Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Sir Andrew

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sir Andrew

  1. Sir Andrew


    In my mind, It works like this: If the fetus is dependent on the mother, it is still a potential. If it is at the stage of viability, that is, it can survive without the mother, just deliver the baby and put it through a private adoption service. I'm not saying it should be outlawed, but I don't much see the point in half-way delivering a baby just to abort it, especially when you're gonna pull it out anyway. Just pull it out, snip the cord, and bam, you're done.
  2. It's an interesting idea, but what makes him think that a) we can assimilate 5 million immigrants quickly, and b ) that immigrants can afford a house with no credit?
  3. Question: Some creationist I argued with (who apparently was using google to argue for the existence of God, since he first said he couldn't prove anything, then ten minutes later, he comes back with proofs) said something about how the energy needed for work is depleting. So therefore, since it had to come from somewhere, it came from god. Yet as far as I know, energy is never created or destroyed, it is merely converted to other forms. What's the rebuttal to this? Then again, he claims that god can exist outside of time and existence in the universe, so I don't know if there's even really a point in trying to rebut that irrationality.
  4. If I recall, Ayn Rand never held suicide itself to be immoral if the person doing it desired it.
  5. Do it off school property before school?
  6. This man needs to learn how to use commas and semicolons.
  7. Any Stargate or Star Trek series, Sanctuary, South Park. Also a big fan of Fox News' Red Eye.
  8. Wow, that's a first I always thought she was rather strict in her style.
  9. Also, that God "gave us the choice" in the Garden of Eden (as I've heard it argued), and when we didn't do what he wanted, he got into a hissy fit. Which brings me to another point, about the Tree of Knowledge. In Genesis 1:30, God says to man "I give every green plant for food.", but then in Genesis 2:16-17 he says "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil". C'mon God, get it together now.
  10. Am I the only one who saw this and had "More teens looking at porn" come to mind?
  11. Nah, it went nowhere real fast. I didn't think it would be worth the time either.
  12. I'm still waiting for sunglasses with a LED screen built into them. I want some privacy while I'm walking in public.
  13. That's certainly true. Catch phrases aren't designed to get people to think, but just to stick in someone's mind. The problem with activist organizations that the the source of all the thinking (and the slogans on the picket signs and the petitions) is from the activist organization itself, so volunteers aren't thinking. They're merely disseminating what the higher-ups have said. I'm thinking more of just presentation. Like the way there's the Atlas Shrugged site that gives an intro to the philosophy of Objectivism, while also being helpful to students reading the book. I'm not saying we have to rework the philosophy or make it "hip" or "cool", because part of what makes Ayn Rand so interesting is she's just as relevant today as she was 30 years ago.
  14. Well, you don't have to do it every time. But your argument shouldn't rest on the authority of a dictionary, it should rest on the authority of reason and logic.
  15. But are they entitled to our rights when they take up arms against those very rights?
  16. That's true, but then you run the risk of losing the debate by pinning your entire argument on whether or not your opponent will accept the authority of the dictionary. It's far more rewarding to get into an argument of semantics before you even start debating actual issues, because your opponent has to defend and (hopefully) reconsider their own definitions, and thus the concepts behind the words of their argument. If you can get them to concede that your definitions are correct, you can then proceed to work through the issues you're debating and move forward with confidence.
  17. Yes, but the philosophies behind those organizations (assuming there even are any) don't make people inclined to think.
  18. I played BioShock before I became an Objectivist, and it's the best game I've ever played. Oh, and I thought the voiceover work on the game was phenomenal. I was surprised to hear that Armin Shimmerman did the voice for Andrew Ryan. If they make a BioShock movie, I don't know how I can see it with anyone else's voice playing Ryan.
  19. You shouldn't need a dictionary to back you up, though. (If you cite it, it does make you look uncertain of your ideas, that you have to use a dictionary as proof.) Just logically and rationally define what a word means and what it doesn't mean. Like in your altruism vs. charity example. You can simply say "While charity is simply giving something away, altruism is the belief that men should sacrifice themselves for the benefit of other men.", and then explain how charity isn't always a sacrifice (like dropping some spare change in a collection bucket or whatever.)
  • Create New...