aristotlejones
-
Posts
188 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by aristotlejones
-
-
It doesn't mean that Vulcan civilization is any different than what I have stated. In fact, if you pick up "The Way Of Kolinahr" sourcebook, the society is described as aiming towards selflessness and service to the community. Whereas Spock may have become more individualistic towards the end of his life (as he is when he meets his younger self), the philosophy of the culture itself remains one of selflesness for the greater good of the whole.
No cliff notes here.
I accept your elucidation. I was unaware of this wider context because all I know about the Vulcan culture is what I've gleaned from the movies and the regular series, not from spinoff novels, handbooks, or Gencon symposia.
And one shouldn't expect philosophical consistency from a franchise run by committees.
<Φ>aj
-
I am quite partial to these two, at least as smileys.
I wrote earlier in this discussion:
>...any symbol should be fairly simple in design so that it would be recognizable at a distance, and simple to reproduce. (as with the christian fish)
your mileage may vary...
<Φ>aj
-
They are actually responsible for the creation of humanities.philosophy.objectivism. Long ago, they invaded (utterly unmoderated) alt.philosophy.objectivism and made APO unusable. Marginally-moderated HPO was then created -- with the only rule being "You cannot mention Neo-Tech".
I actually remember seeing that play out. Gawd I am olde.
<Φ>aj
-
I don't think your business is appropriate for the forum or the link directory. We don't have a listing for businesses run by Objectivists... yet.
I started a thread in Productivity with this announcement:
The Association of Objectivist Business Professionals is getting ready for a new online launch. If you are a business professional and a supporter of Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism--then this is the place for you. The Association of Objectivist Business Professionals web site will have two main features:
1) Directory of Members with Exensive Profiles
2) Discussion Forum -- with a focus on both the application of philosophical principles in business and many day-to-day management discussions.
The goal is to function much like an "Objectivist Chamber of Commerce" with all the features and benefits of social networking organizations-- with the added benefit of shared values. Membership in the Association of Objectivist Business Professionals will be US$125 per year.
If you are interested in receiving more information as it becomes available, please use the sign-up form to get onto the mailing list.
<Φ>aj
-
One thing I find personally annoying is the absurdly unrealistic postmodern "realism" of constantly subverting authority. ... with no real consequences for disobeying orders?
You're confusing Kirk with a Sasquatch.
Only a sasquatch would enjoy being beat up, knocked out, stuffed into a lifeboat, and dumped onto an ice planet.
Kirk has red blood in his veins, not antifreeze.
<Φ>aj
-
Unfortunately, the way Rodenberry wrote them, Vulcans are Socialists: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" is what Spock utters to Kirk as his reason for dying in The Wrath of Kahn.
In the Search for Spock, the sequel to TWoK, this statement is turned on its head, "The needs of the many are outweighed by the needs of the few, or the one."
Cliff Notes aren't enough, even in the ST universe.
<Φ>aj
-
The Association of Objectivist Business Professionals is getting ready for a new online launch. If you are a business professional and a supporter of Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism--then this is the place for you. The Association of Objectivist Business Professionals web site will have two main features:
1) Directory of Members with Exensive Profiles
2) Discussion Forum -- with a focus on both the application of philosophical principles in business and many day-to-day management discussions.
The goal is to function much like an "Objectivist Chamber of Commerce" with all the features and benefits of social networking organizations-- with the added benefit of shared values. Membership in the Association of Objectivist Business Professionals will be US$125 per year.
If you are interested in receiving more information as it becomes available, please use the sign-up form to get onto the mailing list.
<Φ>aj
-
More and more lately, I notice that a lot of people's (namely, my friends') psychological and relationship problems stem from low self-esteem. Holding my friends as values, I of course want to help them. What are some methods of boosting your self-esteem? (I of course realize that only the people in question themselves can do something about it). Thanks in advance.
Don't ya know all the other gals are going to the "Dove Self-Esteem Sleep Over" tonight?
Some crap I saw on the glass teat.
<Φ>aj
-
Again, thanks to you all.
It was a good day, quiet, but good.
Too busy...must sleep...
Sorry I missed your birthday. Hell, I missed my own...
Happy Accelerated Decrepitude Day!
The only cure for entropy is integrity.
Gheers,
<Φ>aj
-
Good evening AristotleJones. Thanks for your comments.
I don't even have time to read your comments right now, but Sammo put me onto a wiki quote that confirms my Einstein quotes:
You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother.
variant: If you can't explain something to a six-year-old, you really don't understand it yourself.
