Uriah
-
Posts
42 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Uriah
-
-
Maybe we can relive the topic?
This topic is for the members to share the music they are listening to, it supposed to be updated constantly.I'll be the first:
My best friend is traveling in India at the moment, this song makes me think about him and about journeys in general.
The youtube video is great.
-
I don't like the term "central purpose in life", it sounds like some outsider entity (God? State? Philosopher?) is asking for tags.
To learn everything I can about life.
Nice!
What do you mean by "Life"? Philosophy? Natural sciences?
-
It is understandable.
-
Was he better President than GWBush?
-
I am an Objectivist from Israel. It's nice to hear about you Nada, specially when I think about 2006. I graduated the same high school Yaron Brook did. By the way, there were few pupils from south Lebanon in my class.
Perheps you can write a blog in arabic? I can spread it among some arab acquaintances of mine.
Sandmonkey (Egypt) is not an objectivist as far as i know, but he writes very well.
Leonid: The New Liberal movement is not an Objectivist movement, though there are Objectivists among the supporters. Boaz Arad is one of the founders of the movement. Isn't it odd for Americans to hear about Objectivists supporting Liberal movement? here the semantics is different.
-
What do you mean by purpose? It sounds too schematic.
My main purpose in life is to be happy.
-
By the way, Clinton was very popular in Israel (unlike Obama). I don't know much about the political situation back than in America, but it is still weird for me to see Peikoff supporting the Democrats.
-
I like Barcelona too (the way they play the game), but as far as their non football related activities, Laporta is a raving nationalist (and I think a socialist too, because that's a great combination), and uses his position for propaganda. They of course have periodic elections to select a president (since the team is owned by the paying members, socios is the word I think), so that reflects nicely on what Catalunia is all about politically.
I do think there is something wrong with it if you buy into the Catalan identity crap, but not with liking the team overall. The cash-cows players certainly aren't Catalan, now are they? In fact I think that a lot of their success is attributable to the fact that the other major Catalan club refused to hire any non-Catalan players for a long time, and fell behind in the quality of football they were playing.
I apologize for the late of my reply.
*I don't know the case of major Catalan clubs who refused to buy non-Catalan players, i do know Espaynol which related to the spanish crown and therefore the combination with the white colour - just like Real Madrid.
*There is definitely high number of Catalans in the team: Valdes; Puyol; Piqué; Xavi; Busquets; Bojan, all of them were raised in La Masia.
*"Los Blancos" (Real Madrid) use the method of elections just as well, is that what Castillia is all about?!
-
-
I think it's a good time to open a thread about the most popular sport in the world: We know all the teams who'll be playing in the world cup and their groups; we passed a boring group stage in the Champions' League and know how the round of 16 would look like; we passed a very interesting Super-Classico in Spain and there's the premier league christmas in front of us.
This is how it looks like:
2010 FIFA World Cup
Group A
South Africa
Mexico
Uruguay
France
Group B
Argentina
Nigeria
Korea Republic
Greece
Group C
England
United States
Algeria
Slovenia
Group D
Germany
Australia
Serbia
Ghana
Group E
Netherlands
Denmark
Japan
Cameroon
Group F
Italy
Paraguay
New Zealand
Slovakia
Group G
Brazil
Korea DPR
Côte d'Ivoire
Portugal
Group H
Spain
Switzerland
Honduras
Chile
UEFA Champions League
Stuttgart v Barcelona 23 Feb 17 Mar
Olympiacos v Bordeaux 23 Feb 17 Mar
Internazionale v Chelsea 24 Feb 16 Mar
Bayern Munich v Fiorentina 17 Feb 9 Mar
CSKA Moscow v Sevilla 24 Feb 16 Mar
Lyon v Real Madrid 16 Feb 10 Mar
Porto v Arsenal 17 Feb 9 Mar
Milan v Manchester United 16 Feb 10 Mar
La Liga (Spanish League)
League Table (week 15)
1 Barcelona 39
2 Real Madrid 37
3 Sevilla 30
4 Valencia 29
Premier League
League Table (week 18)
1 Chelsea 41
2 Manchester United 37
3 Arsenal* 35
4 Aston Villa 35
5 Tottenham Hotspur 33
*missing match
Premier League Christmas matches
Saturday
Birmingham City v Chelsea
Burnley v Bolton Wanderers
Fulham v Tottenham
Liverpool v Wolves
Manchester City v Stoke City
Sunderland v Everton
West Ham v Portsmouth
Wigan Athletic v Blackburn Rovers
Sunday
Arsenal v Aston Villa
Hull City v Manchester United
Monday
Blackburn Rovers v Sunderland
Chelsea v Fulham (Fulham's Bobby Zamora,)
Everton v Burnley
Stoke City v Birmingham City
Tottenham v West Ham
Wolves v Man City
Tuesday
Aston Villa v Liverpool
Bolton Wanderers v Hull
Wednesday
Manchester United v Wigan
Portsmouth v Arsenal)
The way things are going it seems promising for Chelsea, but without Essien and Anelka this is a wonderfull time for Man UTD and Arsenal to get something for Boxing Day!
