athena glaukopis

Sparrowhawk Series by Ed Cline!!

I hate higher education

The baby dies either way, so I would think that it would be unethical to NOT defuse the bomb (and unfortunately kill this poor innocent infant) then to just stand there and let 1001 poor innocent bystanders (including said infant) die. Keep in mind fantastical emergency situations like this (almost) never occur in life, and they are poor "stories" to shape a morality around (that allows breaches of integrity and morality "in these (extreme, unlikely, and fantastical) circumstances" ... those kinds of thoughts are just anti-morality thoughts disguised to look like reason (but what is more like rationalization for immorality) edit: spelling mistake fix

I have learned SO much about psychology from a guy named Stefan Molyneux at Freedomain Radio -- I was first turned onto his site by an Objectivist couple I knew, and the first thing I watched one of his youtube videos...well I have just ordered this guys book and I can't wait to read it, because I have been listening to them on mp3 FOR FREE He has read Rand extensively, and Brandon and many other "rational" psychologists, he was an Objectivist for 20 years. I think he has great insight -- Listen to some of his videos or podcasts on issues that you are interested in using the Phylo-Physician (found on the main page, linked above.. just scroll down a little bit to find it) and you can plug in your interests edit: here is a feed my friend made for me that is a good "round up" summary of the psychological side. enjoy

If you describe "literary genius" as the ability to create interesting, lucid, and affirmable stories, then Kafka has as much "literary genius" as James Joyce: none. If you hear of any writer from "modernity" as being a "genius" I would suggest doing a little research on them before buying and reading their books. They're 9 times out of 10 total crap. I would suggest finding an author you do like and then maybe see if you like other authors in the same "intellectual movement" or "style" -- or even see what authors your favorite authors liked (and why) usually that will lead you on a good trail. also there are many posts in the archives here about suggestions for good books to read, so if you have an itch to expand your library, you'll never have to buy and read that Kafkaesque shit again

http://www.powellhistory.com/ I haven't done it, but I sure want to! I'm a history major and most of my teachers teach "thematically" -- I'm all jumbled up and once I get some extra dough I'm going to try his courses. Good luck! I wonder how much of my education should be done in the privacy (rationality) of my own home (mind). Let us know how it goes~ Edit: If you are interested in Linguistics and the kind of wordplay that Burgess does (which he uses Russian) you might be interested in taking a language as well, (if I were to create new words I'd want to take Greek or Latin, myself but everyone is different). I've taken a basic Linguistics course and found it fascinating, with all the glottal stops and creoles and allophones of the same phoneme! It's a real hoot! For Philosophy, I like using History of Western Philosophy by Bertrand Russell -- it's easy to reference (has an index in the back), it's well organized (each philosopher has his own "chapter") and if you skim past his "opinions" on certain philosophers it's an easy way to gain a basic understanding of the premises of many philosophers (especially the modern ones whose own works are difficult to understand -- and lets face it, a pain in the ass to read).

I'm a little late on this one, but I agree wholeheartedly. Nothing I can say hasn't been explicated above by one of the former posters.

welcome!

i am really interested in these. i am a history major and cannot buy them just yet, unless i can find a copy used. do you think that everyone keeps their copy, 100% of the time?

http://www.cordair.com/ i love bryan larson!

by me

Perez Hilton talks about We the Living I don't know how "Objectivist" this band is, but here is their website

Only worn a few times, does not fit me so I never wear it. It's a shame to have it sit in a drawer. Size Medium it is $15 new, I'm asking for 10 + shipping or best offer.

This isn't even close to an argument. Plus, its a false dichotomy.

idk what i was thinking, but this artist's name is FREDERICK LEIGHTON, not Richard ?? SORRY ALL!

I am a woman with short hair and I keep it short for a few reasons: 1) It's easier to take care of (less shampoo/conditioner to buy, less brushing time, less "fussing") 2) It does not get in the way (as you had mentioned) also: IT DOESN'T LEAVE GROSS LONG SHED HAIRS EVERYWHERE (YUCK!) 3) Because most men do not like women with short hair, you can still dress and look sexy, and most men will not oogle or dog you. All the better, because those are not the types to give a damn about anyways. 4) (Most importantly) I think it looks assertive, down-to-business, artistic/cutting edge, and unique; all of which I consider myself to be (and like to portray in my physical appearance as well as through my actions) Now the question is: why do I think it looks assertive and down-to-business? I've wondered this before. I think the androgynous nature takes away the frail femininity (caveman dragging woman by the hair) and replaces it with a more masculine nature... do I associate men with "srs business" more than women with long hair? Well, of course I do. Plus, all of the assertive ball-busting business women of the 80s had androgynous hair, and so that, I'm sure plays a part as it leaks out of my psyche. To me it says "WORK" not "PLAY" -- if Rand hadn't specified, I would have imagined Dagny with a short cut. selma blair, natalie portman, and british model agyness deyn

Invocation Bath of Psyche The Countess Brownlow The Music Lesson Hercules Wrestling with Death for the Body of Alcestis The Painter's Honeymoon Mother and Child (Cherries) -- Sorry this is the best img I could find of it :/ Pavonia Frederic Leighton, 1st Baron Leighton PRA (3 December 1830–25 January 1896) was an English painter and sculptor associated with the Pre-Raphaelite movement. In 1878 he became the President of the Royal Academy. His paintings represented Britain at the great 1900 Paris Exhibition. Leighton was knighted at Windsor in 1878, and was created a baronet eight years later. He was the first painter to be given a peerage. Leighton died the next day. As he was unmarried, after his death his Barony was extinguished after existing for only a day; this is an all-time record in the Peerage.

Ha, I have been planning out which of my favorites to start posting and you have lots of them, thanks I might just link some that you've already collected for me

You sound great, man! Wonderful, thank you for the links!

Can you give us a page number and the version you're looking at? Or at least the context of the passage?

Comparisons The Roses of Heliogabalus Ask Me No More The Year's At Spring; All is Right with the World A Coign of Vantage A Favorite Poet Expectations Spring (I've seen this one in person! Stunning...) Unconscious Rivals Sir Lawrence Alda-Tadema (1836-1912) was a prominent Classical painter of the Victorian era. He was well known for his portrayal of Greek and Roman scenes.

Seconded!

HAHA! Funny you say that because last night I was like "Honey, who should I post next? Alda-Tadema probably... or wait no, Leighton? Maybe Ingres!"

I'd have to say I agree with this. But! that doesn't mean that you have to use your own words 100% of the time, especially for expediency, if someone else has said it in a more sophisticated and clear manner than you could. But! If this is an Objectivist Forum and (implicitly) the goal is to figure out how X fits into the ideas of Objectivism, I think it's safe to say that quoting Objectivism's founder, Ayn Rand, is a good way to ensure that you don't flub up or make weaker the argument that you're trying to make from her POV.