There are currently 3 users and 21 guests online.
Linz's Mario Book—Updated!
Who Should Be the Republican Nominee?
Total votes: 20
Submitted by eg on Fri, 2006-06-16 04:35
MSK on OL states that George Reisman does not submit his articles to SOLOP, but that they are lifted off of his blog. Is this true?
Sorry for going off last night — by eg on Fri, 2006-06-16 15:01
That's interesting. What are — by Fred Weiss on Fri, 2006-06-16 14:51
Reisman and the Saddamites — by Lindsay Perigo on Fri, 2006-06-16 09:32
Submitted by AdamReed on Thu, 2006-06-15 09:28
If you include a large image, the page may widen by default to accomodate its natural width. This can be avoided by including "width=96%" in the img tag, like this:
Submitted by waterclerk on Thu, 2006-06-15 04:16
Okay, so I'm a lapsed Objectivist. Haven't affiliated with any of the various branches which lead away from the original NBI/ARI trunk, nor with the original trunk. I need to be educated as to the difference between these different Objectivist followings to determine where I should be.
Can anyone objectively describe the differences and similarities in the Objectivist thinking of SOLO, TOC, ARI, OL, etc.
Aah I see now. I too have — by Jon Coster on Wed, 2006-07-19 16:42
No Problem — by Landon Erp on Fri, 2006-06-16 23:10
OK — by Greg Mullen on Fri, 2006-06-16 23:07
Submitted by Victor Pross on Thu, 2006-06-15 03:30
If human beings are born tabula Rasa, what is to account for talent? Or does this term mean only in regards to knowledge and ideas? Still, why is that some people are born with the ability to draw? It’s an ability that can be noted early in childhood and that is clearly well advanced from that of other children. They go onto be artists, while others can’t draw to save their lives. The same goes for playing a musical instrument.
Brian — by Victor Pross on Fri, 2006-06-16 00:45
I've had a talent for — by Brian English on Fri, 2006-06-16 00:41
"I've been told many times — by Penelope on Thu, 2006-06-15 23:39
Submitted by Olivia on Thu, 2006-06-15 00:45
Has anyone else seen this film? It rocks! It stars Viggo Mortensen and is about an ordinary family man whose past descends upon him with a fury. Viggo truly kicks ass and the violence (self defense) is... well, very satisfying. I enjoyed it thoroughly. It also depicts the couples' sexuality in an interesting way. They start out with a coy, kind of self conscious playfulness which turns into something else entirely once the other side of Viggo's character comes out.
Saw it, I definitly thought — by Landon Erp on Thu, 2006-06-15 22:18
Love this film. A screenplay — by John M Newnham on Thu, 2006-06-15 16:06
Submitted by George Reisman on Thu, 2006-06-15 00:15
A Critique of Kevin Carson’s Studies in Mutualist Political Economy
Kevin Carson’s new book Studies in Mutualist Political Economy (Fayettvile, Arkansas, 2004, 409 pp.) centers on the incredible claim, self-contradictory on its face, that capitalism, including laissez-faire capitalism, is a system based on state intervention, in violation of the free market: “It is state intervention that distinguishes capitalism from the free market,” declares the book’s preface.” Capitalism, writes Carson, is “a system of privilege in which the State enable[s] the owners of capital to draw monopoly returns on it, in the same sense that the feudal ruling class was able to draw monopoly returns on land; or, as the left-Rothbardian Samuel Konkin put it, `Capitalism is state rule by and for those who own large amounts of capital (p. 92).’” Perhaps not surprisingly, in view of his description of capitalism, Carson hopes his book will provide a foundation for “free market socialist economics (p. 10).
Labor theory — by Chris Cathcart on Thu, 2006-06-15 22:18
I also recommend the other — by Aaron on Thu, 2006-06-15 16:21
Submitted by User hidden on Wed, 2006-06-14 22:55
I have zero interest in the crazy thread going on with Phil, Fred, et al, but I am interested in Penelope's comment about flirting being bad and Lindsay's post diagreeing. Either of you care to post your comments here?
