Patrick N.

I'd like to point out that Aristotle never said "A is A." To the best of my (limited) knowledge, Aristotle thought the Law of Non-Contradiction was the most basic metaphysical principle. The Law of Identity wasn't made explicit until many, many centuries later. Those who have an interest in the subject may find this thread at THE FORUM for Ayn Rand fans interesting: http://forums.4aynrandfans.com/index.php?showtopic=881

This comment is insulting... to animals. Please call them "sub-animals."

Another question, if you don't mind: Do you think silvertips or full metal jacket would be a better self-defense choice for a smaller caliber pistol? I have heard that for smaller caliber rounds hollow-points are a bad idea because they don't penetrate far enough to substatially damage the attacker. I've never talked to a Cop about these things before, let alone a *Rational* Cop! So I value your opinion!

Rational Cop, I was wondering if you knew anything about the effectiveness or not of the .32 ACP. Is it too small to be of much use for self-defense? My reason for asking is because I want to know how effective a small .32 pocket pistol would be.

How about Warwick Davis?

Of the girls linked here, Yuko Ogura is my favorite: http://yuikabe.cool.ne.jp/idol-a-ogura_yuko.htm She's just so cute! And don't forget the fact that you're an Objectivist! Talk about a dream come true for me!

New Jersey is actually on my list of potential places to live (because of its proximity to New York City). Would you mind telling me more about the corruption there?

He's a good dog.

Maybe this will help you: http://forums.4aynrandfans.com/index.php?showtopic=881

Go here: http://forums.4aynrandfans.com/index.php?showtopic=881

Mr. Laughlin wanted me to give you this message: "The Firefox connection worked for about a week. Now, even through Mozilla Firefox I can not get access to OO.net. This problem first appeared this morning, Thursday. When I click on the button near the top, the button Patrick help me set up for OO.net, I get this message, as an alert: 'The connection was refused when attempting to contact forum.objectivismonline.net' When I try to go through Google search, on Firefox, I get the same message. As before, this problem appears only in trying to connect to OO.net -- not in connecting with any other site on my favorites list. Burgess Laughlin"

I honestly have not read enough of your posts to answer your question. But I do like your avatar and screen name.

He's using MSN. I'll ask him to try Internet Explorer instead.

Burgess Laughlin is unable to post. When he signs in, his name appears in the Board Statistics at the bottom of the page, but at the top of the page it still says: "Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )" Each time he tries to log in, the same thing happens. When he attempts to post, he gets this Board Message: "Sorry, an error occurred. If you are unsure on how to use a feature, or don't know why you got this error message, try looking through the help files for more information." The error returned was: "Your posting permissions have been removed." It then says: "You are not logged in, you may log in below." If he tries to log in again the whole frustrating process happens anew. I have tried to sign in with my own user name from his computer and mine does not work either. It appears that the problem is restricted to the relationship between OO.net and his computer only. I don't know on which end the problem is occurring. We deleted all cookies on his computer as well as all offline content and the problem still persists. I contacted GreedyCapitalist about this to ask him if perhaps Burgess had been accidentally banned, or if someone with a similar IP had been banned. GreedyCapitalist told me that Burgess's IP address doesn't match anything in the ban list, so that can't be the problem. We still have no idea what is causing this problem. Can anyone help?

I have known about the philosophy of Objectivism since I was 16 years old, but I never actually practiced it until I was 23 (I’m 27 now). On some implicit level I must have accepted the theory/practice dichotomy. For most of my youth I lived without principles or direction. I thought I was an Objectivist, but in practice I was a just a hedonistic pragmatist. I was unhappy, my life was going nowhere, and I didn’t have a clue. Then I "woke up." I realized that this is it—this is the only life I’m going to get and I had better make the most of it. It realized the virtues of Objectivism are not an intellectual game, but practical principles meant to be used. I started taking a long-term, principled approach to my life. I began practicing Objectivism—not just thinking about it—but acting on it. The results have been incredible and I am very, very happy now. The moral of the (true) story is that theory minus practice equals zero.

*Bump*

*Bump* This topic should be set to sticky.

Congratulations on receiving your degree! Are you planning to go to grad school?

Thanks for the free tutotial.

I got (18x^3)+60x+(15x^2)-50 for the first problem. The original equation contained a negative 6x rather than a positive 6x. I got (3x^2)+6x-5 for the second problem. Did I make an error? For the third problem I arrived at the same answer. Anyway, thank you very much for the help.

While I'm at it, can anyone explain domains and ranges of functions to me? The concept confuses me.

I am having problems with a math assignment. The class is 100 level. When f(x) = -6x+5 and g(x) = (3x^2)-10 I am supposed to find (fg)(x), (g+f)(x), and 3*g(x-4) I am then supposed to simplify the results. For (fg)(x) I came up with (-6x+5)((3x^2)-10) For (g+f)(x) I came up with (-6x+5)+((3x^2)-10) For 3*g(x-4) I came up with 3((3(x-4)^2)-10) So far so good (I think), but I can't remember how to simplify any of the results. Math is not my interest and sometimes it frustrates me. Can anyone help?

I do not agree. All the parts are relevant. You cannot separate philosophy from politics, or any other part of human life. Philosophy is always relevant, it underlies everything. To look at a political philosophy while ignoring the rest of philosophy is to drop the context that makes politics possible.

Why would you look at only part of the picture?

I was going to let the others in this forum answer your question, but now I've changed my mind. If you want my advice, go to the library, get everything you can on Kant, and read it. Just to warn you, I tried to read Critique of Pure Reason years ago and was shocked by Kant’s awful writing style. Even so, you ought to know where Kant was coming from in his own words. After you have read most of his major works, post specific questions here about them. Perhaps the more knowledgeable people can help you then. Once you have gotten a taste of Kant’s work, I would then read The Ominous Parallels. Also, to further your study of Objectivism, you should sign up for the Objectivist Academic Center this spring. If you really want to be an Objectivist philosopher, the OAC is a must. I have heard nothing but good things about it, and am planning on signing up myself. -Patrick