Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

whYNOT

Regulars
  • Posts

    3715
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    113

Everything posted by whYNOT

  1. No comment https://www.jns.org/biden-ends-the-us-israel-alliance-at-a-fortuitous-moment/
  2. Yup, the final section where Sam reverts to his basic Leftist-altruist convictions is not his best. Limited to Israel and antisemitic protests in "solidarity" with Jihadists, he's knowledgeable, very good and right, and although an atheist, a long-time moral/intellectual backer of Israel, as I am. No one speaker, anyone, anywhere on the net, has it all correct. Take away the best leave the rest.
  3. Just caught sight of this. Reminds us of the virtue of justice. To think in principles. Over and above, one (not) being Jewish or Muslim which is immaterial, are the moral evaluations one needs to make about the collectivism/tribalism which has consistently and historically turned on only one, single "collective", whenever (Western) societies have suffered discord and fractures. And it is hardly the Muslims. Simply: "blame the Jews". For anything. To the point of violence. They are the smallest and most passivist group so it's safe for the racist bullies, now mostly on the hard Left, to do so. Zionism and its validity. No one can look at the modern landscape and its wholesale and far-reaching mass vilification of all Jews in once safe countries today, and not be aware of the fact that there will always be revivals of such racist feelings. Worse and greater now than '30's Europe and Germany, because of the internet. . So much so, that many Jews are considering leaving those previous havens and going - of all insecure places - to Israel. (If we can't make it there, we can't make it anywhere) The retrospective validation for Zionism again today is on every second headline. If there were not already a "safe" place in the world, it could well be necessary now to make one. Grames, you are wrong: overall it was not "Jewish supremacism" to mark for Israel's creation, it was imposed Jewish inferiority-by-race. I use your argument: if Zionism was and is valid (self-interested!) to found a safe place for world Jewry, agnostic, secular or practicing, then everything which is a consequence of Zionism is valid.
  4. "Is" comes first, and irreducible. The sequence: metaphysics and epistemology, then the ethics logically following (by necessity), was the unique feat AR performed in her essay. Often - the metaphysics, the general nature of life and specifically man's life and nature, gets left behind or taken for granted. I believe the full justification of rational egoism is weakened. Tad, I thank you for your response. But could you quote my post to alert me? In this forum, by some mutual consent or orders from high, it seems I have been excluded ("canceled"?) from debate.
  5. The objective Sam Harris. Betters any analysis and moral evaluation I've heard elsewhere.
  6. The 'figures' match, Jerusalem and Washington agree. Caution. From RT: "Israel’s airstrikes and ground offensive in Gaza have left more Palestinian civilians dead than Hamas fighters, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has acknowledged. During his appearance on the CBS TV news program Face the Nation on Sunday, Blinken was asked if Washington agreed with the recent claim by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the attacks on Gaza have so far resulted in the death of 14,000 “terrorists” and 16,000 civilians. "Yes, we do,” the Secretary of State replied. “Israel has processes, procedures, rules and regulations to try to minimize civilian harm,” but they “have not been applied consistently and effectively. There’s a gap between the stated intent and some of the results we've seen,” he explained. Blinken stressed that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) are fighting “an enemy that hides in civilian infrastructure, hides behind civilians,” which makes it problematic to determine what actually happened in each of the individual incidents..." -- At almost 1 : 1 the IDF is setting records for lowest casualty ratio in urban warfare. Leave alone, an enemy which exposes its citizen-martyrs. The "genocide" criers should be shamed, but won't be. Plainly on their part, it was always about saving Hamas terrorists' lives and exploiting civilian deaths.
  7. If it's in man's nature, does it not exist 'inside' of nature? "Is" supplies the "ought". To turn against our nature, there's "the evil".
  8. The realization that the life of a common cockroach is also "an end in itself", may be disconcerting at first. Rand's "organism" relates to all living things - "man", included. "On the *physical* level, the functions of all living organisms, from the simplest to the most complex...- are actions generated by the organism itself and directed to a single goal: the maintenance of the organism's life"
  9. When you take good and evil to stand for life and death, for all organisms/animals. "An organism's life is its ~standard of value~; that which furthers its life is the *good*, that which threatens it is the *evil*." ... "It is only an ultimate goal, an ~end in itself~, that makes the existence of values possible. Metaphysically *life* is the only phenomenon that is an end in itself; a value gained and kept by a constant process of action..." p17 --- A critical footnote to allay concerns that these organisms, animals, etc, evidently do NOT have consciousness of life/death, good/evil, values, morality, goal-directed purpose, and so on (apart from sensations, pain/pleasure, for many forms) - on p16: AR: "When applied to physical phenomena, such as the automatic functions of an organism, the term “goal-directed” is not to be taken to mean “purposive” (a concept applicable only to the actions of a consciousness) and is not to imply the existence of any teleological principle operating in insentient nature. I use the term “goal-directed,” in this context, to designate the fact that the automatic functions of living organisms are actions whose nature is such that they result in the preservation of an organism’s life". “The Objectivist Ethics,” The Virtue of Selfishness, 16
