Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

bicklevov

Regulars
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About bicklevov

  • Birthday 10/24/1989

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    Bicklevov
  • Website URL
    http://www.myspace.com/kcfreelance
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Photography, Reading, Playing Guitar

Previous Fields

  • Country
    United States
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Kansas
  • Real Name
    Bill Murray
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted
  • Biography/Intro
    I have read Atlas Shrugged Philosophy: Who Needs It? Leonard Peikoff Objectivism
  • School or University
    Highscool
  • Occupation
    Student

bicklevov's Achievements

Novice

Novice (2/7)

0

Reputation

  1. That seems like a good answer. Yes, I do believe that it was a very emotional appeal, (I did not think of this question myself, it was asked of me in my "gifted" class last year) And I obviously misstepped there...I didn't think of it as an issue regarding need over achievement... Now, would that man be anti-life? (evil) if he had, say, deliberately raised the prices because he hated my wife, would that be an anti-life stance, and therefore make it evil? (or am I misunderstanding here) also, one more question: If you had to drink 3 cubic light-years of orange juice, would you do it?
  2. Okay, Ive searched for a thread made about this already and I hope I am not making a duplicate.... I bet you have heard this scenario before: You live in a small village and your wife has some terrible disease and will die in a day. A doctor has a medicine that can cure it, but raises the price of it so high that you cannot (and the village entirely) afford it. Although the doctor created it and it is his medicine, and he has the right to govern the prices of his products..... would you steal the medicine and save your wife's life? or would you let her die because this doctor would not sell it to you? I honestly don't really know what I would do. Any suggestions? I find it tough to fully understand Ethics...
  3. I'm still struggling to grasp fully the concept of primacy of existence, or that Existence exists outside of consciousness... See, I kinda started this debate with my friend who I guess accepts the primacy of consciousness. We were arguing on the topic that if I said that i saw a pink flying unicorn and sensed it by touching it, seeing it, hearing it, etc... that i would declare its existence true, but since my friend wasn't present, he declares that the pony does not exist. He says that whatever he experiences is reality and that since he does not see the unicorn then it doesn't exist for him. I think I can see the fallacy but I don't know how to say it I guess. Its more like if a Christian said that he felt god and saw him one day, then it must exist, but I deny God's existence. On what grounds can I deny his direct sense perception? I think I'm just confused on this. And what about if a colorblind man says that apples are brown, but I look at them and see that they are red. His conscious is telling them that they are another color than what mine is saying. So if his only method of interaction with the world is through false senses...who am I to say I am right? Thanks for any advice!
  4. Pre-Ayn Rand? It may not be perfect but I just ran across this quote when reading Henry David Thoreau's "Resistance to Civil Government" (1846) Look at this quote: "The authority of government, even such as I am willing to submit to—for I will cheerfully obey those who know and can do better than I, and in many things even those who neither know nor can do so well—is still an impure one: to be strictly just, it must have the sanction and consent of the governed. It can have no pure right over my person and property but what I concede to it. The progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual. Even the Chinese philosopher was wise enough to regard the individual as the basis of the empire. Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly.Note I please myself with imagining a State at last which can afford to be just to all men, and to treat the individual with respect as a neighbor; which even would not think it inconsistent with its own repose if a few were to lie aloof from it, not meddling with it, nor embraced by it, who fulfilled all the duties of neighbors and fellow men. A State which bore this kind of fruit, and suffered it to drop off as fast as it ripened, would prepare the way for a still more perfect and glorious State, which I have also imagined, but not yet anywhere seen." Interesting, huh?
  5. Wow, guys. Thanks a ton. I'm not totally sure yet of what to do, but seeing as how I am a junior, I am going to wait until this summer to think about re-enrolling or not. I agree that it can be of some benefit of me, and since I'm not the most terribly involved student (I prefer my own pursuits- playing in a band, photography, biking....etc.), I think it would be decently worth it in the long run. My general thinking is that I will stay in it for my own benefit. And I might as well mention that I have been reading these forums for a few days after I found this website. I've.... never actually found a place on the internet like this! I can deal with rational people! This is one of the coolest things EVER. And I also enjoy the general intellect of the people that use these forums. It's so nice not to see "YOURE GAY OMGOMGOMG!!!!one!111" all over these forums, as is common just about everywhere else on internet forums. Again, thank all of you for your helpful suggestions! Anyone else have anything to say... go ahead!
  6. I am in National Honors Society at my high-school and was inducted into the organization in October of last year. (For those who may not be familiar with it), NHS is an organization where you basically help out the community with random crap. At my school, everyone is required to complete 25 hours of community service per semester to stay in the organization. Theres about 100 kids in it out of about 1100 in my class, and you have to have good grades....be "honest," etc.. so I guess it's a somewhat selective group of kids. I just read 'Atlas Shrugged' and 'Philosophy: Who Needs it' and I must say Atlas Shrugged is the most influential book on my life I have ever read. See, since I don't believe in helping out people and organizations that won't directly benefit me, (i.e. trade something of value), I absolutely despise wasting my time completing these service hours. It is considered an "honor" to be in this program, and it makes me sick. You may be asking, "Well, why are you in it?" I'm still in it because I hope that having "Been in NHS for 2 years" on my college transcript will benefit me in the form of a college noticing that I am involved in school, therefore I would be a better candidate...etc, so it is for a selfish reason, but I still feel guilty being a part of an organization that I don't believe in, even though I'm somewhat gaining something from it. Do you think it is moral for me to contradict myself, even if it is for personal gain? I need to convince myself to get out of this thing cause I hate it. And, on a further note, do you think it's okay to help out the community out of your own free will, if you don't expect anything back from it? (Hey this is my first post, and if this is in the wrong place in the forums, please let me know and I'll move it (or someone will I guess)) I apologize if I don't have this in the right spot.
×
×
  • Create New...