Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ilrein

  1. Indeed, there is no lawful reason for denying same-sex marriage. I don't see a world where a bonafide Objectivist could argue against homosexual consensual matrimony.
  2. Enjoy guys! Just to note a few similarities of tantamount importance: "For a woman qua woman, the essence of feminity is hero-worship--the desire to look up to man." - Ayn Rand "If you have a more feminine sexual essence, your professional life may be incredibly successful, but your core won't be fulfilled unless love is flowing fully in your family or intimate life." - D.D. Both authors share the same ideal of masculinity and its opposite. Another quote by D.D: The imagery of Dominique is perfect here, and Rand's characterization of how Roark responds to her is just so consistent. That in Dominique's most brutal "testing" her secret desire was that Roark could not be broken...the harder she pushes for hurting Roark, the more she admits to herself of the depth of her love for him, that even when she succeeded she still could not hurt him and that he still completely dominated her in mind and body. And the later part of the book when Dominique leaves Roark and returns to test him and see if he will abandon his purpose, in that moment truly acting as if she wanted just that, and Roark of course knowing that deep down it would be a betrayal of his own values, and that Dominique would grow to resent and hate him for it if he would submit to her impulse...
  3. I read this book before I was self-acquainted with Ayn Rand and it helped me understand Dominique's character with remarkable accuracy immediately. Randomly, I felt the urge to reread it (although I skip the fruity text and just read the laws), and now I am curious as to the opinions and reviews of the many respectable members of this forum. Personally, I think combined with Ayn's ideals the two works synergize for a very healthy view of masculinity. My understanding of these values has brought me new freedom in my sexual life and I couldn't be happier. I whole heartedly recommend reading the book. PS. Link here: http://smilyanov.net/download/pdfs/The%20Way%20of%20the%20Superior%20Man.pdf
  4. Thanks for the responses, but I know why Mike and Roark get along--I get why someone else would describe Roark in such a fasion as well. I was merely wondering whether the quote is actually in reference to a physical event in the plotline. No superintendent or contractor is ever introduced, this is before Roark ever built his first building, he (seemingly) is in no position to actually annoy anyone. It seems to be a short few lines that came out of no where in reference to nothing at all (plot-wise), which is obviously very uncharacteristic of Ayn.
  5. It's when Mike asks Roark if he knows anything about some super[intendent] who describes Roark as the most "stubborn and the lousiest bastard he's ever been up against." I have no idea where this is in connection to at all, I've never understood it, even re-reading this book for the umpteenth time =( Any thoughts?
  6. I know this may be better suited to the Political Philosophy section, so forgive me if this is the case. Nonetheless, I'm currently in an ongoing discussion about Objectivism with a law student and I was wondering if there are any trials which can really be broken down to fundamental Objectivist principles. I'm particularly hoping for a case where someone's Right to Life/Private Property was wronged and the court upheld it, but only to be corrected in Appeals Court (or the Supreme Court). Any suggestions are much appreciated!
  7. It was one phase in my pursuit of enlightenment. From hypnosis mind control philosophy, to NLP manipulation philosophy, to mature seduction philosophy. All this mixed with Decartes, Beginner books on Quantum Physics, Zen and so on. One day I read a journal update of a close friend I have much respect for...and he commented on just having finished Fountainhead. I saw that name popup in my Creative Writing class and I turned it into my final project. The rest they say, is history. There are still many questions unclosed for me. Is dating until you are dead an unproductive, ie immoral way of living? Does a soulmate really exist? Is monogamy the result of a collectivist, sexually respressed society? I always had a problem that Roark only fucked Dominique. I understand why it works with plot and characterization, but I still never liked it. In fact, Ayn is specifically vague about Roark's sex life (paraphrased:) Wynand: Either there were not many, or you are very discrete. Roark: There were not many. For one thing, we know that Dominique was a virgin prior to Howard, but we don't know if he was. All her characters seem to be magically amazing in bed as an innate skill, yet if someone wants to objectivily improve their sexual ability, they risk the title of 'manipulative second hander' if they choose to learn the art of seduction. Thoughts?