Frequently attributed to Richard Feynman
So, I'm not completely decrepit.
<Φ>aj
-
LL speaks of “the correct theory”.
From the viewpoint of TEW, the classical conceptions of fields - whether gravitational, electrical, or magnetic - are rejected.
-----------
Is there any “observational evidence” for vectons? What about for Lewis Little’s reciprocal elementary waves?
I would answer: There is sufficient evidence to make these TEW notions worth studying further. And that these TEW notions have sufficient explanatory power in themselves AND in comparison to other theories to make them worth studying further.
------------
Did he really say that? I’m not doubting you, but I would like to know more about any such view by Einstein if you (or anyone else) happen to have a reference. Just my curiosity.
Hey Prodos,
I will try to respond to what I can understand.
The above statement rejecting all classical conceptions of field theory is broad in scope, and needs evidence that LL's proposed theory explains successfully more observational evidence than the existing theories. When you say no comparison is shown, nor even any connections between LL's theory and even a few observational anomalies, heretofor unexplained by conventional theories, I cannot in all objectivity buy into his theory.
Just because a proposed theory claims sufficient "explanatory power" without demonstrating its connection to contextually complete observations, or by predicting observations that previous theories cannot, that claim must be judged "arbitrary", in the objectivist definition of said concept.
As for the Einstein quote: I posted the accurate quote in this thread above, but I also stand by my recollection that there is a more complete quote referring to a 12 yo girl, who in fact he was tutoring at the time, and who was the source of the more concrete quote. (Maybe Feynman quoting Einstein?) If one can think in essentials, then they can see that my ad hoc quote and the one most recorded is conceptually the same idea.
At this point, even though I don't have LL's complete treatise, I am willing to extend him the benefit of the doubt without the complete story. However, with the claims that his theory is without a demonstratable observational foundation, and because it cannot seem to explain anything that conventional theories have not, nor can it predict anything new, and that we should simply reject all field theories without sufficient reason, I then have to judge it as "unproven" to use an Irish legal concept.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Stay Focused,
<Φ>aj
-
It took a long time for me to understand why. Of course that would be because my exposure to art has been predominantly to *bad* art. If it can be called art at all. (Luckily there is Cordair Fine Arts to give a little bit of balance.)
I believe that the kind of heroic television shows centered around the sixties, that spunoff from the values of those who survived WWII, should be included in under the "romatic realist" tent. Yes, I'm talking kids shows, cartoons, supermarionation, etc. They are mocked now as the "World of Tomorrow", where wife was slave labor and husband was an alki, see that recent DeCapprio movie about the "company" man, but they were romantic, and the better ones were realistic.
Star Trek comes to mind, as does UFO, Sandbaggers, all the variations on James Bond (There can be only one Connery) including the ground breaking I Spy, Mission Impossible, etc. Communism was and is a deadly threat, and good men did not stand by and complain, they risked their lives and honors to fight for their right to be free.
Thunderbirds may have had wooden (sic) characters, but the message of the show, that a private International Rescue organization would tackle the emergencies that the government had abandoned, and that this was the right way to go about things, has been forgotten or disfigured now. And in those shows people knew the proper place of government, and did not buy into the delusion that throwing good money after bad would change the fundamental equation. And in some shows, when govt. was truly needed, the agents were truly competent to the task, not blundering in with both left feet making things ten times worse, instead they tried to acheive a nuanced, long term and morally defensible solution.
While these kinds of fiction could be called scifi or thriller, and were lampooned when they came out, have you noticed that the most popular fiction now adays is scifi or thriller or both? People still need heroes, and objectively moral resolutions, as they did in the sixties. Just because the medium has evolved, I think the term art should include more recent contributions, especially when they are romatic realist, the only art worthy of the name. (at least for non-barbarians)
Thoughts on a Sunday morning while waiting for my UFO megaset.
Your mileage may vary...
Stay Focused,
<Φ>aj
-
I bought "Philosophy: Who Needs It" and "The Virtue Of Selfishness" from Borders a few days ago. They were the only two non-fiction works of Ayn Rand they had in stock.
By recommending ItOE, I was addressing it to the ubergeek in you.
But your titles are also a very good foundation in the ethical and sense of life issues of the philosophy, as well as a basic introduction to the epistemology. (methods we use to achieve objective certainty)
Of course, Peikoff's Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand, is also broad and deep.
The avalanche has begun: it is too late for the pebbles to vote. Kosh
<Φ>aj
-
Greetings from Australia,
Profession: Computer Programmer
INTJ
So once you're finished Atlas, pass by the other fiction titles for now, and go directly to the Introduction to Objectivist Epistomology, the source code of objectivism.