I'll try to keep this thread alive, it would be nice if all the football fans around the forum will introduce themselves and the teams they support, I'm a Barca fan by the way.
Happy Christmas!
-
Open question for everyone:
I am a fan of FCBarcelona, a proud Catalan football team. It has a unique philosophy: "mes que un club" (more than just a club) and is proud of its way of building a community among the football club weather it would be the fans or the players.
I am not Catalan but I am happy when the club is winning and I am sad when the club is losing.
Does anyone see anything wrong with it?
Needless to say I don't.
-
Why two people's rational interests cannot conflict? I don't know this prinicple and i don't see how it relates to egoism.
-
I meant to write a message for two German musicians I met because I wanted to share my strong feelings and my deep appreciation for the fall of Berlin wall. I wanted to share my admiration for the German people that were uprising from collectivism and became a model of civilized country, both from a political and cultural aspect.
But than I thought that if I want to share my positive feelings which should make my friends proud of their country, and if I belief that authentic connection is the only type of connection I am willing to make among my friends – than I might make them feel shame of their previous history – the Nazism. Just the thought about it made me feel arrogant and hypocrite. Making someone feel unearned guilt makes me feel like a sadist.
I know how to solve this one philosophically and psychologically, but I want to hear another experiences and thoughts about the issue from an objectivist point of view.
-
I'd like to recommend on this work by the Irish economist Edmund Shanahan. you can download it directly from the link.
I have strong feelings about the Irish case. There should be no doubt that the first to be blame are the "Brits", but just as David said it's an old story and what looks like a big issue from an Irish perspective might seems almost trivial from a British perspective.
The term Irish-republicanism is so wide that there cannot be one answer for your question.
-
C'mon c'mon c'mon c'mon touch me baby
The Doors 1967 LA, Jim was sober enough to give a good gig.
My favorite not-19andsomthing American band.
-
Why would categorizing it under morality mean that applying "deserve" to describe an emotional reward or punishment is invalid?
it's not and i didn't try to claim differently.
But i would like to defend my suggestion by your examples, the categories are painted in orange:
- A criminal; Action: harming someone unjustly. [Action of] Punishment: Being put in jail. From whom: From every man in society, represented by the state.
Law
- A good parent; Action: All the actions over the years of taking care of his/her kids. [Action of] Reward: Children's love. From whom: Kids.
Morality
- A man of honor; Action: The actions according to one's honorable character, like telling the truth, trading honestly, keeping one's word etc'. [Action of] Reward: Respectful behavior from other people. From whom: Other people who know this guy.
Morality
- A costumer; Action: paying for a product according to an agreement with the seller. [Action of] Reward: 1 pound of potatoes the costumer has paid for. No more, no less. From whom: Seller.
Economy
- A man with a guilt trip due to an altruistic premise. Action: Judging oneself to be bad for not sacrificing a value. [Action of] reward: correcting one's feelings of guilt. From whom: Oneself.
Morality
- Two people catching a fish together. Action: catching a fish. [Action of] Reward: allowing the other person to enjoy the value of the fish (as a meal or as payment by selling it). From whom: Each of the two people.
Morality / Economy (depneds on the context)
- A worker. Action: doing one's job, providing the value that was agreed on by the contract with the employer. [Action of] Reward: Getting paid one's salary. Getting one's performance be recognized. From whom: Employer.
Economy
- A man best qualified for a job. Action: Going to a job interview, demonstrating his skills. [Action of] Reward: Getting the job. From whom: The interviewer/ interviewers/ company.
Culture
Reservations anyone?
- A criminal; Action: harming someone unjustly. [Action of] Punishment: Being put in jail. From whom: From every man in society, represented by the state.
-
First, I am rethinking my initial claim that deserving can only be from someone. I found one exception for it, which is emotional reward or punishment in relation to one's character and actions. One can deserve or not deserve guilt.
I don't know, I found this exception, but it's the only one that involves only one and one's self. It is weird, since it is almost like "you don't deserve guilt from... from reality, you simply don't deserve it". There is no second entity.
In my opinion this example should be categorized under morality. If a friend of mine would do something which is to be considered immoral I'll expect him to feel guilt about it, emotions are the most honest indicator for one's judgment.
-
there is no social contract, so rights cannot derive from that.
What is the United States Constitution if not a social contract?
Children also lack a conceptual faculty. Children cannot exercise their "rights" either.So how about giving up school?
-
10/10 on a philosophical scale but not on a psychological scale, I still didn't eat something that is not kosher.
Dawkins got a case, his methods are not good enough (or maybe too good scientifically).
-
I must accept the fact that children, whose rational faculty is not yet developed, are not entitled to any rights.
In a world where children have no rights, parents or anyone else may beat, enslave and sexually abuse children just because they are not mature enough by some twisted standard.
I see quite a big problem there. You are stating that an individual right must first be approved/sanctioned by another before it is a right. That is not a right, that is an agreement.How can right be inalienable if it is by definition social? Right is an outcome of an agreement weather you like the philosophy behind it or not.
-
this is for the match this sunday:
Manchester 4 Liverpool 0
Past the Pub who saps your body
And the church who'll snatch your money
The Queen is dead, boys
And it's so lonely on a limb
All your dreams are made
When you're chained to (your) mirror with (your) razor blade
Today's the day that all the world will see
I don't dig what you gotta say
So come on and say it
Come on and tell me twice
I'm no clown I won't back down
I don't need you to tell me what's going down
Down down down down da down down down
-
As long as "God" have no free will or any kind of interference with man's life this is not a theistic statement in a mystical context, but a failing metaphysical theory.
-
Ifat, I read the all topic and i find your writing once again insightful and intelligent.
If I understand correctly, after you declared your basic claim (the term" deserve" only has meaning from someone) our job as advocates of objectivism is to find in which contexts and under what kinds of standards we should use the term "deserve".
I'd like to suggest four:
1) Law
We deserve our rights to be respected by the principle of the "Social Contract" (Du contrat social / Jean-Jacques Rousseau). Not necessarily the objectivist social contract (which is the American constitution) if we talk about other western approaches that came out from the same base.
2) Economy
Nothing but contracts to be respected.
3) Culture
By the standard of the american culture "The Best Man Win" with an aspiration for the highest-quality, uncompromised credibility and respect for the state's law. It might be hard to understand for anyone who didn't spend a serious period of time in a mediterranean culture, but none of this is necessarily coordinated with egoism or capitalism.
4) Morality
I deserve to base my relationship with other human beings on my own selfish standard.
I might be wrong, as we already saw semantics tend to be slippery.
-
Whenever you face a problem which you want to solve with a pure logic method you must be exact with definition.
I'll be able to take the challenge as soon as you'll answer the question "Who (or what is) god?"
You don't need science to proof religion wrong. Every axiom in every area is based upon Parmenides' axioms, and he was a pre-Socrates philosopher.
What are you listening at the moment?
in Music
Posted
Nada, are you familiar with Orphaned Land?
This one is for you!