  8. Hey Castle, When you saw what worked, would you post that method online? Would you back up those claims with lay reports? Would you care about participation in online forum activity--that's what I'm wondering about. I too love it's idealism, for me it was a primitive precursor to a fully integrated philosophy, ie Objectivism. Though relatively young, I posted a few stories and insights, my earliest comprehensive journal. Now as I approach the achievement of finishing every book Ayn has to offer, I read: Which is completely true--which made me cringe in memory of sharing some truly deep moments...At least it was a private forum unaccessable without knowing the leader in person...Who interestingly enough, was my polyamorous Ballroom & Latin instructor--involvement in the Seduction Community has lead to unique opportunities. Thing is, I'm undergoing a conflict of values, and I'm not sure how I'll resolve it as of yet. For one thing, I'm only interested in women of high self-esteem, who happen to make the best canditates for the art of short non-fiction sex writing--ie lay reports. But should these stories ever be expressed in the first place...?
  9. Interesting replies. What are your thoughts on the concept of Field Reports, where PUAs' post the observations of their individual application of pickup philosophy?
  10. http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.p...t=0&start=0
  11. What's the general Objectivist outlook on said industry? I define 'Seduction Community' as publicized by Neil 'Style' Strauss in The Game to everything commercial nowadays -- directly or indirectly -- related to that beginning. I imagine many points can be made for either side and I am curious to hear the intellectual responses... Thoughts?
  12. Good sir, allow me to enlighten you: Evidence to the contrary I think you may be referencing DotA RoC by Guinsoo, or at best; early IceFrog on TFT, however aesthetics is a field thoroughly integrated by this particular animal oddity of a software architect. Not to mention, DotA 6.66b is the current standard. The days of the same fifteen heroes played over and over went drastically with the nerf of the blink dagger, the 2150 gold fabled dagger of Kelen [fastest assassin ever to walk the lands of Azeroth] created a tight circle of viable heroes capable of utilizing a fast escape tool to its potential. In roughly 6.46b, where competitive DotA was at its height, this was the norm. Things are vastly different now. I figure that DotA on the TFT engine is nearering a masterpiece completion. This magnum opus will come out before Vavle-style DotA will. It will signify the end of WC3, within the timeframe of proximity to Starcraft 2, as the ashes of the phoenix before it rises again -- except these ashes fall and form an interactive statue depicting the creativity of man and resourcefulness as a virtue. And if you disagree about the validity of my claims, my only possible answer is we shall see.
  13. That's a valid point but typically games with a solid storyline make for a good single player campaign while the game's popularity is determined by the quality of its online play. Indeed, CS used to be the most popular of all cyber cafe games, devoid of any story whatsoever. What DotA has going for it, moreso now than ever, is it's inability to ever repeat itself. When playing on a team of trusted friends, against another semi-organized team, even if you use the same bread-and-butter heroes repeatedly -- the games quickly escalate to epic proportions. DotA's future is in its medium to high level play, where minor mistakes turn the tide of battle, strategy is rewarded, and victory an achievement. If you have spent your DotA days in the open public sphere, you have no idea what you have been missing.