Brant — by Olivia on Mon, 2006-06-19 07:21
Sense of Life Protestants — by Craig Ceely on Sun, 2006-06-18 06:09
Good point, Craig. Let's — by Ross Elliot on Sun, 2006-06-18 03:41
Submitted by JulianP on Wed, 2006-06-14 09:05
I read and re-read this chapter about five times, each time learning something new.
These are the main impressions I was left with:
Art flows from the artist's sense of life, expressing: "This is what life means to me." In particular, an artist decides what is important about reality, according to his sense of life (revealing his metaphysics), and distils that into his art in a style compatible with his sense of life (revealing his psycho-epistemology - his view of man's consciousness and its efficacy.)
Having just looked through — by Matt on Fri, 2006-07-14 14:30
More Toiling — by Lanza Morio on Fri, 2006-07-14 11:59
Jon, — by Banned User on Thu, 2006-07-13 04:35
Submitted by Victor Pross on Wed, 2006-06-14 01:52
Fred Sucks — by Gerald on Tue, 2006-06-27 19:43
Jeff, get a new writer. — by Fred Weiss on Mon, 2006-06-26 21:48
Thinking — by jriggenbach on Mon, 2006-06-26 15:29
Submitted by Mike_M on Tue, 2006-06-13 23:43
Is anyone familiar with chaos theory? The other night I had an objection to certain parts of Objectivism raised from the perspective of chaos theory. I had to say I didn't know enough about chaos theory to comment. The objector is VERY good at math (a genius, literally) and a relatively good friend. He is also an intellectually honest person from what I have observed and interested in Objectivism. I think he deserves a good, solid answer or at least beginning of an answer.
. . . — by Stephen Boydstun on Wed, 2010-01-06 04:43
. . . — by Stephen Boydstun on Wed, 2010-01-06 04:42
Nothing comes from something — by eg on Fri, 2006-06-16 06:49
Submitted by Marcus on Tue, 2006-06-13 23:11
Recently, I have had some philosophical epiphanies, independent of Objectivism, that I want to reveal to you here, that others may find them useful too.
The first of these I discovered when reading a book by the NZ philosopher - Jamie Whtye.
In the book he states that nothing is in fact “a matter of opinion“, that a statement is always either true or false.
You might think this should be obvious to any Objectivist, i.e. that A=A. Existence exists. What is true is true. What is false is false.
Zen and the Art — by Lanza Morio on Wed, 2006-06-21 10:10
Marcus — by Lanza Morio on Wed, 2006-06-21 10:07
Speaking of intrinsicism, I — by Matt on Mon, 2006-06-19 19:46
Submitted by AdamReed on Tue, 2006-06-13 07:05
All of you probably noticed that I haven't been on SOLO as frequently as in previous years. I teach at California State University, Los Angeles, and I was in the final months of the tenure process. And I did get tenure, with promotion to full Professor of Information Systems. The tenure process is strenuous enough to test the stamina of a man in his twenties or thirties. In my youth it was said that no man got tenure after age 35. I left Bell Labs at 54, a few month before the Lucent swindle came to the surface, so I was up for tenure at 60. I would congratulate myself, except that one of my department colleagues, now 78 and still teaching full-time and still brilliant, got tenure at 66. Somehow messing with computers works like a fountain of youth.
Congratulations, Adam — by Craig Ceely on Sun, 2006-06-18 02:02
Rock on Adam!!! — by User hidden on Wed, 2006-06-14 22:38
Congrats — by John Drake on Wed, 2006-06-14 18:58
Submitted by Lanza Morio on Tue, 2006-06-13 07:03
This excerpt is from Ayn Rand's working notes on Atlas Shrugged. The rest can be found in Leonard Peikoff's intro the 35th anniversary edition.
The error is this: it is proper for a creator to be optimistic, in the deepest, most basic sense, since the creator believes in a benevolent universe and functions on that premise. But it is an error to extend that optimism to other specific men. First, it's not necessary, the creator's life and the nature of the universe do not require it, his life does not depend on others. Second, man is a being with free will; therefore, each man is potentially good or evil, and it's up to him and only to him (through his reasoning mind) to decide which he wants to be. The decision will affect only him; it is not (and cannot and should not be) the primary concern of any other human being.
