cliveandrews

Your observations are spot on, and this is the source of the ideological corruption that exists in medicine today. Most of medical training consists of tedious memorization rather than problem solving, critical thinking, or conceptualization of any kind. As in other academic fields, the philosophical component has been totally lost. I recently read "Philosophy: Who Needs It" for the first time and was shocked to see how accurate some of Rand's insights were, even though she knew nothing about medicine and wrote without any intention of predicting anything. She simply soliloquied that irrationalism in medicine might take the form of "treating the hospital instead of the patient" and studying disease without reference to what consitutes a state of actual health, and those two things are exactly what have happend in medicine. This is why it's now considered "normal" for people to be on a handful of prescription drugs by the time they reach their 20s, and why the medical community's perception of what constitutes "normal" weight has changed as the population has gotten fatter. Acadmic medicine is as prolifically irrational as contemporary philosophy, economics, political science, etc. and and the world's health is going to shit while the doctors sit there inventing new diseases like "ADHD" and giving statins and blood pressure meds to patients in the name of "preventative" care, and the nation goes bankrupt spending trillions to treat infirmities that could be totally avoided or cured by nothing more than simple diet and exercise. I spend a lot of time on the studentdoctor.net forums, which is the world's premier site for people pursuing the medical profesion. It's utterly shocking to read the things that supposedly intelligent medical students, residents, established physicians, and educators have to say, and then to realize that these are the people who will be responsible for healthcare in the future. Many of them simply don't know how to THINK, and should be mowing lawns and digging ditches for a living instead. Just to let you know what you're in for.

Somebody needs to put that fat fuck out of his misery, soon. There's gotta be someone in the Objectivist community who can make films. What would be the cinematic couterattack to movies like "sicko?" How would you establish the corret philosophical take in a way that would be entertaining and believable?

nonjudgment, failure to exercise/pronounce judgment sorry if those are already taken, i'm not reading through the whole thread

The moral foundations. All other schools focus on practical considerations.

Obviously, Objectivism doesn't deal with the technical aspects of economics, but given the importance of the field's ideological component, and the fact that the proper ideological foundations aren't found in any other school of economics (that I know of), could Objectivism be considered a school of economic thought in itself?

That post is regrettable.

*** Mod's note: Merged with a similar thread. sn *** I can't find the exact quote but something very siminal to this is attributed to Ayn Rand. She said it during a television interview which can be seen on YouTube. I'm sure some of you are familiar with it. Doesn't this statement contradict the primacy of existence? She's basically saying that the world is in her mind and that, when her mind goes out of existence, so does the world. Is this a contradiction, or do I misunderstand her intention?

I have a very similar story about living with a bad family through my early twenties while training for my sport (running). My campaign was unsuccessful, but in retrospect I clearly understand exactly WHY it was unsuccessful, and I will tell you what I would tell my younger self: #1: GET OUT OF YOUR PARENTS' HOUSE. They are destroying themselves and are brining you down with them. As an grown adult man, which any 22 year old worth his weight in shit ought to be, you should not be dependent on a family whom you don't respect. You are infantilizing and emasculating yourself by continuing to live like a child under their roof and this is a major source of your problems. Even if you live and breathe MMA, your independence and ability to stand on your own two feet should come first. Personal stability is a prerequisite for quality athletic training. You can still pusue your training while you work to support yourself. There are 16 waking hours in a day and you only spend eight of them at work. Regarding your ambitions to be a champion, I have no idea what your talent level is, but the reality is that you will NEVER go pro unless you were BORN with the GENETICS to be an elite athlete. There are exceptions, but most people in almost any sport will know by 22 whether they have the ability to go pro. You have to be truly honest with yourself. Again, I have no idea what your ability level is, but I promise that you will never profit from decieving yourself about your talent or having a naive attitude toward the issue of genetics. No type nor amount of training will ever allow you to defeat an opponent who is drastically physically superior. That's not complacency or defeatism, it's the reality of life on earth. Even if you don't go pro, you can still make your passion into your profession. You can become an instructor and start your own training facility, be an owner/coach/entrepreneur and make a great life for yourself doing what you love. Set a goal to create the best MMA gym in the world or even a chain of facilities. Set a goal to coach professionals. MMA is going to be huge in the future and I think you can find some way to be a figure in the world of the sport and profit handsomely from it. But, yeah, get OUT of your parents' house. The entanglement with your family will destroy your athletic career before is starts.

I think it starts with having something to sell. Everybody wants to start a business, but few people can create anything worth paying for. You start with the intention to create something rather than the intention to be an entrepreneur. Otherwise you just get an MBA and work for an established company.

I don't have the source, but in a recent print interview, when asked which party he would run with, he stated that he's more philosophically aligned with the republicans, "minus the religious elements which I'm not on board with" or somethng very close to that. He is a Jew anyway so no need to worry about Christianity.

