Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

damZway

Regulars
  • Posts

    144
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified

damZway's Achievements

Member

Member (4/7)

0

Reputation

  1. Auction ends today. http://www.ebay.com/itm/280918232586?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1586.l2649
  2. http://www.ebay.com/...984.m1586.l2649
  3. One day left. I'll be listing another item later this week.
  4. http://www.ebay.com/...=item4164b7753f
  5. http://www.ebay.com/...984.m1586.l2649
  6. I sent them an e-mail this morning asking about future pricing once the switch is complete. No response as yet.
  7. Why do I have to choose one or the other? This is a Morton's Fork. Your approach here consists of quoting the formulations of others, then expecting the reader to be convinced of an argument that you can't quite articulate. This amounts to "Mentzer sucks! And, um -- my current guru, Haycock, will explain the 'how and why' in this quote." If this is true, you don't really know it yourself; iow, there's not much you in your argument. So, I suspect that your essay is delayed by more than time constraints. Trying to fit everything into your analogy template might prove problematic in light of the inherent rationalism required for such an approach. But take as much time as you need. I just hope that you don't jump to another training protocol in the meantime; you might have to change the name of your essay to "Haycock: the Nathaniel and Barbara Branden of Weight-training." -- then post some quotes from James Valliant, and Greg Glassman of CrossFit -- to tell us all why. "You have to choose b/w induction (science) & rationalism (pseudo-science) - “You can’t eat your cake and have it, too.”" I don't accept your premise that Haycock represents "induction (science)". So, the Morton's Fork remains. "Ever hear of the idiom "reinventing the wheel?" If it's been said better before, why say it again?" Interesting. Your defense of parroting others with no genuine input from yourself begins with more parroting? No, you don't have to reinvent the wheel -- but you do need to understand how a wheel works. "Trying to evade all the inductive science against HIT might prove problematic in light of the inherent dishonesty required for such an approach." And continues with even more parroting -- of me? "The essay was originally my way of giving back to the Objectivist community, but given the evasive mentality encountered in this thread, I'm beginning to doubt its value." I think we all had our doubts regarding its value -- and more doubts that an essay containing an original formulation from you was forthcoming. Like any other bad poker player, you had to fold once your bluff was called.
  8. Haycock is one of many in the fitness industry who create pseudo-scientific systems to peddle their needless supplement lines. He should be mentioned in the same breath with Joe Weider, not ARI. And yes, Mentzer was guilty of rationalism -- like a young Peikoff and many "Objectivists". They also like to deal in weak, questionable or false analogies.
  9. Logical Thinking CD set by H. Binswanger
  10. Ayn Rand eBay Auction click above for the listing -- which ends in a few hours.
  11. Passion of Ayn Rand's Critics Auction click above.
×
×
  • Create New...