Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Drregaleagle

Regulars
  • Content Count

    79
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Drregaleagle last won the day on October 15 2010

Drregaleagle had the most liked content!

About Drregaleagle

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Previous Fields

  • Country
    United States
  • State (US/Canadian)
    RhodeIsland
  • Relationship status
    Single
  • Real Name
    Keith
  • Copyright
    Must Attribute
  • Biography/Intro
    The aspiration to innovate and produce drives my life. I'm from a small town in Massachusetts and I am now a pharmacy student. I love freedom, logic, science, and math. I loved The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. Oh yeah, I entered the wrong email address when I made the account "TheFlanker35" so I couldn't confirm the email address.
  • School or University
    University of Rhode Island
  • Occupation
    innovator
  1. On another thread entitle "The true nature of religion in civilization's development", Black Wolf raised a good point. This thought should cause us to ponder the nature of absolute certainty. The critical characteristic of absolute certainty is that certainty develops from the definition of one's terms. Relating to Black Wolf's example, how would you ever notice a correlation of the Maclaurin series with sine values in the first place? If one took a protractor and drew many right triangles, the side ratios of the triangles could be measured with a ruler and the sine values could be
  2. The universe is potentially infinite and not actually infinite because the universe itself is merely a concept of set theory; we determine that certain things exist and then we assume that we can construct a set of all that exists, the universe. The problem is that this set is a concept of our mind so your god must be a concept of your mind. Points and lines are potentially infinite in certain respects also so they are just abstractions of the mind and not existing things.
  3. In short, Happy Thanksgiving in honor and memory of the Pilgrims' contributions to America.
  4. Fair enough. Regarding color, it is objective but still observer dependent. Color, by definition, is a state at which an observer sees it and a concept of the mind. A color is an attribute of sensory interpretation, a concept used in thought. Without any concept formers, concepts wouldn't exist. Matter exists independently of sense perception, but our sense perceptions of matter do not exist outside of our minds per the Law of Identity. Regarding the unmoved mover, he must be unmoved. He cannot be in motion presently. Any event that created the universe would have operated under
  5. I'm not equating two per se, but I think territoriality is part of understanding property. Animals can understand food ownership too sometimes, but your example shows that obviously sometimes they don't. Just like humans.
  6. Which means that a first cause does not actually exist. Nope, the idea that an unmoved mover must have existed to ignite the universe is contingent on the postulate that everything is in motion. Since an unmoved mover is not in motion, he cannot currently exist in this system. Therefore, the unmoved mover would have existed in the beginning, but not currently. Hence, he died. Reread the proof, you don't understand it.
  7. An omnipotent God could not redefine objective truth. If you at 3:00 P.M. ate a late lunch on 11/23/2010 and drove to Wal-Mart, an omnipotent God could never ultimately change the substance of such truth. You might counter with the fact that God could travel back in time and alter events, but that time travel would only be from your perspective. Time is always moving forward from some frame of reference so it would still be an objective fact that from God's perspective at 3:00 P.M. you ate lunch and went to Wal-Mart. You might also argue that words can mean multiple things. They can, but t
  8. I probably should have titled the thread "the true nature of the philosophy that emerged from religion in civilization's development". I was considering religion synonymous with philosophy but the mystical aspects are not, once it is rationally demonstrated that they are mystical.
  9. The number of events between two events is potentially infinite as it is potentially infinite because every event can be broken down into sub-events. The idea of an "event" is a human product similar to a point. Events, like points, only potentially exist as they are infinitely small. According to Aristotle, the originator of the thought behind the Kalam and Cosmological Argument, the Unmoved Mover must be the source of all motion. However, Aristotle also postulates that everything moves. Therefore, the source of all motion must not exist currently. Hence, that god died at the incep
  10. It is, but that doesn't mean that animals never understand private property. Charles Cornish wrote a book "Animals of today, their life and conversation" where he shows examples of dogs respecting property rights. A quick Google search of "animals understand property" yields several instances that shows a rudimentary concept of property rights in animals.
  11. I've been following Neurosky and the research of Tan Lee for about three years now. This is the most likely imminent advancement that will make a difference in our lives. The machine relies on something like an EEG machine that reads brainwaves instead of buttons. The greatest difficulty with the design is that our brainwaves are continuous and have ranges. It's easiest to set up the machine to receive exact frequencies so much of the recent research has been about getting it to work at a wide range of frequencies. Another obstacle is the interference from other devices, but wires reduce
  12. Peikoff acknowledges that experimentation refutes mysticism. One needs to be able to interpret sensation, to reason, accurately to experiment. Reasoning skills are not merely innate qualities that we evolved; they are sharpened with practice, study, and the advice of others. If this weren't true, no philosopher would ever need to write any books to convey his philosophy because everyone would instinctively know it. Reason must be developed. Since reasoning must be developed, people will naturally always hold to mystical ideas until their reasoning sharpens. However, it is the recognition
  13. Correlation implies causation in a controlled study unless the correlation can be explained otherwise. If you reject this, you reject the scientific method. Neither is Enlightenment thought; the Enlightenment also produced the disastrous French Revolution. Certain aspects of Protestant Christianity were mostly just a US phenomenon by 1700. Yes it was and those historical principles came from religion, particularly Protestant Christianity. You still don't seem to understand the difference between Christianity and a philosophy that evolved from Christianity. Many Objectivists cite S
  14. Actually, it is A according to the primary source documents. A) Jamestown's founding statement reads: “Wee, greatly commending and graciously accepting of their desires to the furtherance of soe noble a worke which may, by the providence of Almightie God, hereafter tende to the golire of His divine Majestie in propagating of Christian religion to suche people as yet live in darknesse and miserable ignorance of the true knowledge and worshippe of God and may in time bring the infidels and savages living in those parts to humane civilitie and to a setled and quiet governmente, doe by
  15. Since causality is inherently a potential, an infinite regress of causality is potential also. When you say that turning the key starts the car, the turn of the key isn't the direct cause. There are a potentially infinite number of steps between the turn of the key and the start of the car. This isn't an actual infinity. This is why there's an infinite regress of causality. This argument is called the Kalam argument. I personally think it's awful, but a lot of people are taught it. It isn't rational at all because it worships a dead and impotent unmoved mover. That being said, Cathol
×
×
  • Create New...