Stay Focused,
<Φ>aj
-
Here is a scenario practically every person who is a parent or who has dealt with a small child will recognize and it absolutely destroys your rational child and the "failure" of a parent.
We'll look at two scenarios. The forceful parent and the explanatory parent.
The appropriate solution incorporates some of both methods.
Overwhelming forceful edicts create a fearful rebellious child who will grow up to do far worse than play in traffic to assert their independence.
Pedantic lectures without acknowledgement of the child's innocent excitement and legitimate distraction will go unheard, and more important messages will be ignored as well.
The "child" is excited for good reason. The way to connect with the child, is to prevent them from running into the street, AND, joining in their excitement. Then, when safe, by showing instead of telling, guide the child to the other side of the street, and let them pet the puppy.
That is how you show respect for the child's mind and your legitimate concern for their safety, and that is also how you earn their trust and get them to want to listen when there is no time for explanations. A rule of thumb to tell a child from and adult is whether they have learned how to postpone gratification until appropriate. If gratification is completely outlawed, then they don't ever learn how to self-control these legitimate urges.
I know there are few examples of this more appropriate solution, as the majority of us have been raised by the first two examples of parent, but I saw a mother do this on a bus one day with her little boy (different circumstances, but equivalent mutual respect), and I almost cried in public.
Stay focused,
<Φ>aj
Now if adult-children want to play in traffic, who am I to prevent Darwin his due?
-
Ayn Rand's fiction is full of little "golden nuggets": points made almost in passing, that "protrude" from the flow of the narrative like a little golden nugget placed there for the perceptive reader. It invites the perceptive reader to ask: "what's that?" Other writers do this too. There might even be a technical name for it (if there is, I'll change the title of the thread).
Excerpts from:
A. E. van Vogt - A Profile By Charles Platt Originally published in "The Dream Makers" in 1980.
[Alfred Elton van Vogt (April 26, 1912 – January 26, 2000) was a Canadian-born science fiction author who was one of the most prolific and complex writers of the mid-twentieth century "Golden Age" of the genre. -from wiki]
"A man called John W. Gallishaw wrote a book called "The Only Two Ways to Write a Short Story". Van Vogt adopted this system, and has always used it, making him one of the few successful professional authors to have built his career on a popular "how-to" guide. He also learned to write in what Gallishaw called "fictional sentences":
"In science fiction you have to have a little bit of a `hang-up' in each sentence. Let's suppose, for example: The hero looks up toward the door." Van Vogt gestures toward the sunlit screen door of his living room, leading out onto the veranda. "He hears a sound over there. And something comes in. It looks like a man wearing a cloak. You don't quite know what's going on. Then, you realize this is not a human being. This creature or this being, whoever it is, has a sort of manlike shape. And this creature reaches into what now looks like a fold of its skin. It draws out a gleaming metal object. It points it at you. Is this a weapon? It looks like a weapon, but you don't know that for sure. It's a "hang-up", you see. The author furnishes the information, but each sentence in itself has a little "hang-up" in it."
Vogt's fictional sentences seem to be missing something or implying something that the mundane reader would overlook, but the perceptive reader would follow to a new understanding.
Softwarenerd, this may be the term you were seeking. I also remember a term called the "narrative hook", but cannot remember the context, or whether it is applicable to your example.
<Φ>aj
btw, I tend to talk this way, and find it can be used as a poor man's IQ test.
-
It is precisely because of the "baggage" of the dollar sign that I am fine with it. For those put off by it-- so be it since they have given into philosophical nonsense.
Thoughts?
The core of the objectivist philosophical system is not capitalism, which a dollar sign represents in popular culture.
The core of objectivism is rational ideas objectively derived, and they alone form the basis for the entire objectivist philosophical system.
The phi symbol "Φ" clearly and uncontroversially communcates "a philosophy", as it has done throughout history, and >can< be used to symbolize "an objectivist philosophy" if used by enough people as such. My variation is to add arrows "< >" to denote that an objective philosophy is the root of all its dependent branches and implications, such as capitalism, rational ethics & epistemology, heroic aesthetics, etc. (also, the arrows remove the implication that the lone Φ character may have just been a typo) This symbol <Φ> has the added advantage that it can be used with common computer type fonts, which can help spread its usage (assuming you can send unicode).
