Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

dreadrocksean

Regulars
  • Content Count

    35
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

dreadrocksean last won the day on February 22 2019

dreadrocksean had the most liked content!

About dreadrocksean

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted

Recent Profile Visitors

1923 profile views
  1. That's not the topic though. The Trolley problem has, at its core, the fact that your action makes a difference - "minimize the casualties". "No matter what I do" - is incorrect.
  2. That's awesome. I love how some don't get the 'problem' of the trolley situation is OTHER people.
  3. It's not silly when many of the decisions we vote for are based upon studies such as this.
  4. You assume that the society is significantly more than a million. You need to get your vision out of the Murica box for a min. So yes I can calculate in a split second what would happen to my culture should I allow 1 Million of us to be killed. No they're not just numbers as those other ones do not exist. Good on your last point. But then he'd just despise me.
  5. Hahaha. I'm saying that at some point, which I arbitrarily measured at 1 Mil, a particular society's value rivals that of my offspring, whom I'm ironically raising to be a productive member of. Also, how would he feel, after he's grown up, when he finds out that 90% of his heritage and culture was sacrificed for him?
  6. Those are irrelevant. All we require is the decision AS IF it were real. It was well thought out and it worked. Most did not switch the tracks and they claim to in all surveys.
  7. This is a very good reply. To apply this to in first person, in that situation, I would know the difference between causation and choice. The first choice is - "Do I get involved or not?" Not - "Who should die?" After I correctly absolve myself from blame (should I choose not to get involved, I then embark on deciding the first choice. Here is where self interest enters the equation. If it were turned around and the train was naturally heading for 1 person, with 5 on the other track, but that 1 person was my child, I would get involved and I would switch. But not so fast. Is ther
  8. You action caused the death of an innocent person. Regardless of the reason. You intent was also to kill the innocent, so you cannot claim ignorance or accident.
  9. I agree with A is A. Though a child does not legally own anything, ownership is the key to western civilization and a core of individual rights - property rights. This should be paramount as a concept to instill in our young from as early on as possible. The sharing instinct does not kick in until the ownership one has. One cannot share what one does not own. The closer we adhere to the Trader Principle in our relationships, the closer we come to World Peace. One cannot trade what one does not own. Keeping a toy just because, losing friends in the process, is just plain stup
  10. I think that you are mistaken. First of all, the 'conspiracy theory' is not rooted in the '50's but in 1910, 3 yrs before the Federal Reserve came into being. As long as our currency is controlled by the feds, the feds can control inflation (theft), by being the first in line to trade their money-out-of-thin-air at the current value, pre-circulation. The rest of us get that money after the circulation has devalued it (hence theft). If we all accepted shoes as currency, they would have no power over us via inflation. But we do not. In comes BitCoin. By widely accepting this medium o
  11. I know that this is 7 years old but I don't like that. Dragon Lady took your questions seriously and engaged her mind fully in her reply to you. To belittle her or imply that she is in error by making a mountain out of a molehill, is quite unfair to her. Suppose you held this thread very important and her replies were flippant, would that have been acceptable to you?
  12. Thank you for your thoughtful reply on this topic. In the end, you do differ in opinion to what she generally dismissed. This encourages me to believe that I am engaging in a rational discussion not plagued with Randian dogma - though I will state here than one is well advised to disagree with her with extreme caution. With regard to the 'physically impossible', that was my interpretation and I do not view it differently as a reference to her quote. The only proof she has for any artist's aiming to "disintegrate man's consciousness" is the art itself. That was her own personal deduction
  13. I am a full blown Objectivist. I am not a Randian. When I struggle with the logic of an Objectivist opinion, I do not accept it. I have left O groups who could not reasonably explain certain ideas and who chastised me because of my reluctance to accept those ideas purely based on Rand's opinion. Before I launch into my Aesthetics post, I would like to preface it with one of my past Objectivist arguments. The issue of Competing Governments. With the non initiation of force principle entrenched in my morality, it seemed ridiculously contradictory to deem moral, aiming a gun at me if I sh
  14. Beautiful. Yes, Comedy, sums it up. Why didn't I think of that? Good job. However, do realize that I also refer to the everyday acts of comedy, in the office, at school, in a bar etc. and not necessarily the more official forms of it. So... 1/ Is it an artform? 2/ How does it work? 3/ Why does work? 4/ Is it necessary to man? (redundant to #1 but here for clarity)
  15. There was an experiment done where 99 caucasian faces were digitally 'averaged', by features, on a computer algorithm and the 'averaged' face was included with the 99 making it 100. This was repeated for each sex. The 200 faces were shown to randomly chosen individuals and a rating system was devised based upon each individuals preferences. I cannot remember but I believe that, for simplicity, the control groups were confined to the caucasian race. An overwhelming majority picked the 'average' face of each sex. This supports the theory that man unconsciously rejects abnormalities sugges
×
×
  • Create New...