Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by anonrobt

  1. If you recognize that a child is, properly, what is re-pubertant,that a teenager is, properly, a young adult - and that there was little if any disagreement of this before the 20th century... if you recognize that, culturally speaking, the 20th century was a deliberate extending of childhood beyond validity, as a means of extending control over those involved - at least in pushing the notion of adulthood as some manner of 'necessary evil', and that childhood was a time to be savored as long as possible, that dependency was good, and self-responsibility was to be not bothered with for as long as possible - the infantilizing of the teen, with the conjoining disrespect of the being as a person capable of self determination, and with the inevitable rebellion of them as a sensed devaluation of what should otherwise had been a continuing growth of self responsibility - that those who deviated from this viewing of the teens were more and more constrained from being able to violate these proscriptions -

    then you can better try to answer that question, now having been given some perspectives from which to see how an answer could be given... morally and legally are by no means the same, and in this day of continually furthering of constraints on all, not just the young adults, thru these legalities, answering can be hard to do in the sense of any single answer in the real world - because that legality is very powerful, even as it is at cross serving the moral...

  2. I'm unsure if this has been discussed before, but I'm very curious about what type of music Halley's symphonies were supposed to be like. Does anyone know specifically the type of orchestra his music sounded like? Was it Romantic, Baroque etc? I also don't know the type of music she liked specifically, which obviously would reflect the type of sound he would have created. Personally, the one composer I equate with Hally is Ralph Vaughan Williams, but that's simply because he's one of my favourite composers. Perhaps that is not the style she intended and is indeed something more along the lines of Mozart. Ideas?

    Try Rachmaninov.......

  3. The primary political issue is: does she grant the initiation of force as a proper means to some ends?

    If she does, or equivocates on this fundamental political precept in any way, you need to either set her straight or get the heck out of dodge. It took me 14 years to realize this was a dead-end road, and while things have worked out well for me in any case, I sure wish I had been less stubborn in evading the truth for so long, I'd be much better off in my health and career at least if I had been more principled in my primary relationship (the sad thing is, she was incredibly intelligent, and one of the few cases that, had I straightened my back sooner, might have worked out with me convincing her to change her principles ... and by accepting her bad behavior, I only encouraged it.)

    If she says she doesn't and sticks to the principle consciously, but is not consistent in applying this principle, then you can leverage her recognition of the principle to correct her application of it. There WILL be arguments, but if you are consistent, either you will persuade her, or she will leave you (be prepared, this latter is the likely outcome if you attempt to persuade her to follow the logical consequences of the principal).

    If she doesn't and her behavior is consistent with her claim, then you can, and likely will, work any issues out if you both are committed to the relationship.

    - David

    or, to put it another way - does she intend to support a slaver state, or freedom [for force and subjugation are what slavers do, however they may euphenize it]...

  4. Staying alive and doing nothing will not make a person happy. Happiness comes from achieving a purpose. There are a whole lot of rational options: a whole lot of careers. Briefly, one cannot come up with the best career option by thinking in terms of "what is the most rational" or "what is the most productive". Since this is a choice being made for a specific person -- you -- you also need to consider your own specific nature: background, likes/dislikes, and so on. Here is one thread about careers, and here is another

    Remember - this is an individual philosophy, not a group one...

  5. On October 9, PajamasMedia published Amit Ghate's OpEd, "<a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/values-and-the-defense-of-freedom/?singlepage=true">Values and the Defense of Freedom</a>".

    In it, he responds to the question, "Is faith necessary for defending natural rights, or is reason sufficient?" Here is the opening:<blockquote>In the wake of the recent Values Voter Summit, a worrisome question arises: will the Tea Parties or a reformed GOP be able to champion limited government and fiscal responsibility, without also importing the religious right’s so-called "social values"?

    HotAir's Allahpundit raises this issue, noting that speakers at the summit repeatedly asserted the idea that limited government must ultimately be based on religious beliefs -- on the existence of a "Big God." Uncomfortable with these assertions and searching for a better, secular defense of freedom, Allahpundit asks how Objectivists (adherents of Ayn Rand's philosophy) would respond.

