Seanjos

Looks interesting... I've too many maths books to read in the coming months. Let us know how you get on!

Will Culture: My main interest. "A stimulus to nervous matter effects a change in the matter by calling forth a reaction in it. This change may be exceedingly slight after the first stimulus, but each repetition of the stimulus increases the change, with its following specific reaction, until by constant repetition a permanent alteration in the nervous matter stimulated occurs, which produces a fixed habitual way of working in it. In other words, the nervous matter acquires a special way of working, that is, of function, by habit.- William Hanna Thomson M.D This is the opening quote to Frank Channing Haddocks: Power of Will. What a way of writing he and most writers of the 19th Century had. As a weight-training enthusiast practising this idea of conciously bringing will to the fore transformed my often mundane workouts. It's an inspiringly rational text from the most secular of the will power authors- and the best.

With medicine socialised, obesity is a national concern. The government is pushing sports science departments hard, they want to know why everybody is getting fatter and they want us to fix it. The funding we are receiving is bordering on ridiculous. I don't think there's a damn thing 'we' can do about it and all this money ensures is more olympic success. This is happening in Japan and now with American medicine 50% socialised I see similar trends occuring there. If medicine was private, it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference, but we're not going to see private healthcare anytime soon. I have to make a report: What can be done about obesity ? I wonder if we should be doing anything, if you want to be fat, be fat. Although when it's healthy people footing the bill, in a place where everyone loves National Health Service I can't help think that something must be done.

Wow. What a strange world we live in..... http://megafoundation.org/MegaPress/Titles/Anthem.html

Shameless Bump

Thank you Clive, perhaps also, I just needed some encouragement. Like the men you mentioned, I'll remain honest and just like them, have a very lonely career. But I will be right and what greater joy can I get than that.

Yes, I discovered Objectivism through Mike Mentzer, he mentions her in all his work. Imagine my delight at finding a book on my favourite subject when I was 18 which stressed need for understanding the laws of logic, the law of identity and excluding the arbitrary. I knew then that something was wrong with the scene. Exercise Scientists didn't write in this tone; Mentzer didn't even go to college. I have one of his seminars on tape, " Y'know PhD stands for, Piled High an' Deep in BULLSHIT"? I'll never forget that. Scores of men much smarter than him who have doctorates write subjective, opinionated and contradictory tomes. If I can't identify the cause there is nothing stopping this happening to me. Upon writing this I've realised, what I'm concerned about is not so much junk science, as my method of thinking. Could just a more thorough study of Logic be the answer ? I don't want to lose anymore sleep on this. p.s Click on my name for his photo

Exercise- Biomechanics, Kinesiology and Physiology.

Although my PhD is a few years away, I'm suddenly panicked at the idea of starting my new course, and neglecting the ills of science education. Peikoff wrote of the terrible habits he picked up in grad school. I'm concerned, like Peikoff, that the work ahead will be so time consuming and difficult that things will start to slip by me. Rationalising and chiefly, what is killing science: "picking up where the last man left off". Could anyone reccommend some pre-term training for me ? I start back in September. Thanks

Jake_Ellison. Agreed, the reasoning is valid, but is the conclusion sound ? (see bottom line) Ah this is great David, I'm at the ceiling of my understanding . How can you prove that you cannot defy the laws of nature without reasoning in a circle. Musn't it always come down to an assumption ? What am I missing here ?

Following Peikoff's instruction, real thinking requires painfully thorough understanding of the radical: the what and why. When I first read the statement my thought was, as David and West have pointed out: a self-evident extension of identity. Perhaps there is nothing else to understand, I could be looking for something that isn't there (I have before). But it's better I do in order to really "get it". It's a funny feeling, I told a colleague that I just wasn't smart enough to do what I want to do (in science), so I've got to get strong(er). She said if I got any smarter my head would blow off. Exceptional test scores were a result of memory organised by common sense, just letting things wash over me. I'm paying for it now, I'm re-learning how to think...properly/independently. I'll get it though Back to it:- That which defies the laws of nature is a miracle You cannot defy the laws of nature .'. You cannot have miracles Begging the question. The conclusion appears as an assumption in a different form: petitio principii.