I've wondered if he isn't a closet Objectivist, or at least an Objectivist sympathizer. Apart from his affiliation with Ron Paul there's nothing about him that's incompatible with Objectivism.

I donated $150. Do Objectivists have a problem with him running as a Republican?

I have the opposite view. I think intelligence is biologial, basically genetic, and only mimimally amendable. What makes the human brain superior to the brains of other animals... genetics. Likewise, the differences between individuals within a species are attributable to genetics.

More good stuff. My entire sentence was 1 year of jail suspended, 2 years probation, a $1100 fine, and three months of drug/alcohol treatment. When I was in court the other day, there was an attractive 18 year old girl on the docket ahead of me. She was driving drunk with a blood alcohol level of 0.17 (250% of mine), hit somebody, ran, and the cops found alcohol and marijuana in her car. She recieved a sentence was 90 days suspended, no probation, no fine, and a DUI victim's panel. nice to see the justice system in america working so well...

I got a DUI in June of 2008. My blood alcohol level was under the limit (0.071), but I failed the field sobriety test. The truth is that I have never had anythign even approaching a drinking problem; I am, in fact, a non-drinker and always have been. I was driving home from my friend's wedding reception where I had a few beers because it was a special occasion. Because I rarely drink, I don't have a tolerance for alcohol, and even the small amount consumed was enough to impair my judgment. So I got arrested. I take it very seriously and I haven't had a drink since. In the wake of my arrest I was ordered to complete a drug and alcohol assessment for the court. I told them that it was an isolated incident and that I don't have a drinking problem, but they diagnosed me with "alcohol abuse" and recommended three months of treatment. I got a second assessment from a different agency, which provided a diagnosis of "no significant problem" and did not recommend treatment. But the court didn't accept the second assessment, and now I'm forced to comply with the first agency's recommendations under the threat of imprisonment. I had an intake appointment with the treatment agency the other day and received an information packet about the treatment program. It's the most childish and patronizing bullshit imaginable. It's like a fucking kindergaten class for alcoholics. But what's really infuriating is that all of the activities and assignments assume the existence of an addiction. For example, I have to make a retarded fucking collage that represents aspects of my behavior while practicing my "addiciton." For another, I have to write an essay about how my "addiction" has damaged my work performance and family relationships. It continues along the same lines for twelve weeks of sheer mindlessness. The requirements are irritating to the degree that I literally feel incapable of participating in the program. I simply refuse to admit to an addiction that I don't have. I almost feel like a coward chickenshit for actually paying these utterly talentless parasites ($1200) instead of telling them to fuck off and accepting a jail sentence instead. How should I handle the situation? If I refuse to admit to having an addiction, I'm afraid they will tell the court that my "progress" isn't satisfactory and force me to undergo even more mental health extortion. Should I just bite my tounge, grit my teeth and say things that aren't true just to get through the program? Try to find some middle ground? Spit in the counselor's face? (highly tempting)

Treat your volunteer experience as a selfish means of gaining exposure to the medical profession. Discuss what you learned and how it reinforces your desire to pursue a medical career. Make it all about yourself and your own ideas. No need to babble about serving others- and trust me, a lot of applicants will be doing exactly that. You can set yourself apart by taking a selfish angle. Just don't actually say the word 'selfish' or get needlessly ideological on them and you should be fine.

I like his stuff but don't see how it's so head and shoulders above anything else that's ever been done that he's got the highest selling album of all time. A lot of his content is really mindless and strange, although I realize that's not what it's about. Is it a sympton of cultural depravity that he would become as popular as he has?

I don't think there's any way to prevent a government from becoming corrupt except for a philosophically grounded citzenship to keep it in check.

8 year olds can post on the internet? That's crazy to me.

Would it be moral to steal property from a publically funded institution, such as a public school, in the name of recompensation? For example, suppose I really need a computer, and can't buy one due to being raped by taxes. Would it be moral to steal one from a local college.?

As a form of voluntary taxation, suppose the government charged $500 annually for citizenship. Citizenship would be voluntary, but non-citizens aren't eligible for police and judicial protection. This would be the only form of taxation. Would this be a good mechanism to pay for essential government functions?

My dog is the only member of my family I love.

If you're a hyperliberal pro-bureaucracy asshole and a pro-tax ideologue like one particular economics professor I'm thinking of an you intend to spread your ideas to the masses with the end goal of plundering my bank account and forcing me into some shitty governmnt run healthcare cesspool, doesn't that give me the right to use force against you in my defense? In any case, the more involved I get in political debate, the more I realize that there is simply no getting though to most people- at best they will dismiss me as a conservative extremist or Ayn Rand cultist- and that a much more practical solution would be to just hoist the black flag and start slitting throats, as someone once said... it would certainly be a lot more satisfying.

So it would not have been moral to kill Kant, even though his ideas would kill millions of others?

Suppose that a person is a dangerous ideologue, an outright intellectual terrorist, and has the ability and ambition to spread his philosophy on a large scale. Is it moral to kill such a person?