    It's a perceptive question. Though many recognize Rand as a stalwart defender of freedom, few appreciate how radically her defense differs from that of traditional religionists. Key to her innovative approach is an original conception of values and morality -- one which ultimately puts her at odds with much of the religious program...</blockquote>(Read the full text of "<a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/values-and-the-defense-of-freedom/?singlepage=true">Values and the Defense of Freedom</a>".)

    Congratulations, Amit!<div><img width="1" height="1" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/3372618-7400381639687491831?l=blog.dianahsieh.com" alt=""></div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/noodlefood/~4/gBwI4d0AEzQ" height="1" width="1">

    View the full article

    The comments to Amit's OpEd were, however, quite disappointing... about as irrational and concrete-bound as any seen...

  6. While checking when a French translation of Atlas Shrugged will be available today (oooooold story)I was taken aback on my chair when I found this:

    The Internet Archive - Community Books

    Am I dremaing? Is it true? Are we supposed to understand that it has an official existence? Does ARI gave its approval to it?

    Any idea, anyone, please?

    It certainly appears to be a published book, and in the previous year by someone other than the previously stated A bientot... haven't finished reading it, but is so far a very good translation... would indeed like getting a hard copy of it, but as yet, Amazon not carry it...

  7. Since madness was mentioned I can't help but think of Scriabin(I don't know about Chopin, but Rachmaninov seems perfectly sane - despite depressions and hardships). Now that guy was properly mad(still a great composer though).

    Poem of Ecstasy is an orchestrated making love composition - extraordinarily done [indeed, once made love via it playing in the background, and dang if it didn't all come out just as to the music B) ][yes, by the end of the music, she knew she was being played, but she could not help herself, and had to agree it was very well written]

  8. If it helps at all, I've started with Philosophy: Who Needs It.

    That, actually, is the best one to start with - then you go to The Virtue of Selfishness,then Capitalism the Unknown Ideal... the rest essentially are fillers, for those more interested in particular details [and OPAR is not Rand non-fiction, nor, for all the good they really are, are Tara Smith's books - these are Rand derived, but not Rand]...

  9. My quibble on this issue's showing is this 'retro' of imitating classical as a means of expression... that strikes me as lacking in imagination, certainly universalness... far better to have nudes, where it is timeless, or at least within contemporary clothing styles... [am speaking specifically in this case of Larsen's works]

  10. Tall Poppies

    Cut the tall poppy,

    Cut it right down.

    That's where we want it,

    Flat on the ground.

    It's blocking our view,

    It's taking our light,

    It must be too tall,

    'Cause we aren't that height.

    --Mindy Newton


    by John Paul Sherman

    There was a man who pricked his heart

    On the thorn of an unfilled need,

    Who clamped a bandage, crushed the smart,

    Refused to let it bleed.

    Yet, while fore-stanching bitter blood,

    A sequel swell of liquid gall—

    Crude tears--impinged; he damned the flood,

    Refused to let them fall.

    When no moist sigh could crack dry lips,

    Nor a memory-dampened moan

    Elude such arid censorships,

    He felt secure as stone,

    Till, on foot in an autumn week,

    He heard, along the cobbled way,

    A dead leaf scoff. He turned to speak—

    ...But the wind blew him away.

  11. Well, I've listened to Rachmaninoff's 2nd and 3rd Concertos, and I think they're vastly overrated. Frankly, I hardly felt any soaring notes or any feeling of exaltation, as Rand describes in her works. I don't feel much of that with Tchaikovsky or Shostakovich either, and I have no idea how these three are rated as composers with an Objectivist touch. In my opinion, they have all made some pretty ordinary music, nothing superb or brilliant to talk about. The only Rachmaninoff piece that I think is really worth mentioning here, is possibly Vocalize. And also, loads of people tell us of how Jupiter by Holst is great as well. Well, I don't really think so. In fact, I'd rate Saturn better, although many people haven't listened to it.