I don't care about miracles. I'm disturbed that the statement, as worded and in it's proper context is guilty of petitio principii. Edit: I had this confirmed yesterday by our Doctor of letters.

I'm not concerned with miracles, just the argument. This from Dr Peikoff is a logical fallacy: "Miracles cannot happen because they would defy the laws of nature"

An IQ of 200 if nothing else is a demonstration of superior reasoning ability. Why hasn't he come to the same conclusions as us ? He must have heard of Ayn Rand.

What do you think of "the world's smartest person" ? There's a short on YouTube. Clearly extremely bright but, a monster... I heard Peikoff explaining Rand's definition of intelligence and why she didn't rate IQ tests. Can't remember though.

Yep I mentioned this in another post. I love what we once were but... I just feel like f*ck it, I'm 23 I don't want to spend my life convincing people, it's totally to their benefit not mine. When I finish university I'm out of here. To America, HK or Singapore.

As for the fraud, black & white absolutely. Manchester United's policy for all high-level front office staff is a first class honours degree. An old arbitrary policy (but it is still in use). She was approached by the club because of stellar work at a lower side and they hire on that basis. Then the formalities came about, the job was offered conditionally upon meeting the requirements. She lied and everyone was happy, once discovered, the CEO Dave Gill said he was simply following rules by firing her. So, however here's my reservation:- 1. There were no other applicants in the running. 2. She was selected and hired on ability, the 1st, a formality. 3. Fans, shareholders and board members still wanted her in. 4. It's a policy set decades ago that none involved with the club it seems, cares about. I don't have a problem with her dismissal, I'm interested in the ethics at play. For Gill to claim that it was non option, black & white, is a kop-out. This is a case for HIS judgement, which he didn't give. Eh ?

An Executive at Manchester United on her job application stated she got a first class degree from Oxford. It was discovered in 2007 after 2 years in the job, in fact to be second class. She was immediately fired. She argued that a second, wouldn't have landed the position, and that she should be judged on the work done since her appointment (which as a fan of the club can tell you, was excellent). This issue isn't as black & white as I first thought it was. I have my thoughts I'd like to hear some more.

Argumentum Ad Hominem isn't a spell from Harry Potter.

Does anyone have a solid opinion on FLCL ? I gather it's crazy, but it's coming out on a new box set in UK, thought I'd try it.

Did anyone else know the name of Ron Paul's son ?

I was well advised that The Fountainhead serves as a primer to Atlas. If I'd gone straight to it, I shudder to think how I may have reacted. My 18 year old sis just finished The Fountainhead and loved it, regularly calling me up for clarification (Dominique confused her). Start them with that, get them used to the temperature before we throw them in the water. Fountainhead First !!

That was a short thread.... Alan Greenspan: Alas, We [Thought We] Knew Him!

Yes, it had to be said. People in this country don't like America, but especially Americans one bit. Have you ever sat and watched a patriotic Hollywood epic with your family like Pearl Harbour ? Did they cringe with embarrassment as mine did at "cheesy American victory music" ? Now Pearl Harbour and most Hollywood epics are cheesy. Yes, but, there is a deeper issue... Does anyone remmber the story about the Yorkshire miner (I think he was) from Ayn Rand's book of horrors ? Such attitude to work is common here now. It's one good man in 100. Or in this case 3000. My late uncle (a non-intellectual) remarked on this "sorry pal I'm on my lunch" attitude from young (20's - 40's) employees of his customers. Working anything above what is expected is an imposition. Dr. Bernstein does us a great service in his book, and it just makes it painfully clear how much we've lost.

When you consider that your president-elect understands the concept of individual rights perfectly, but rejects it, that such an thing could occur in the culture is really not surprising. This movement ( ) is making the same mistake the feminists made- the idea that coercion, would make the grey mass less hostile towards them. An essential grasp of individual rights covers all bases, it is this we need to impart.