  10. Most certainly underscoring "man". VoS: “That which is required for the survival of man qua man” is an abstract principle that applies to every individual man. The task of applying this principle to a concrete, specific purpose—the purpose of living a life proper to a rational being—belongs to every individual man, and the life he has to live is his own". "Man must choose his actions, values and goals by the standard of that which is proper to man—in order to achieve, maintain, fulfill and enjoy that ultimate value, that end in itself, which is his own life". AR All life, down to every living organism, is "an end in itself": Self-generating, self-directing. When it comes to "value", inseparable from "life", each organism->animal's own physical life(/death) is its own "standard" of value, the good(/evil). By Rand, man has, I'd put it, an 'elevated' standard of value to achieve and sustain, one proper to man, beyond the reach of animal - etc.. etc. "Survival" qua man then, is on a greatly extended range, inclusive of his (biological) life, of course. I'd not fault anyone's uncertainty and confusion, there is a huge amount to unpack and flesh out above from Rand, "an abstract principle" leading back to each individual's life.
  11. Caring so deeply, that never does one hear outrage by them directed at Hamas for not laying down their weapons, not humanely releasing all hostages without equivocation - nor in fact, for starting proceedings in the first place by Hamas' de facto declaration of war on a far more powerful nation - so consequently bringing the deaths to an end earlier. Oh yes, they care.
  12. Master *methodology* as distinct from "philosophical master-framework". WHAT is discovered by the sciences will come from the domain of science, to be assimilated without contradiction into a body of knowledge, HOW it is discovered will be by objective method.
  13. Fewer dead civilians is great news for all non-malevolent actors, right? Too, the ICC will revise its estimate of potential 'genocide', foreign governments will relax sanctions on Israel, the stinking SA government issue a formal apology for its unjust charge and the screaming pro-Palestinians who care deeply for Gazan lives, will be happier, will quieten down, and disband. Right? Don't mind me. Dreaming again.
  14. "This comes after months of accusations [by] leading statisticians that the numbers produced by the Gazan authorities cannot possibly be accurate". "Washington Institute for Near East Policy released a report in January that showed major discrepancies in the fatality reports. They concluded such discrepancies were most likely caused by manipulation. Professor Abraham Wyner also told Tablet Magazine that the rate of deaths was very unnatural and climbed far too regularly". Too late to overturn "genocide by Israel" assertions in the public consciousness.
  15. Surprise! Not much. (The only surprise it was the UN to bring this up) Keep in mind, out of the "revised" total, +\-15,000 were Hamas combatants. https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-800772
  16. Your first thoughts are right, I'm sure; I have a problem with the last sentence. Validation from concretes to principles and reducing those concept/principles back to concretes, may ~seem~ like "[Rand] evaluating them based on how they aligned with her principles". Then one may conclude Rand was a rationalist. But one is seeing one half of the process. AFTER those principles have been solidly grounded, tried and true, can one (/Rand) evaluate any matters according to appropriate principles.
  17. J_G, I am pretty sure David Kelley has not and would not suggest "revising of axioms and corollaries", nor the "theory of causality". His lectures as I recall, implicitly and explicitly, always contained references to those. You said it, "that will no longer be Objectivism", and he knows this better than anyone. The question is, what new knowledge in the universe (and of man's nature) could challenge let alone, overturn, the philosophy? No, existence-reality is the eternal all-encompassing: come what may. And our minds retain efficacy, from long ago into any future. At another "level", sure I think lesser adjustments - newfound derivatives - of O'ism can and should be added by thinkers and scholars. Where Kelly's criticism had it right in my opinion, was the tendency he viewed to intrinsicism within "Objectivists" (not O'ism, per se). The initial "Revealed knowledge" (as taken from even and especially, Rand--particularly from her powerful romantic fiction) needs to be reexamined - objectively - re-evaluated and gradually replaced by one's thinking, experience, striving and efforts, the essence unchanged, until the philosophy becomes no longer Rand's, but one's own. The 'fault' was not with Rand but with one's own reception of her works. Since the effects of revealed knowledge as one sees at large in the history of general humankind and personally from many individuals, HAS to bring about eventual disillusionment and disappointment when matters of living don't turn out as ideally anticipated, founded upon that "knowledge" and value system. And: The flip-side of intrinsicism necessarily turns to subjectivism/skepticism--as Rand brilliantly saw. In a more tangible way, "life gets in the way", as is said, and one's early (and fine) "enthusiasm" turns to the cynical. Both intrinsicism and skepticism to be strenuously avoided. All the while not letting go of "the passionate search for passionless truth". I remember that Kelly's stress was on one becoming "the complete philosopher" (my words and takeout) - by way, he gives every indication to this day, OF Objectivism.
