About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3


Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 60

Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 10:57pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I swear this guy handed me a flower when I passed through the Detroit airport...

Post 61

Friday, April 29, 2005 - 3:56amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
He was a bit hari-ed, wasn't he.......

Post 62

Friday, April 29, 2005 - 6:11amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hello Dean,
                  Since you are bent upon giving me $1000USD please go ahead!


Post 63

Friday, April 29, 2005 - 6:12amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Guys,
         When was the last time I visited America?
10,000 years ago?


Post 64

Friday, April 29, 2005 - 2:52pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Andrew B., please keep in mind that this guy kept me in a mirthful mood while I made some other posts. We could be crossing paths on other threads based on a misunderstanding.

Post 65

Friday, April 29, 2005 - 6:29pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Murugan Koliar,

This is the deal I am offering you:
You will provide a rational argument (based on objective reality) that will show that something some kind of thought or consciousness is transferred from one being to another when a being dies, yet the transfer is not through DNA or the 5 senses.
AND
I will give up my membership at solo
AND
I will give you $1000USD

OR

You will never speak of re-incarnation again- until you have reason to believe it.
AND
You discover you have faith in re-incarnation. Faith is belief without reason that may also have contrary evidence.
Last chance. Deal or no? Make your answer in the form "Yes, Dean, it is a deal." or "No, Dean, it is not a deal." Otherwise, it is not a deal.

Post 66

Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 2:08amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hello Everybody,
                           'Yes,Dean,it is a deal'.

     I will be reloading the discussion of 'Who is the real life Howard Roark and John Galt?'
in the Ayn Rand message board of the meetup.com.
     Please pick up any one idea from there and prove it as wrong,then that's it.
You can only have fun in doing so but you are not going to succeed - upon my word,that is!
 
     Existence Exists.Rebirths and Immediate rebirths are one higher concepts of
existence which Ayn did not want to talk about.She avoided these discussions
completely.I will explain the reason for that soon!
   
     And you are using that[what ayn did not talk about!] as a weapon against me which will not work.See the point.Something is true because it is true even if
Ayn chose not to talk about it!


Post 67

Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 4:05amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Something is true only if you can prove it - else it is mere believing.

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 68

Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 7:59amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Murugan,

I hope your English level can follow what I write below.

I would like to direct your attention to the chapter that deals with axiomatic concepts in the Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology.

In it, Rand basically gave the reason she did not speak too much about this kind of metaphysical speculation. Her drive was to create a philosophy based on reason.

There comes a point where deductive/inductive reasoning, which is based on referents in reality, no longer works. That is when you have an axiomatic concept or, in the case of reincarnation, faith-based (non-reason) opinion.

The hallmark of any axiomatic concept is that it cannot be refuted by assuming the opposite, which is a condition for reasoned proof. For example, the opposite of existence is nonexistence, which is not a state of anything. It is a lack of state. It automatically steps outside any syllogism or empirical evidence.

The opposite of consciousness is non-consciousness, which means a state of being able to evaluate something without being able to evaluate anything. It falls outside once again.

The opposite of reincarnation is non-reincarnation. It is life forms having a single existence within a time frame. That is reasonable and metaphysically possible. Just look around you.

When you're dead, the show's over dude.

Of course, you may have a different opinion...

Michael


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 69

Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 8:15amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
When the moon is in the seventh house,
And Jupiter's aligned with mars,
The mystic fog know as Murugan
Returns as Kareem Abdul Jabaar.

This is the dawning of the age of silliness,
The age of silliness,
Silliness!
Silliness!

Harmony, misunderstanding,
Sympathy and rust abounding,
No more worries or decisions,
Golden living dreams and visions,
Mystic crystal revelations,
And the mind's true aberration.

Silliness!
Silliness!


Post 70

Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 11:29amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Murugan's posts illustrate the main downside of my global encouragement to Ayn Rand Meetup members to move to SOLO.  In the words of online Objectivist personality Noumenal Self, "Objectivism attracts lots of nuts."

Post 71

Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 2:41pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Murugan Koliar,
When you walk past a lady on a street whom you have never seen before and she beams at you and makes some gesture pointing at her breasts then you go ahead and place your one hand on one of her breasts and see if you don't get slapped no matter how good looking you are?

I never got slapped to this day by a woman!
Thank you!
It is quite possible that your lack of being slapped by women is true because of something other than re-incarnation. Which woman have you touched? Did they approve of it? Have they used other methods to convince you to keep off? I do not see how this supports the idea of re-incarnation, in fact, it seems to me that whether you have been re-incarnated is independent of this event.
Do you still want any further proofs for re-incarnation?When I walk on the streets of Mumbai I occasionally see an american,german or french girl who looks at me because i am the krishna.I don't wonder how they got to know about Krishna.He is supposed to be the most famous individual on this planet!Check facts of reality and give up mysticism completely!That much is expected from Ayn Rand readers.
By the way,have you seen shades of krishna in the character of Leo in We The Living.No he is not the highest man but you think Ayn is innocent!Are you underestimating her?Oh,Lord!
You failed to support the claim "[women look] at me because i am the krishna." How do you know they are not looking at you for another reason? I bet this is more likely the reason: women look at things to gain information about their surroundings, and you happened to be part of their surroundings.

To answer your question: I have no idea what Krishna's character is like, because I have never taken the time to learn about Krishna. Also, I haven't read "We the Living", so I do not know the character of Leo. So I also cannot compare or contrast the character of Krishna to the character of Leo.

Comments:
Our deal did not include me disproving unverifiable and non-falsifiable claims. You carry the burden of providing verifiable falsifiable evidence that re-incarnation is a property of reality. Above, I have provided non-mystical verifiable falsifiable explanations which seem more likely to be the cause of the events you described than re-incarnation. It doesn't seem reasonable to believe a mystical explanation when non-mystical reasons satisfyingly explain the events.

Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Post 72

Sunday, May 1, 2005 - 6:35amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Murugan,

I did not appreciate that email you sent to me nor some of your other remarks here. I would not usually put things this way, but there is obviously a language barrier to cross this time...  

You are a nutter and a complete fuckin' asshole. Consider yourself slapped by a woman....me. 

 I am asking Linz to ban you from Solo.



Post 73

Sunday, May 1, 2005 - 8:18amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Murugan,
Hmmm... maybe the woman you speak of are oppressed, so they are incapable of defending themselves? What I mean is: they wish you did not touch them, but they know it is best for them not to do or say anything about it, because otherwise they will be beaten or ostracized.

Kathy,
Thank you for providing me with a counter-example to Murugan's claim. I am afraid that you might be condemning a person that can change... can you give me more time to talk with him before you have him banned? I hope that one day you will be able to change the statement "You are a nutter and a complete fuckin' asshole." to "You have been a nutter and a complete fuckin' asshole."

Joe & Jeff,
Feature request: Ban list for solo mail.
(Edited by Dean Michael Gores
on 5/01, 8:20am)


Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 74

Sunday, May 1, 2005 - 10:01amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Dean,

Go for it and scratch you savior itch. I get the same itch once in a while, but most of the time it is a waste of time.

One warning though. This little sucker has already sent Kat a come-on email. If he even thinks about groping her breast, being slapped by a woman will be the least of his worries.

In this lifetime.

You hear that Muru-baby, stud?

Michael


Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3


User ID Password or create a free account.