Dr. Radiaki

I believe you mean 'tilting at the windmill', as it is very difficult to run after something that doesn't move. Though it is amusing to imagine an overstuffed bureaucrat huffing and puffing as he madly chases a contradictory windmill that goes where it pleases.

Ontario's minimum wage will very soon be $10.00. I'm actually giving a speech about the evils of minimum wage laws soon... for a public speaking class. Still, I'm excited.

This was honest-to-atomic-structure inspiring. Thanks for sharing!

Have you considered signing up for the program, then spending every cent of "benefit" it provides to promote true captalism and oppose the government that instituted it? My grasp of Objectivist ethics in this particular situation seems shakey to me, so if anyone cares to comment on my thinking, please feel free.

If you have a scanner or other means of converting your art to an electronic format, I'm sure that you'd receive a lot of honest feedback in the appropriate sub-forum, much better than you got in that art class of yours, by the sounds of it. EDIT: Didn't see the original post, but man, paragraphs, I love 'em. Just thought I'd point that out.

I was listening to one of Dr. Peikoff's older podcasts, and he briefly mentions giving a lecture that equated modern art with a form of schizophrenia. This has piqued my interest in Objectivist analysis/critique of art, especially contemporary art. Ayn Rand has written fairly extensively on the subject of art, but I was looking for something a little more recent, so they might comment on pieces produced in the last 10 years or so. I'm not really concerned with who specifically has written it(be they PhD or layman), so long as the approach the subject from an Objectivist framework. Free content is preferable, but I'm not averse to paying for high quality work. Any suggestions?

The atomic bomb attack was expedient, but it's necessity is debatable. At the time the bombs were dropped, Japan was defeated, whether they had officially recognized it or not. With no oil and no hope of getting more, any effort they might have made would have been brought to a screeching halt. Such an effort supposes a viable navy or air force which they did not have. Further, the Japanese home islands are small and easily blockaded, making the waiting game an easy one to play for a numerically superior force. Given the Japanese leadership at the time it is certain that such a blocked would need to be maintained for some time. The sheer fanaticism of the military elite would make surrender a long time coming. Further, without any outside assistance, it is certain that many Japanese would have starved to death as food supplies ran short and the economy completely collapsed. Perhaps fatalities would have even reached the levels of the atomic attacks. However, such fatalities would not have the far reaching consequences of radiation. Namely, slow and painful death from radiation poisoning, horrific mutations of unborn children, and lasting danger from contaminated soil in the surrounding environment. We must keep in mind that Truman was under immense political pressure to bring the war in Japan to a close, both from his own government and the populace at large. The atomic attacks were, as history proves, a remarkably quick solution to this problem, much faster than any blockade. However, speed is the only benefit of such a solution. A long term blockade would have endangered American lives only insofar as anyone is at risk living long term on a ship, and further would have left more infrastructure intact for the eventual rebuilding process. I assert that atomic attacks were undertaken primarily for the speed at which they would achieve American goals.

Ceaser might have been convinced of the efficacy of armored divisions, but Atilla was so mired in tribal traditions and the warrior cult that he would have roundly rejected metal sky birds, I'm sure.

Funny? Most likely. Useful? Probably not. While Christianity is deeply flawed, it does provide an internally consistent philosophy to many misguided people. What can Bill offer as an alternative? Nothing but the usual scorn and derision, I'm sure. Philosophy: Who needs it?

All right, but what about slapstick? I'm thinking along the lines of <i>The Three Stooges</i> and their ilk. Is it wrong to laugh at a man getting poked in the eye, or being struck by a heavy object? Are viewers just reacting to the absurdity of something that should cause grievous bodily harm merely causing annoyance? Would that make it okay?

If by logic He is not extant, then His existence He must recant. I think I'm a poet!

I read about an interesting method of discipline in a magazine, and I wondered if any the parents here could confirm or deny its efficacy. The basic idea was to allow a child to experience the full consequences of an incorrect action, rather than punish them and forcing the correct course . An example given was a child that had to be told many times to change for school, which often resulted in shouting matches and threats. So, frustrated by the ineffectualness of this technique, the mother simply took the child to school in his pajamas. He was told, once, that he should be ready to leave at a certain time, and when he was not, he was simply taken to school anyway. Obviously such a method would not be practical for a child who refused to look both ways before crossing the street, but I wonder at its usefulness in other situations.

Is there any evidence whatsoever that engaging in homosexual acts with another consenting adult is an anti-value?

*rimshot* He's here all week, folks!

Do not go gentle into that good night, Old age should burn and rave at close of day; Rage, rage against the dying of the light. Though wise men at their end know dark is right, Because their words had forked no lightning they Do not go gentle into that good night. Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay, Rage, rage against the dying of the light. Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight, And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way, Do not go gentle into that good night. Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay, Rage, rage against the dying of the light. And you, my father, there on the sad height, Curse, bless me now with your fierce tears, I pray. Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light. Do Not Go Gentle into that Good Night, Dylan Thomas

Everybody knows that the best ice cream is, objectively, marlin. Sheesh.

She sounds like a hateful idiot, full of irrational thoughts and ideas(An actor who hates gays? Boy, is she in the wrong business) Still, by what right to does the government remove free speech? Even stupid speech about animal rights nonsense? And even If she was advocating that all true French citizens rise up and kill Muslims in an orgy of blood and death(and I don't think she is), is that a crime punishable by removal freedoms? That is to say, is advocating the removal of another man's rights(but taking no action yourself) criminal?

Ayn Rand stresses the importance of a government that supports and enforces objective law. What might be a good example of an objective law? Does objective law exist in North America today in any form? What makes a law subjective, as opposed to objective?

If the entire world economy were to accept a gold standard, would enough gold exist to make trade possible? Aside from direct barter, that is.

After the relationship with my last girlfriend broke down, I was feeling miserable, assuming(incorrectly) that the many friends I had met with her would be obliged to choose one of us over the other, and such a choice would not favour me. I was wrong, and found that a certain couple among this group of friends was especially supportive and social, something that helped me recover much faster than I otherwise might have. T Sounds good so far, right? Well, here's the problem: I have fallen for the women in this couple. Hard. These sorts of feelings had existed prior to the break-up, but didn't really develop as I was so focused on other pursuits. These vague feelings have increased hugely since that time. I find myself thinking of her constantly, even dreaming about her. These dreams are especially painful, as they are so often wish-fufilment fantasies which leave me miserable upon awakening. What makes it even [sarcasm]better[/sarcasm] is how long standing, and apparently loving their relationship is, which makes me feel like crap for even thinking some of the things I have. I don't want to loose the friendship of these two people (Which I value immensely), but at the same time I feel like I'm lying by omission when it comes to the romantic feelings I have. My question is this: What the hell do I do?

FIGHT! Bach wins... Baroqueitality! *harpsichord riff plays*

The speaker(Brian Dunning) is quite consistent in his application of his principles. You can hear him speak about global warming and many other topics at www.skeptoid.com. All podcasts are also transcribed for those with low-bandwidth connections. I would especially recommend his recent podcast on the 'evils' of fast food, and the myths that Super-Size Me has helped propagate.

Anthem has been adapted into a musical

This is a truly excellent set of photos featuring Japan's highway interchanges. Beautiful example of the application of a man's mind.

I'm going to side with DarkWaters here, wasting energy to no good end is stupid.