    If you want some soaring pieces of Music, that really make you feel like you can stand up, with your convictions against 6 billion people, then listen to pieces like, The Bumblebee in the Transformers soundtrack, or the Gladiator theme, or the Schindler's list theme. There was a very good piece in The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button somewhere in the middle of the movie, but I haven't seen what it is yet. Inception rocks on the soundtrack level as well. A bit more classically, Samuel Barber's Adagio for Strings is brilliant, though it is depressing. It does touch some pretty high notes though, and I'd think you'd be a downright fool if you can't appreciate that. Try listening to some of Ludovico Einaudi's pieces, especially two, Divinere, and In Principio. Enya is pretty nice as well, although I have listened to only two of her songs. Richard Clayderman's Liebestraum is beautiful too, no doubting that. Pachelbel's Canon is pretty uplifting too. And I think Mahler composes some dark and beautiful pieces as well, which though sad, makes you feel a quiet, inner joy as well. And who can forget Moonlight Sonata, by Beethoven?

    If you're more of the rock-type, then Stairway To Heaven is indeed one of the most beautiful, epic songs I've heard, though the theme of the song is generally theistic, and I am an atheist. Still, try to procure that Orchestral version of Stairway. It is the most enchanting, heroic pieces I've heard. Try it!

    If you're speaking of uplifting music, it is hard to beat Sousa's Stars and Stripes Forever or the William Tell Overture, or Saint Saens' Fifth Concerto...

  12. Suppose you have a hobby or interest that stands out above anything else in your life, but which isn't necessarily a realistic or suitable career prospect. Examples might be athletic activities, art, or music. Would it be a mistake to organize your life around such a pursuit as opposed to a productive career? I suppose it might be a false alternative to suggest that you could only enjoy your hobby or have a career, but suppose you had to take a lot of time and energy away from your work to dedicate it toward your hobby. What would you say?

    I wrote this last year regarding observations of the difficulty many artists have in monetarily pursuing a living - and I think it pertains here, as even tho it speaks of artists, it applies across the board to any productive endeavor -


    While many of these examples given of various artists and their works show those who have made a financial success of trading their works, not all have - indeed, a number of highly creative artists never acquire the means of achieving their material well-being thru just their creativity... does this mean anything in the way of failure? no, because while the basic reason person need be productive is to meet the needs for material values, and normally this is thru trade as means of payment for the work - this is not always the case... money is not the only type of material value, and not all work that creates material value is well compensated in the market... thus a person may need be making the money at a less productive, relatively undemanding job, in order to enable the more rewarding and challenging and productive work - in this case being that of the artist... this is often, perhaps especially so, when the artist as creator has blazed a new direction in creating, showing work which requires more conscious attention to being appreciated, or appeals to a more selective set of viewers... this does not detract from it being productive work, only that the burden of being able to achieve the creating may be harder than otherwise, a situation which, to the creator having the success of the creating, is, relatively speaking, small and unimportant... it is the doing, the creating, the visualizing which is the productive and thus the important - and in that regard, the success of being...

  13. Yes. The main question which Objectivism asks about good and therefore valuable is “good for what or for whom?" Suppose, you know that your smocking habit will reduce your life span say by 10%, but you enjoy your smock, it gives you a pleasure. In other words you trade the quantity of your life for its quality. As long as you made such a conscious decision, pack of cigarettes is a value for you. But suppose you've changed your mind and now you're smocking only because you are an addict. In such a case there is no value in smocking and you should kick the habit out as soon as possible.

    In other words - there are values, and there are viable values... and only the latter enhances the well-being, the flourishing, of the person...

  14. This is how a few of my friends who are "educated" in political science (at WLU), define rights. After awhile of arguing against this thinking, I have to retire from the discussion because they can't or refuse to understand anything from a natural or individual rights perspective.

    Perhaps that is because 'positive rights' stem from 'divine rights', and postulate a master/servant relationship - and elitists, being the sheltered they are, consider themselves as heirs to the 'divine rights' notion... <_<:lol:

  15. The only difference I have found, in any practice or common use, is that morals refers to a religious based view of what is right or wrong, and ethics refers to a secular view... almost all, whether the one or the other, refer to a cultural viewing of right/wrong, even if in part there may be objective basis involved...

  • Create New...