Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Boydstun last won the day on October 17

Boydstun had the most liked content!


Profile Information

  • Gender

Previous Fields

  • Country
    United States
  • State (US/Canadian)
  • Relationship status
  • Sexual orientation
    No Answer
  • Real Name
    Stephen Boydstun
  • Copyright
    Must Attribute

Recent Profile Visitors

17227 profile views

Boydstun's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (6/7)



  1. The interviewer in the preceding is Eiuol.
  2. Philosophy, Engineering - a life, a mind Interview of me:
  3. Dealing with radiation: Optimal Radiation Shielding of Astronauts on a Mission to Mars
  4. Six Poems (YouTube video)
  5. Dupin, that writing of Dewey's is contained in The Later Works - Volume 3, which covers 1927-28. "Dewey traveled to the Soviet Union in 1928 as a delegate with other American educators. He reported somewhat glowingly on the possible Soviet trajectory for cooperative life and experimental education, but he was soon to alter this bright prophecy as the Stalinist faction's 'revolution from above' began its murderous purge. . . . Dewey remained prosocialist yet anti-Marxist." (Dewey by Steven Fesmire - 2015) One part of Marx I doubt Dewey would ever have bought into anyway: dialectical materialism. When Dewey was a young beginning philosopher, although he was a Hegelian (later rejected by Dewey), he did not accept Hegel's dialectic. I imagine Dewey would have found Marx's dialectical materialism similarly otiose. I'm not yet much versed in Dewey's social philosophy, but I gather that his stout support of democracy was tied to his experimentalism philosophy and his views on social criss-cross process (as in science) for arriving at the better in knowledge and social arrangements. Though he hoped for democratic socialist outcomes from the democratic processes (if I understand correctly), I seriously doubt he had confidence that his favorite contender (socialism) would be the democratic outcome. Then 'so be it', would be the attitude of one so committed to experimentalism and democratic process. I notice John Dewey and the Soviet Union
  6. Picture of Particle AND Wave (at the same time!) (Although likely we should be saying particle-like AND wave-like: a wavicle.) HT - Dan Edge
  7. Sev, There is another formulation of immortality that does not invoke a conveyance entity and is argued as a certainty, not a possibility. That is Nietzsche's 'eternal recurrence'. This is not a situation in which the recurrence of one's self and same life would be felt as sameness to prior same-existence(s), but the situation of recurrence can be reasoned to. The argument goes that because the future is infinitely long, all the things composing the sequences of the world and one's life and person in it must eventually recur. Even granting the assumption of Nietzsche's day, that the chemical elements will be capable of forming the molecules of life for an infinite time to come, the recurrence Nietzsche envisioned is impossible. The failure is not realizing that there are different sizes of infinity. The infinity of real numbers is larger than the infinity of integers, such that the probability that a number picked randomly from the real numbers will be an integer is nil (zero). Similarly, the infinity of future hours (we are going along with as assumption in the setup for the doomed argument) is a smaller infinity of courses of hour-fires I can have in my fireplace and smaller than the infinity of life-courses I can have in front of any particular course of fire in the fireplace. The hour of life I have just now passed will never recur.
  8. No. The notion is only a childhood brainwashing holdover. More is required for possibility than lack of surface contradiction. Isn't it possible that cellular life is possible only through attendance by a non-physical life force? No. Genuine inquiry about brain/consciousness - real possibilities
  9. Gentlemen, be sure to acknowledge to yourself explicitly what you do know: you each one, just like me (much your senior), are going to die. No ifs, buts, or maybes. Totally end. Be sure to invest your life with that background as absolute and with projects consonant with your rationally expected range of end date. Indefinitely long is not what is going to happen to your duration, and at some level, hopefully explicitly, you know that. You will die (and eventually even the species will die). And it can have been worthwhile, indeed entirely complete, to have lived your few or several decades of existence. Related, from another, recent thread: Life, finite life, is an end in itself.
  10. One concordance of Dewey with Rand would be: “The most pervasive fallacy of philosophic thinking goes back to neglect of context.” That quote is from Dewey’s lecture “Context and Thought” published in 1931, LW 6:5. I want to mention that for all of Dewey which I reference to Early Works (EW), Middle Works (MW), or Later Works (LW), the Dewey writing can be accessed as follows: Google ‘The Collected Works of John Dewey’. Click on the link to siupress. Find the volume you are looking for, such as LW 6, in the list that comes up, and click on it. On the page that then comes up, click on ‘Google Preview’, and you can scroll through and search the text, (e.g. search the volume for the term neglect in LW 6, and the line I quoted above can be found in the text).
  11. Appropriations - FY 2022 FY = Oct. 1 through Sept. 30 Budgets and Projections Thanks to Merlin Jetton for recent remarks and for notice of the site COMMITTEE FOR A RESPONSIBLE FEDERAL BUDGET.
  12. Eiuol, The idea that Spinoza opened a gate for the modern standpoint is interesting. There is a book by Steven Nadler on my shelf which I’ve not gotten to whose full title is: A Book Forged in Hell - Spinoza’s Scandalous Treatise and the Birth of the Secular Age (2011). In the ancient world, it would seem that Epicureanism was a philosophy facing squarely that death was the end of the whole person and that gods were indifferent to the affairs of humans. In a couple hundred years, however, that philosophy and its practice was overrun by spiritualistic cultural currents.* In the modern era, Epicureanism was bannered by devotees of empiricism, and Jefferson was a devotee of the Epicurean philosophy. It seems to mesh well with the secular outlook today provided one replaces Epicurean views on the methods and significance of science with modern ones. Epicurus/Lucretius suits our modernism better than Spinoza’s rationalism and his scheme for mind-body relations. Both seem to have opened a gate in the early modern period for our modern standpoint.
  13. I had said: "But as ever, one can become fully aware not only of one’s coming nonexistence, but to its place in life." I had meant it is good to become fully aware of one's coming nonexistence square on, with no ifs, buts, or maybes, no fogginess and no denials. And its place in life is only terminal point of life. Conducting one's life never shunting awareness of the coming end is a rationality in life (and tuning one's priorities in projects and relationships with one's present expectation of the termination time of one's life---some decades from now versus two months from now---is part of that rationality). Have you by chance read the book The Denial of Death by Ernest Becker? It's been a while since I read that, but as I recall, it's quite good.
  • Create New...