  18. I fail to see why "implications" are not recognized around here. The slogan ~implies~ murderous intent. A free Palestine implies an UN-free Israel.
  19. Not often I quote Hillary... but, yeah, she's right, Palestine could have maybe turned out well if Arafat implemented that 96% sovereignty deal in the West Bank which Israel offered. 96% was an excellent offer. Israel always looked for peace. The PA/PLO, as "rejectionist" as ever. Apparently they wanted all of Israel then, and they want it all now. Free Palestine!! Right. They wish for the entire territory for "Free". Hillary Clinton slams anti-Israel protests on college campuses, says students have been fed propaganda By Jacob Magid Former US secretary of state Hillary Clinton tears into the pro-Palestinian protest movement that has swept across American colleges, calling them ignorant and lamenting that they’re being misinformed by propaganda on social media and in the classroom. “I have had many conversations with a lot of young people over the last many months. They don’t know very much at all about the history of the Middle East or frankly about history in many areas of the world, including in our own country,” Clinton tells MSNBC’s Morning Joe. “With respect to the Middle East, they don’t know that under the bringing together of the Israelis and the Palestinians by my husband — then-Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, the then-head of the Palestinian Liberation Organization Yasser Arafat — an offer was made to the Palestinians for a state on 96% of the existing territory occupied by the Palestinians with 4% of Israel to be given to reach 100% of the amount of territory that was hoped for.” “This offer was made and if Yasser Arafat had accepted it there would have been a Palestinian state now for about 24 years. It’s one of the great tragedies of history that he was unable to say, ‘yes,'” Clinton laments.
  20. I've noticed your soft opinions on the PA, whose Palestinians I'd inform you have been polled recently to be heavily in favor of Hamas' actions in October. Have you not heard of Abbas' "pay for slay" program? It is not new. Murder civilian Jews or soldiers/policemen and go to prison - or best, be killed while being arrested, and your family receives cash benefits on a sliding scale. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://emetonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Pay4Slay_Fact-Sheet-FINAL.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjCouzm3oGGAxUvRvEDHfo9CYMQFnoECBIQAQ&usg=AOvVaw24sCFxIU0yLh396ZYsTgz7
  21. Of course it is, don't allow them to be in any doubt. "Free Palestine" = "kill Israelis" (Or "Zionists" as such people try to hide behind.) They are either: a. useful idiots or b. complicit in an intended mass murder. And no other option. I am pleased to see you get to the core, however.
  22. From a post I wrote at OL. "Hamas' political arm knows its audience. Capture hostages, commit murderous attacks. The threefold plan: 1. they know the Israelis are guaranteed to come in hard to rescue hostages. Good. The trap is set. 2. the hostages serve as protective shields 3. hostages can be negotiated as leverage for a ceasefire. Objective achieved: Plenty of their own Gazan civilians die and the world turns on Israel and pulls support, and they buy time to reorganize, re-equip and to do it again. I've seen it all before. I could not read much of Mr Unz's sophistry and inversions. Don't misunderstand these folk, they delight in seeing Israelis killed, the country brought low, and even eradicated as Hamas promises".
  23. This quoted sentence confuses, is incomplete and strays into the Objectivist ethics, of objective good and evil: "Life" is the metaphysical given, not a standard. ["Obectivist ethics holds man's life as the standard of value..."] Just having a pulse is no "standard" for man. How would one objectively gauge one's own, and others', moral performance -- or, e.g. - what form of governance/society is to man's good, (or, topically, who holds the moral high ground in Israel's conflicts) - but for that standard to judge by, (proper) man's life?
  24. -- CAV Link to Original Seldom has been the "pro-Palestinian cause" voiced so blatantly. Having coupled to the Islamist/sharia/ethnic cleansing of Israel cause**, this is what the Gazan 'sympathizers' should pay heed to. Be careful what you wish for. They are being manipulated to pick upon the smallest "grouping", one least likely to violently react to targeted racism, the Jews in their midst. I am greatly disturbed for the West. There are Jews (secular, not all religious) I know of in Canada, Britain and the US(!) who are not seeing any future for themselves and their children there. **which may strike some as classic "Attila and the Witch Doctor", brute force and mysticism coupled in mutual dependency.
×
×
  • Create New...