As I outlined in the preceeding discussions, the "Φ" can graphically symbolize the "I" of the individual's independent mind as the only tool to grasp the world around them, as symbolized by the "O" behind it. Also, the "I" could be seen as the joining of the two half truths of rationalism and subjectivism into the whole of objectivism.
For these reasons, I am and will be promoting the use of the <Φ> as the objectivst meme symbol. If you want to support this effort, please include this symbol in your taglines. I have started to use it in my signature for business emails, and will see if I can incorporate it into other business communications as well.
Stay Focused,
<Φ>aj
-
Space is measurable attributes. Attributes are not separable from entities. Therefore space is an entity.
Thank you Grames for a succinct and comprehensive description of space that finally includes e-m fields, as the overwhelming observational evidence of the past 50 years demands. I have been struggling with theories of the electric universe/ plasma cosmology crowd, and your description brings me that much closer to an integrated understanding of the topic.
You might be interested in one of the resource sites on electric universe theory:
Thunderbolts at www.thunderbolts.info
Stay Focused,
<Φ>aj
-
Two other words.
Natural selection...
Two more words,
Peter Principle
<Φ>aj
-
Obama would never shut down the Internet. Most of the world's traffic flows through the US. Obama cares too much about kissing Europe's behind to piss them off like that. This would probably be used for silencing political opponents by shutting down anti-Obama websites.
Um, gee folks, that'd be us.
Or to quote an old song: "The safety you have demanded is now mandatory. Shut up! Be happy!"
<Φ>aj
-
Actually, the response to the X-Prize competition showed that private companies and individuals can at least make a start on space exploration. Any of the following could have sufficient motivation and money to reach the Moon:
Large hotel, resort, or travel companies
Mining companies
A very large group of people who want to create Galt's Gulch
The Myth of the Robber Baron should be retitled Entrepreneurs Made America!
That book tells the story of the Fulton Steamships that ferried people up and down previously inaccessible rivers for free, only charging for food, because they were run so efficiently. Of the government gangsters who tried to shut them down in every town, and in spite of fines, still kept running.
Of the Pacific Northwest railroad that ran more efficiently than every other government subsidized railway, in spite of competitors attacks, sabotage, murder, government corruption and obstruction.
Of the Standard Oil company who created 300 new medicines as a mere spinoff of its taking control of a fractured inefficient oil industry by making every step in the process reliable and cheaper than ever before, and yes, they lowered the price of a barrel of oil which was the equivalent of cutting your hydro bill in half.
Of the Carnegies who put libraries in almost every town in America, open to everyone for free, and not supported by extortion...I mean taxes. (at least when they were started)
I read the book many years ago, and can't remember more examples...
To quote Burt Rutan, the pilot who flew around the world on one tank of gas:
See what free men can do.
<Φ>aj
-
But if one chooses not to focus, then they must be focusing, since to choose presupposes focus.
Truck. What truck! SPLAT!
<Φ>aj
-
I think you might be surprised how much "pure" competitive mind games help in real-life situations. I am most familiar with chess, so I'll take that as an example:
Your example of high level chess competition is not what I imagine when I think of mind/brain exercises. I was thinking more of Niggle, which is Scrabble for the Palm. (an evil game I tell you...it cheats)
While neither a game nor an exercise, performing comprehensive and accurate patent searches requires a similar skill set, including the ablility to stay focused while employing the crow epistemology to clump data.
<Φ>aj
-
A craving for a token is not inherently intrinsicist. Exchanging wedding rings, getting a tattoo, and the giving of gifts in general are material demonstrations of regard.
I started off scoffing at the idea of a symbol, but find I am arguing myself into accepting it.
So I've started using the phi symbol to represent objectivism, bracketed by arrows to represent a meme.
It seems to have the right balance, and to look like a distinct symbol now, instead of a lone phi character.
I'd wear a tie-pin with this symbol.
<Φ>aj
Sci-fi/fantasy Reading Recommendations
in Fiction
Posted · Edited by aristotlejones
James P. Hogan, the first scifi author who I've met who actually understood the principles of objectivism, and who applies them to his novels and characterizations. He weaves hard and radical scientific questions, with moral problems that require objective thinking to resolve. For example a ship is sent to another planet with the embryos of humans who are raised by robots who are logical and consistent and encyclopedic. When the parents swing by later to claim "their" planet, the rationally raised offspring have much different ideas.
Harry Harrison for his Stainless Steel Rat series: when in a ferroconcrete cage, only a stainless steel rat escapes. These books are absolutely hillarious and heroic and whimsical and thoughtful.
<Ф>aj