01503

I think it's best to defend Rand and Objectivism on the more popular sites, where more people can see it, and not on the sites that are dedicated to the antithesis of Objectivism, because most will reject it without any thought whatsoever. I know these people, and I've heard them denounce the concepts of fact and reality in direct conversation to me. They will believe what they want to believe without any thought or regard to the the basic axioms of Aristotelean and Objectivist metaphysics. I enjoyed this thread: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=3...&topic=4909 It's not anonymous, most certainly, being that it's on Facebook, but here's a quick summery (which also pertains to many "arguments" against Rand and Objectivism): A guy named Ryan makes claims with no evidence, and uses a "my time is thin" excuse (which is perfectly plausible, except that, about 72 days later, he has still made no reply after the first day he posted). His claims are outright wrong, and it is obvious that he has never picked up any of Ayn Rand's works. A couple people who know what they're talking about make some quotations from Rand's works, and that seemed to shut Ryan up. Almost all arguments against Rand are all based off of outright lies about her works, hoping that people will believe them without reading further.

I think by "calling" can be defined as "one's passion, and what one longs to do with their life." I feel that my calling is writing, and I love to write. I especially love philosophy and history, so I may be an author in those subjects. I will one day write for ARI, if it exists then. I'm only 15 now and I don't exactly like the way this world's going--the people who are dominating the influence our world preach acceptance of anything but things they disagree with, and they just *love* the idea shutting people down.

Haha I love Dennis Miller. Sometimes I think that a lot of the people on the HBO specials are only laughing because they don't want to look stupid because they don't get it. He's right on most of the issues I can think of though.

A couple of hours after posting my last reply, I decided to come back and do some research. Found this: http://www.house.gov/smbiz/hearings/080508...care/Wilson.pdf It turns out, I think I misinterpreted what he said. There is a 10.6% cut in "Medicare Physician Payment" meaning that instead of charging 10% less, they skip that step and just deliver 10% less of the profit to the physician. I think that PDF document focuses mainly on this issue, although it was written on May 8, and it was put in action in the beginning of July. If I misinterpreted it again, tell me.

I don't know. I think its a local tax, I'll ask him and post it when I return on Monday... All I know is, they were forced to lower the prices 10%. In the meantime, Happy Independence Day (http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?JServSes...ws_iv_ctrl=1021)

BACKROUND: My used to work at Florida Hospital, but due to massive downsizing, he and about 95 percent of the radiologists there were laid off. He started up a private practice, sold it and started up, with some friends in the business, another one. Although 6/7 of the doctors were based in Tampa, we live in Orlando. So when they asked him to come, our family is very rooted here, and he bought the place in Orlando. He always said, after the Florida Hospital incident, that having a private practice gave him much more control over his own destiny. He now works there, it's basically a family business by now. He reads the x-rays, CAT scans, and MRIs, my mom does the marketing, my grandfather does finances, and I do basically whatever else they need done. Point is, I was talking with my grandfather (who has always been my mentor, so to speak) and he was talking about how Congress was trying to find a way to lower medicine prices. But they had vacation, so they said (basically) to cut prices down 10% until we get back. So an MRI that costs $500, now costs $450. No big loss? I couldn't help but think of Atlas Shrugged. It's not so much the cut (although I oppose government tampering with the economy) as much as it is that they used NO LOGIC whatsoever. Where was there decision based? Who's benefiting from this? There is an unbelievable amount of questions that need to be answered, but won't. Simply because there are no rational answers to their decision. I can't help but think of DIRECTIVE 10-289 from Atlas Shrugged. Hopefully it won't come to that. But what's your take on all of this? [quick edit] For those who don't know, these are the premises of Directive 10-289, if you want to see the results of this, read Atlas Shrugged. http://radio.weblogs.com/0104693/stories/2...ctive10289.html

I don't think I will see that movie. It is my all time favorite book, and it has a high bar set for it, that I think it will be nearly impossible to meet. Before I read Atlas Shrugged, some of my other favorite books were turned into movies, and that was, well, not exactly as good as the book, to say the least.

I can completely relate to the woman who gave this speech. I was once a Christian myself, one of the "logical" theists (which I now find to be a contradiction in terms). My life before and with Objectivism, summed up quickly: Fifth grade: I was clinically depressed; I did not know why. I was on an intense amount of medications with sometimes terrible side effects. The doctors (I must have gone through a dozen in three years) gave more and different reasons for every comment I made. When I entered high school, the summer reading was Fahrenheit 451, Ender's Game, and Anthem. I read this book, and I thought it was great. I did not even begin to grasp her philosophy (still had never heard the word 'Objectivism' in my entire life), so I did some online research. It was then that I started to see it. I heard, during my research, that Atlas Shrugged was her magnum opus. I picked up the book at Borders. First thought: WOW is this a big book. I read it about chapters at a time in the beginning. Something told me not to drop the book, however. After I reached Part II, I read it avidly. I finished the last third of the book in a 2 day weekend. By the time I had finished the book, I, who has never cried over physical pain, was in tears. All my life, I had suffered, I had seen my family suffer (my dad is a very successful doctor and entrepreneur with his own private practice), and I could finally answer the question that I ask every doubt I may have: "why?" No longer was I lying on my bed for hours, idle, after being yelled at for my 'laziness' in school, or after my best friend/girlfriend (who never gave a damn about me) and I got into a fight about whatever. I knew why. I knew why I was yelled at, not the cheap plastic answers they gave me, but truth. I knew that my life did not depend on Lisa, and that she was ingrateful for everything I did. What reason did I have to stay? Why? I am not ashamed to speak the truth about my life, I was not far from suicide when I picked up Anthem. To conclude it: Atlas Shrugged changed my life. I strive every day to be like John Galt: The man without pain, or fear, or guilt.

I agree that the irrationality of these theists is underestimated a lot. I went to Christian Schools from PreSchool until 9th grade, and argued with most of the teachers about religion. Don't get me wrong, many were great teachers, it was just the religion teachers mostly that were... unqualified, to say the least. The point is, most of the arguements would end with them saying "it's a matter of faith." To which I would reply "if I told you that there was a unicorn that I could only see standing in the middle of the highway while we were driving, would you stop the car?" Based on their bastardized methods of "thought," they would. But their answer was no, due to the fact that they don't think. They feel.