Thanks for the clarification — by Ryan Brubaker on Sat, 2006-06-17 22:47
This hits way too close for home. — by Adam Buker on Sat, 2006-06-17 16:53
Ryan — by Penelope on Sat, 2006-06-17 14:37
Submitted by Penelope on Tue, 2006-06-13 05:10
Okay, so for my very first SOLO blog post, I want to ask a question...how do you all go about studying Objectivism? Or maybe I should first ask: DO you study Objectivism? Do you engage in a systematic process to improve your understanding of it? Or do you just read her books once or twice?
Here's what I've been doing for the last three years, starting after I read Atlas for the first time:
1. Obviously, read Ayn Rand's books, as well as the books by other Objectivists.
Challenging someone for — by Victor Pross on Mon, 2006-06-19 20:17
How to Learn — by Rex Wilkinson on Mon, 2006-06-19 18:32
I don't entirely agree. When — by Matt on Mon, 2006-06-19 16:58
Submitted by Victor Pross on Tue, 2006-06-13 04:24
Victor Pross... — by Olivia on Fri, 2007-09-21 03:19
I can't see the text... — by Emma Kathryn on Fri, 2007-09-21 03:02
I didn't. The great — by Victor Pross on Thu, 2006-06-22 23:08
Submitted by Rex Wilkinson on Tue, 2006-06-13 00:16
I tried to add to the comment on the page but access denied so further to you definition of terms:Agnostic,the ultimate cop out too frightend to make a decision either way.The middle of the road,the place were all the agnostics go!and comment on the angry Ayn rand,Reality does not change regardless of how we percieve it and it is that which is not mere opinion but fact that I seek and my philosoph
Marnee — by Rex Wilkinson on Tue, 2006-06-20 21:23
Take a fundementalist and shove it — by Rex Wilkinson on Tue, 2006-06-20 21:12
Worse — by AdamReed on Tue, 2006-06-13 22:23
Submitted by PhilipC on Mon, 2006-06-12 23:00
I just found this on NRO by Deroy Murdock citing in part an article in the Daily Telegraph:
Sharia Shaves — by Craig Ceely on Sun, 2006-06-18 02:00
Monster Madness — by Rex Wilkinson on Fri, 2006-06-16 22:17
It seems Iraqis don't have — by Laure Chipman on Tue, 2006-06-13 17:34
Submitted by Landon Erp on Mon, 2006-06-12 22:27
I don't know if any of you here have read this but there's been an interesting development in DC comics recently.
In all their publications they just finished a big mega crossover and immediately after finishing it pushed all the company's books one year forward. The premise is that for one whole year Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman were totally MIA and the aftermath.
One series entitled 52 (as in weeks in one year) is being published in Real time and filling in the gaps. A good reason for Objectivists to check this out is Steve Ditko's Question is getting a lot of face(less) time, he's hevily involved in a storyline with lesbian police officer Rene Montoya.
I did have a point though, dammit. — by Landon Erp on Tue, 2006-06-13 22:32
Victor: — by Victor Pross on Tue, 2006-06-13 19:05
Submitted by JoeM on Mon, 2006-06-12 02:47
SUPERMAN RETURNS is being heavily advertised now for the June 28th release, and I've noticed something somewhat disturbing. In the story, Superman's been gone for 6 years since the end of SUPERMAN II, and in the commercial, someone asks is he still stands for "truth, justice, and all that stuff?", all that stuff being "the American Way." Anyone else afraid of where this is headed?
This isn't the first time America has been given the shaft by DC Comics.
