Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

BurgessLau

New Intellectual
  • Posts

    1430
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by BurgessLau

  1. I am not sure I understand. Could you give me an example list for one political position -- for example, your list for the election of the president of the U. S., if you are a U. S. citizen?
  2. What are the essential principles of pancritical rationalism? How does pancritical rationalism differ from Kant's attempt -- in the Critique of Pure Reason -- to use his "Critical method" to reconcile empiricism and rationalism -- thus "saving" science (while limiting it) and making room for "belief" (faith)? Why do you consider pancritical rationalism a threat to Objectivism?
  3. When you do publish your analysis, I hope you will start another, appropriately named thread. I hope, also, that Dr. Peikoff will publish a written text of his argument. For those of us who are looking for a long-term method for voting -- one that goes beyond this U. S. election to cover all elections in semi-free countries -- such a text may be very helpful. I have not been able to listen to the recording on Dr. Peikoff's website. Apparently I do not have the right equipment. Thanks for your commentary.
  4. There is a strictly moderated forum for Objectivist parents. Ask there too. It is called Rational Parenting List. I believed the email address is [email protected], but I am not certain. The charge is about $40 per year, I recall. Well worth it for parents. There is a one-month trial subscription free. I found the following possible lead (apparently it is an issue of CyberNet news) mentioning the RPList. www.4cybernet.com/sample/d07.html (Would you mention my name if you do connect with the RPList?) If the leads above don't work, ask about "Rational Parenting List" here on Objectivismonline.com. I spent about 25 hours, over a couple of months, sitting on the floor of one of the largest bookstores in North America -- picking out books for my baby grandson. I wanted to find a book in each category -- science, poetry, adventure, history, fable, detective, biography, and so forth -- even if they were a few years ahead. Good books never become outdated. I put them in a special book box, to keep them together, like a treasure chest. You are right, there is a lot garbage out there. Some have objective values in the content, but the illustrations are atrocious. Others have first-rate illustrations for little kids (simple, clear, exciting), but awful content. Here are a few I bought. Keep in mind that the same story might be presented in different books with wildly different illustrations (some scratchy, post-modernist, and some objectively gorgeous) and formats (some are board-books and others are in less durable forms). - The Whispering Rabbit (teaches chjildren to really listen). - Let's Go Visiting (a counting book). - Anatole the Mouse books in various stories, about a very virtuous and adventurous Parisian mouse with a very large family. - King Alfred: Adventure from History. (I am not certain of the title.) - The Egg (a science book with overlays showing the inside of an egg). - Little Engine that Could (caution! watch out for multiculturalist propaganda and revisions). - Aesop's Fables (be cautious in the storytelling because some of the fables have ethical points that aren't correct but deserve explanation) - Dinosaur books for little kids. Some of the best books may be out of print and available only in used copies. Kids don't care.
  5. I am 60 years old and now in excellent health, having beaten heart disease and arthritis through radical diet change. In a couple of years, when a major project ends, I may volunteer to work for ARI in some capacity, if they are interested. I have never driven a car. I have lived car-less in Houston, New Orleans, San Francisco (and Peninsula cities down to Mountainview), and Portland, Oregon (where I have lived the last 30 years, downtown). I have relied on walking (even in cold, wet Portland), bicycling, busing, and occasional cabbing. I have always lived cheaply in a studio apartment, without any of the higher amenities (such as air conditioning, pool, rec room, and so forth). My income has been around $15,000 to $20,000 since I retired financially, years ago. I routinely walk 4 - 8 miles, daily, and bicycle about 12 miles, 3-7 days weekly. In the city of Irvine, is there enough of a livable city center or neighborhood center within a few miles of ARI to make this style of car-less living feasible?
  6. "Liberty= Founding Fathers Definition" When you say "Founding Fathers" are you referring to the founders of the U. S. republic? Keep in mind that objectivismonline is an international forum. "Founders" may not mean the same thing to Canadians, Turks, and Israelis. Further, just what was the Founding Fathers' definition of liberty -- by genus and differentia, if possible? Did all the founders agree on the same definition? Thank you for your original question. It seems straight-forward at first, but it is the kind of delightful question that can prompt wide-ranging discussions.
  7. I am unsure about the question. For example, what do you mean by "force"? Do you mean a socio-political movement -- here one consciously working toward more liberty? What does "liberty" mean? I am also confused by the choices offered: a city (which had a 1000 year history in the ancient world), two empires (the long enduring Roman -- but why not name the Republic? -- and the very brief Alexandrian), and a culture (the Carthaginians). Clarifications would help.
  8. I started a topic -- "A Voter's Method?" -- in Political Philosophy. It was recently moved to Current Events. I do not understand why. My post -- "A Voter's Method?" -- is a philosophical question. Philosophy is the most general of the sciences. It applies to everyone, everywhere, and at all times. My question about what most-general method to use in voting applies to everyone, everywhere, at all times -- wherever there is some form of selection in government, whether Athens 2500 years ago or Bombay 1000 years from now (if there is a representative government then and there). My post does not apply just to Kerry vs. Bush. (I don't even mention them.) My post is not limited to "current events." It is philosophical in its foundation and philosophical in its application (successively) to ideology, strategy, and tactics. Likewise note that the subsequent replies to my original post are very general, and not tied to a current election. The key issue is METHOD, which, here, is a philosophical concern. If I am right, how can I get my thread moved back to Political Philosophy?
  9. On further consideration of your excellent suggestion, I would add one element to my earlier summary of your zoom-in (general to specific) method: philosophical, IDEOLOGICAL, strategic, tactical. Your step 1 invokes the appropriate principle from philosophy (that is, the science that applies to everyone, everywhere, and at all times). In step 2, your context-setting phrase, "In our present situation," invokes ideology (philosophy applied to a milieu) as a context. Your step 2 main point asks for strategy, which is a general plan for changing one's milieu politically and socially. Your step 3 invokes tactics (strategy applied to a particular situation). In summary, a decision to vote for X or Y must fit the tactics resting on a strategy appropriate to an ideology derived from one's philosophy. Again, thank you for your insight. I suspect it will be valuable to me far beyond the question of voting. It is a method that zooms in on a problem while retaining context at successive levels of specialization. My mnemonic metaphor for the procedure is an archer's target of successively smaller circles.
  10. I see two big benefits of your concise, crow-friendly, and hierarchical method. First, with step 1, it is rooted in philosophy (the politics branch). Second, it moves successively from philosophy (step 1) to strategy (step 2) to tactics (step 3) -- a natural progression of zooming-in on the particulars of one election, while retaining a wider context. Thank you.
  11. "I am thinking there is a lot to be said for voting on local issues when general policy is so similar/transparent." This raises an important point for discussion. Should the method for selecting a politician (or "ballot measure," a proposed law, we call it here in Oregon, USA) be any different for a local election than it is for a regional or national election? In my limited thinking, so far, I don't see any essential difference. Can you suggest one? Remember, I am asking for a general method, one applicable to a wide range of elections not just to a particular election at a particular time. Thanks for your comments. Discussion and debate among rational people does advance participants' knowledge. P. S. -- Have you ever noticed that asking people for the method they used in their thinking to reach a certain conclusion puts a damper on discussion? I first learned that when my then six year old son began asking me "How do you do that?" questions.
  12. Objectivists live in an archipelago of semi-free republics around the world. We face many common problems. One underlies the debate over Bush vs. Kerry: What method should a rational person use to vote for one politician rather than another? Why is having a method important? Because any conclusion reached without a method -- implicit or explicit -- cannot be objective, that is, cannot have a logical relationship to reality. Reaching conclusions without methods is intuitionism, not objectivity. Ayn Rand characterizes methods as products of consciousness, products that "designate systematic courses of action devised by men for the purpose of achieving certain goals." She notes that a method may be purely psychological (as in a method of memorizing a password) or a mixture of psychological and physical actions (as in a method of drilling for oil). (For Ayn Rand's brief comments on method, see: _Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology_, 2nd ed., pp. 35-36 and 304-305. The password example is mine; the oil-drilling example comes from Ayn Rand.) For example, for anyone who has selected a candidate in the upcoming U. S. presidential election: What general method led you to your decision? If your method has, say three main steps, how, in particular, did you decide where to start? The candidates' philosophies, your highest personal value, the effect of a candidate on the country overall for the next generation, or what? In conclusion, what I am asking for is a process abstract enough to apply to any election. If that is not possible, then why not?
  13. Objectivists are few in number, and we live in an archipelago of semi-free republics around the world. We face many common problems. One underlies the debate over Bush vs. Kerry: What method should a rational person use to select one politician rather than another? Ayn Rand characterizes methods as products of consciousness, products that "designate systematic courses of action devised by men for the purpose of achieving certain goals." She notes that a method may be purely psychological (as in a method of memorizing a password) or a mixture of psychological and physical actions (as in a method of drilling for oil). For anyone who has selected a candidate in the upcoming U. S. presidential election: What method led you to your choice of Bush, Kerry, or other? What I am asking for is a process abstract enough to apply to any election -- or, if that is not possible, then why not? Burgess Laughlin www.aristotleadventure.com (For Ayn Rand's brief comments on method: _Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology_, 2nd edition, pp. 35-36 and 304-305. The password example is mine; the oil-drilling example comes from Ayn Rand.) P. S. -- This is my first post. If I have misused the features, tell me.
×
×
  • Create New...