immediately, but with time there is a definite chance. But if you vote only for the people who you think will win, nothing will ever change.

practice my vocal skills more finally try out for American Idol this summer avoid procrastination and finish senior year with a bang go to India in the summer choose the right college to attend in the fall surround myself with more people who i can really respect submit an essay for the TF essay contest exercise more