  14. Excellent, if you've ever heard of old school legends like MeR-LiNi or FearDarkness nowadays they recieve a monthly salary and are sponsored to travel to LAN tourneys. Maybe we should form a team
  15. If you have never heard of DotA, or rather Defense of the Ancients, it is a custom map on Warcraft 3. During the height of popularity for WC3, prior to WoW days, thousands of unique privately designed maps were developed to be played online -- DotA was one of those, it's popularity surpassing that of the original game. It features team based play of 5 versus 5, each player choosing from nearly 100 unique heroes and roughly 200 items, suffice to say that no game of DotA ever repeats itself. The reason for its huge success is the nature of its development; it is done privately by a man codenamed IceFrog who is nothing short of genius; it's dynamically designed, updated with new content, balances, and big fixes with impressive frequency. The 3 MB custom map spread across the globe, sparking international tournaments while defining an entirely new gaming genre. But at what should have been the peak of DotA's status, the competitive scene -- and any hope for it's future -- had all but disintegrated. Sadly, DotA failed to push into the mainstream gaming culture -- many factors reflect this truth, but the simplest is DotA, as the greatest game on WC3, remained limited by engine -- despite the programming freedom offered by Blizzard. Naturally, 3rd party developers, with IceFrog's approval, copied DotA and created a standalone copy. For veteran players like myself, this meant huge deterioration in the quality of available leagues, while watching the game stagnate further and further -- the only other option being switching over cheap imitators. Until IceFrog, consistent in his integrity, announced news that shook DotA-lovers across the globe: Valve, the programmers behind Counter-Strike, Half Life, and Team Fortress are going to support the development of an independent DotA game -- removing all of it's limitations and opening the door to boundless improvements. Maybe not in a year, maybe not in two, but in five years DotA will be one of the biggest E-Sports the world has ever seen. International paid players traveling across the globe to compete with the greatest players, with an unshakable fan base of players stretching North America, Europe & Asia. All the ingredients are there, we have the most resourceful Chef in charge, mark my words: DotA will be great.
  16. Thanks for the replies! The reason I ask is I do not know which form of government is ideal -- aside from it being limited. Is there a point to a democracy in a state where individual rights prioritize above all else? Is a prime minister/president necessary?
  17. In an ideal objectivist society, is democracy the form of government? Are free markets synonymous with democracy?
  18. Plato's idea is that our 'souls' return to the immaterial realm where we have direct access to these forms, and we are constantly reincarnated in some endless search to recreate these forms to the best of our ability while never being able to achieve perfection, only a immitation of a form. He also says all knowledge is recollection. Naturally you can see why I want to know exactly why he is wrong. However, his theory splits consciousness from existence but arguably, while these forms exist independently from consciousness -- man is still inherently aware of all of them, he 'observes' them -- in Plato's world sensory perception is incompetent and real perception only happens in between the non-stop pointless cycle of reincarnation.
  19. Hey prosperity, Good stuff! Case one: "You can't prove that God exists." "You can't prove that God doesn't." "So your saying that something exists until it's proved not to?" "Yes." "Ok, prove to me there isn't a pink unicorn in my basement." ----- That works if the answer is yes but it doesn't necessarily have to be. Case two: "You can't prove that God exists." "You can't prove that God doesn't." "So your saying that something exists until it's proved not to?" "No, I'm saying you can't prove God doesn't exist, and therefore its not valid to claim he doesn't." Bam. Where do you go now?
  20. Key. Wouldn't it be possible to interpret this defense as a subjective claim? IE Objective reality still exists regardless of a consciousness to interpret it. The idea of forms is illogical because it is impossible to concieve a concept that's not rooted in reality? But clearly this isn't true, people can conceive of heaven. Still a tad confused =/
  21. Hey turbo, 1. My friend is a rational individual, he has simply not been exposed to Objectivism -- we don't have aimless conversations where the words we use have different meanings. 2. I suggested this, but it's not good enough to be at a gray area, I want to definitely prove God doesn't exist. 3. This is only partially true, Nate Branden said it's not irrational for savages to believe in God because they lack a way to pass superior judgment. This is just as true in modern times, ie Lil Wayne ferverently believes in God but he also happens to be a hero. 4. I'm aware, I'm not that new Remember I wanted to stay away from ethics? I'm interested in the fundamental [il]logic and I want to be able to justify it flawlessly and coherently when I speak off the top of my head.
  22. Excellent! Thanks for the quick replies. What's your response to Plato's form of forms? -- I am curious because I'm sure it could be substituted for God but without hitting the 'consciousness conscious of only itself' contradiction.
  23. I was discussing philosophy with my friend and I hit a road block. I explained the 3 axioms but I had trouble verbally proving God is illogical and doesn't exist. His point was God does have identity as 'all-knowing, all-good, omnipresent', therefore he doesn't violate the axiom of identity. Now I didn't take those characteristics as irreducible primaries, but the topic turned ethical while I wanted to disprove God on metaphysical grounds. What did I miss?
  • Create New...