I'll give it a shot, but — by JoeM on Wed, 2006-06-14 01:43
AMERICAN and "American" — by AdamReed on Tue, 2006-06-13 08:07
Typical — by Landon Erp on Mon, 2006-06-12 21:59
Submitted by Victor Pross on Mon, 2006-06-12 02:18
Mark — by Victor Pross on Wed, 2006-06-21 05:25
Hello Victor — by Mark Dow on Wed, 2006-06-21 05:09
[Somewhere Ayn Rand wrote — by Olivia on Tue, 2006-06-20 22:50
Submitted by JoeM on Mon, 2006-06-12 01:57
Patrecia Neil is on the Tonies as I write this. God, I didn't realize she was the old, barely recognizable! But the voice! I can still detect a bit of Dominque...
Thanks Penelope — by Kenny on Tue, 2006-06-13 08:25
I enjoyed Miss Neal very — by Marnee on Tue, 2006-06-13 05:38
Kenny — by Penelope on Mon, 2006-06-12 17:27
Submitted by Duncan Bayne on Sun, 2006-06-11 21:30
I have spent the last few weeks organising an AMOK! knife-fighting workshop in Auckland. It all came together on Saturday, with a group of us getting together for lunch (during which we discussed individual background, skill level, and expectations), followed by an intense three-hour introduction to the AMOK! system.
Not happening any time soon I'm afraid ... — by Duncan Bayne on Sun, 2006-07-09 06:30
ok, that sounds cool. There — by Jon Coster on Thu, 2006-07-06 04:13
Setting up — by Duncan Bayne on Tue, 2006-07-04 22:44
Submitted by Victor Pross on Sun, 2006-06-11 06:13
I had written an article on some other “general philosophy” site about Objectivism and Ayn Rand. One post wrote in a rather hostile tone—-no surprise---taking on some of my points. I want to share sections from that post with Solo members here for some feed-back and comments.
The poster begins: “I really don't understand you at times Mr. Pross; actually most of the times. I read your 'endearing' essay only to find it full of self contradictory statements. As a 'philosopher', I am duty bound to analyze your assumptions and beliefs..."
Mike, I’ll tell you, I — by Victor Pross on Wed, 2006-06-14 00:31
I've only been an — by Mike_M on Tue, 2006-06-13 23:33
I also recall him writing a — by Mike_M on Tue, 2006-06-13 23:19
Submitted by Lindsay Perigo on Sun, 2006-06-11 04:41
This one was delivered as scheduled. It begins identically to last week's undelivered one, but changes part-way through.—Linz
There’s been lot of it about since I last spoke to you. Barking madness, I mean. Some of it’s good, most of it is innocently bonkers, some of it is quite intentionally evil.
Michael Cullen has certainly gone barking mad. The flaky Finance Minister went nuts at press gallery journalists for letting their own desire for tax cuts get in the way of their objectivity in reporting the issue. This after a catastrophic poll showing Labour trailing National by nine points, after omitting tax cuts from the latest budget, notwithstanding that they take $9 billion more of our money than they spend so lovingly on our welfare. Now Mad Michael must surely know that not only is it in fact the first recourse of a desperate politician to blame the media for his woes, but it’s also seen to be by voters, notwithstanding their quite extraordinary stupidity—so his impromptu tirade will send his fortunes plummeting further. But even crazier is his claim that journalists in general and those he singled out in particular, are in favour of tax cuts. At least three of those and 99% of all journalists are raving lefties who’d probably favour tax increases, especially for the evil rich. The idea that the current Fourth Estate, and the supinely subservient press gallery in particular, are zealous protectors of our liberty and our money from the greedy intrusiveness of Big Government is ludicrous. Crazy Cullen was screaming at his own allies. Barking mad, bad.
Zar — by eg on Sun, 2006-06-11 05:27
Pain deserved — by Craig Ceely on Sun, 2006-06-11 05:07
Submitted by Landon Erp on Sat, 2006-06-10 22:21
This is a writing sample featuring Raven from my comic project Frontier War. She is a young woman working as a stripper with the power to comunicate with and transform into any type of animal, as well as keep a few animalistic traits at all times
Sometimes when I come home from the club I can't get to sleep. I shower off the sweat (my own and others'), the grit the smoke and on the nights I don't bring someone home I lay on my soft sheets and try to sleep... It doesn't come. My mom wound up as a stripper, I keep promising myself I'm not going any further than being one. There are nights it's great and there are nights I want to just go feral and just rip every human in the world to shreds.
art vs propaganda — by Landon Erp on Wed, 2006-06-21 23:28
Rex, Rex, Rex... — by Victor Pross on Wed, 2006-06-21 22:18
Fantasy Land — by Rex Wilkinson on Wed, 2006-06-21 22:12
Submitted by Victor Pross on Sat, 2006-06-10 21:51
Philosophical Detective Caps.
