claire
-
Posts
155 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by claire
-
-
Harrison, your profile says you're 22. You just had a son. How old were you in 1960, when you became interested in hypnosis.
-
Anyone who takes advice from Kevin deserves what he gets. Kevin like to play games with women, but he knows nothing about them. I think it makes him feel masculine to control women. What a fake, and women can see right through him.
-
That's what I meant? Guess I didn't know what I meant. I must need someone like you to point it out. Thanks.
-
Okay. I agree. Except with cigarettes, so many people get hooked young and stupid, like me. It is physically addictive. Can people stop. Sure. My thinking, which is admittedly not the smartest in this context, is that if I live a few more years due to quiting, is it worth it keep craving a cigarette. I don't think I'm being biased when I say I won't place it in the real of the immoral. Stupid, yes. Lack of self-discipline, yes. I still can't see immoral. On the other hand, I would put a drug user in the moral realm. Could be I just won't admit to the truth of cigarettes. I like them, damn it.
-
Lord. Okay. Smoking is something we can foolishly become addicted to. Not smart, but probably millions of people have gone there. It's not anti-life or crap like that. It's a stupid act that can be hard to kick. You're hurting yourself.
Affairs involve feelings and expectations. It also involves promises and a contract. Moral/immoral? Yes, contextual. I can easily see someone so unhappy in a marriage that an affair becomes more important than someone else's feeling, expectations, promises and contracts. Do you think Rand was that unhappy?
On the othe hand, there are always cheating lice who pretend the lovey their spouse while screwing everything in sight. Immoral. Pretty much, if you want to debate the morality of lice.
BTW, I think this started with the immorality of cigarettes. Do you think they are? Should the consequences be up to the smoker. Let's please keep second-hand smoke out of this.
-
Are we arguing over words? We're talking of married people not married to each other engaging in sexual activity. Well, first, the word affair, which is a perfectly good word (you don't like it for some reason?) is a lot easier to use than the long, cumbersome phrase. That's why we have concepts. Are you under the impression Frank and Barara gave their so-called concept cheerfully, or might they have been verbally coerst with words? UJnethical? I'll let that one pass. Cruel? definitely, as you can read from various accounts, Barbara herself, and Frank's own niece, who has posted on OL how Frank shared his pain with his sibling. Is there any reason the niece, who had no idea Ayn was her aunt, should lie?
I'm not sure what you're asking. By the way, there is a grammatical difference between adultery and affair, although the two words are frequently used interchangeablyv. Adultery means affair without partner's knowledge. Affair means a tryst with the partner's knowledge. Technically, affair would be a more acurate word in this case. Although that's really splitting hairs. I mean, what's this thing that only religious people use the word. Not true.
-
Are you saying that only god-fearing people use the word adultery? I never said I considered adultery immoral. Nor do I consider smoking immoral. What would make you think I do. I'm not the one who called Ran a sinner.
-
IF she truly cheated on her husband, in the ways described, then Ayn Rand did not live up to her own philosophy. IF so then she sinned and you're correct.
I wouldn't know. I'm an atheist so I'm not up on what is a sin or isn't. I'll take your word that it is so. Personally, I have not thought of her as a sinner.
-
And if people make the choice to smoke, especially at a time when not much info was available, they are immorale? Are adultery and smoking equally immoral. By the way, just to let you know, adultery is adultery whether or not the spouses agrees. No, I'm not having religious visions (be careful about making statements about someone you don't know; you might get embarrassed) but I do have a dictionary. It's a perfectly moral little dictionary.
-
Since you asked, yes. The dangers of smoking weren't as well known in the 40s, 50s, and 60s. I don't think there's been a recent time when adultery was acceptable. Correct me if I am wrong.
-
You're worried about her cigarette smoking? How about the morality of having an affair with her best friend's husband? How does that relate to morality?
-
What are you trying to do? All that's there is a bunch of words.
-
"How a man goes about this, of course, is crucially important. But the fact remains that modern women are suffering from a glut of totally unimpressive guys. Men who know what they're doing in the area of romance have become virtually extinct."You are SO right! Kevin, you may be genuinely trying to impress a woman. I approve whole-heartedly. But the things you are suggesting are a turn-off to women. Example: first date, 45 minute coffee. I'm guessing you want to appear cool. Kevin, if a man did that to me, he'd be history in 46 minutes. Cool is unimpressive. Genuine interest is not the same as being needy. I want to respect a man, but a man who isn't interested in me won't get it.
Just consider a woman's point of view. It's women you're trying to impress, right?
-
Good, but I believe I may be missing your point.
-
" Do they admit when they are wrong? How do they make amends? Do they ever anticipate your desires and fulfill them? How do they communicate their grievances with you? Do they express disagreements they have with you? Do they express their desires? When you tell them secrets do they tell you secrets? What kind of situations do they prefer to be around you? How much do they know about you compared to what you know about them? Do they acknowledge when their stories seem unlikely? Have they ever admitted to a mistake when they did not have to? When you do things together how do they behave? Are they cooperative and interested?
I can't consider someone my friend until I have answers to all of these questions (and a few more)."
Exactly how long do you think you need to know a person before you have your answers? Are you under the impression that someone will react the exact same way every time? Someone will express their disagreement exactly the same way and never vary? Someone will always be interested in what you say and not have some own concern on their mind? Hmmm Really?
-
Secondhander, from a woman's point of view, this guy wouldn't get through any smart woman's front door. He's living in his own little fantasy world where he's a leading man. Let's not disillusion him.
-
It sound like most people (Hairnet?) here want surety - much like James Taggard and a few others. It's not going to happen. People may be unsure of how they feel, or they may change their minds. Anything can happen. The better you get to know someone, the more sure you can be that he/she is telling the truth. But that requires communication and an established relationship. "Auditing" someone may work for Scientologists, but then they're a creepy bunch.
-
I don't like commenting on someone else's relationship, but since you put it out there - let me ask a question. This guy isn't there for your important marathon, he isn't there other exciting events in your life; he lets you lift heavy boxes without lifting a finger. What on earth does he offer you that's so important?
-
Your mistake is making this a "should he ... " issue. The events you describe are bigs ones in your life. Even I, a total stranger, can figures that out. If a so-called "friend" isn't there for cheer and support, how does he rate the definition of friend. It's the least I expect from my friends. It has NOTHING to do with mindreading.
Two years ago, I was in the worse situation of my life. Literally life and death. A friend I thought would be there for me absolutely wasn't. I didn't ask myself if she should or should not have to be there. My only criteria in judging the situation was that SHE DID NOT met my criteria of friend. Her reasons are her own. She had every right to ignore my very bad need for a friend. Just as I had every right to decide she wasn't a friend.
Is this guy meeting your needs? Just wondering.
-
I also don't see the problem here. I read the article as saying that the emphasis is being put on oral argument as opposed to written. I don't see that it means that the oral arguments are superficial/wrong/weird, etc. Quite the contrary, having to verbalize ones opinion helps with integration.
Am I missing something?
-
-
"...for instance it was your own child being raped and you could get no action out of the government" - that's your quote from LP's podcast. But action was done. The man was found guilty and sentenced (actually, I hate to say this, but 28 years is a pretty good sentence under our messed up system). As I see it, LP's comment DOES NOT apply because the government DID act.
I'm in the effing position of defending some damned child killer here. Not a good place. All I'm saying is,the killer served his time. No victim can ever feel the punishment is enough. But that's for the law to decided. We can't each decide if we like a judgment and then go out and act ourselves. (On the other hand, any takers on taking out OJ - I can contribute some funds). It's legally wrong, and I think it's morally wrong to subject our subjective desires into the case. (That's what the dad is doing, unfortunately.) The power to punish lies with the court, and it did its job, whether or not we agree with the particulars. (Like I said, giving a 16-year old 28 years is actually not bad, considering some of the sentences I read about.) Killing a killer won't accomplish anything.
-
Not to belabor the point, but aren't you suspending your judgment by asking this questin here? Sorry - couldn't resist. Seriously though, are you suggesting it is wrong to ask questions of other people (whether in devil's advocate form or otherwise)? Are you expected to know everything? Do you have all the answers? If not, then you need to ask. From my point of view, that includes asking questions of everyone, not just Objectivist. I mean, if you have a question on playing golf, would you rather ask a mediocre Objectivist golfer or a crazy championship golfer?
Anyway, ask away.
-
Trebor, justice can never be served in a case like this. Even if the killer were executed, the parents would never get their precious child back.
I understand the father's rage, but I still don't believe he now has the right to his own brand of justice.
Knowing What NOT to Do In Romance
in Relationships, Love, Sex, Romance
Posted
You mean, someone who rubs your neck and is polite enough to consider your preference? Nah.