Question: here is an excerpt from my novel The Hungry Artist. The character is Ivan Wine, a postmodernist scholar and “artist.” There is no need to set-up the scene or to describe the person he is speaking to---as the excerpt is enough to glean what type of person Ivan Wine is. What is the implicit--underpinning philosophy (besides what is obvious) that can be detected here? You’re feed-back is most appreciated.
Oh, hell yes---some do. — by Victor Pross on Sat, 2006-06-10 22:26
Ok, do people notice this — by Landon Erp on Sat, 2006-06-10 22:22
If you mean by — by Victor Pross on Sat, 2006-06-10 22:19
Submitted by PhilipC on Sat, 2006-06-10 21:18
I'm finally posting my point by point essay-length analysis of "dialectical dishonesty".
I wrote a much longer version, but to have mercy on the readers I've shortened it and condensed it enormously, often reducing four paragraphs of argument to one. Since this is condensed and contains many points or arguments stated relatively briefly and since a lot of people have been awaiting my finally posting this (as opposed to simply asking questions or addressing isolated points), I would urge that it not be skimmed but read more slowly and carefully than the usual post. Some posts -can- be skimmed without misstatement. This is not one of them.
"Victor, I specifically — by Victor Pross on Fri, 2006-06-23 01:15
For the record — by eg on Fri, 2006-06-23 01:12
WTF :) — by Victor Pross on Fri, 2006-06-23 01:08
Submitted by Victor Pross on Sat, 2006-06-10 01:16
The example of actual shifting sand in debate: — by Victor Pross on Mon, 2006-06-12 06:19
Tag, I'm it? — by Victor Pross on Mon, 2006-06-12 06:08
? — by Mark Dow on Mon, 2006-06-12 06:06
Submitted by Michael Moeller on Fri, 2006-06-09 23:22
I've lifted this from the "Phil's Plan for World Conquest" thread because it's inspiring—Linz
"Moving in a steady decline over the past century"? Really? Then what do you make of the Red Decade? How about the counter-culture of the 60s? The philosophical and cultural underpinnings of those days are favorable compared to today?
I wasn't alive during either of those decades so my finger isn't exactly on the pulse of the culture during those times. However, for evidence look no further than the acceptance of Rand's ideas. What do you make of her early struggles just getting her fiction published, compared with the resounding success the novels enjoy today? I think you are looking at a significant change in the culture--albeit it a subtle one--when even a hardcore Hollywood Lefty like Oliver Stone wants to make a movie out of one of her novels.
No need for translations -- especally in India. — by Jason Quintana on Sun, 2006-06-11 21:44
> I don't have the — by PhilipC on Sun, 2006-06-11 20:23
Translations — by Fred Weiss on Sun, 2006-06-11 03:39
Submitted by Marcus on Fri, 2006-06-09 09:15
Last Tuesday (6th of June) I delivered a talk to a recently formed Oxford Objectivist Society. The society was started by a small group of students studying humanities in Oxford, mostly philosophy and economics.
The founder of the group had learned of my name from another Objectivist when recently in the states.
The speech I gave went down really well, and the students asked highly intelligent and probing questions afterwards. This was followed by a long, but enjoyable debate. We were having discussions long into the night at the college bar.
Another suggestion, Marcus — by Kenny on Mon, 2006-06-12 13:38
Hayek vs Rand — by Kenny on Mon, 2006-06-12 13:35
Thanks for the suggestion — by Marcus on Sat, 2006-06-10 23:10
More SOLO Store
The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand
Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand