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 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Forward one pageLast Page


Post 100

Sunday, July 3, 2005 - 11:56amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Oh my goodness, I can't stop laughing!

I was so pressed for time on my last login that I had only that one to post.

Certainly no intention on my part to throw a monkey wrench on this relationship (which has blossomed on the Economics board, of all boards). You go on your merry ways gentlemen, I'm not one to spoil your fun.

Kant is a seductive mistress to those with a rationalist bent - "Pure Reason" is bliss to the innocent. Alas "Pure Reason" does not exist. The noumenon/phenomenon distinction provides a neat divider to organize the messy universe. Until you read that last sentence again - it just asserted something knowable about the unknowable.

Rick, if you're trying to find arsenic for your syphilis, you may have come to the right place (ok, ok... penicillin). Being labeled a Kantian is a curse among objectivists, but it doesn't bar therapy. Should I monicker you 'Kid Kant' in return for your 'Mr. C'? 'Kid Kant' has a nice ring to it.

I did insist that you be more "honest" on more than one occasion. Apparently, I was the only one who noticed. About blaming my big mouth... well, Ed inquired, and there's that objectivist virtue of honesty, so...

[It's not like you can hide that fact for long, especially around here.]



Sarah, that was a most cinematic zwischenzug: You sure could use such talent in... film.

Speaking about that "science documentary"... since biology is one of the hard sciences, it would indeed be possible to start with dry material, livening it up, then end with profound dialogue... Galtspeak anyone?

Oh I forgot, we're already having another soap episode (unfortunately, nothing to do with this particular "Les Affaire").

Post 101

Sunday, July 3, 2005 - 12:18pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Pfft... biology. Ha! I'll not have my name besmirched by being associated with such a... dirty science. Worms and whatnot. That's all 'dem biologists do ya know. Worms. Yup.

Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 102

Sunday, July 3, 2005 - 12:50pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I swear by all I hold sacred that I am steadfastly resisting the urge to make a suggestion. But it keeps getting harder and harder...

Michael


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 103

Sunday, July 3, 2005 - 1:04pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Michael,

Given our history of things you insinuate that I don't understand, I humbly request you keep on resisting that urge.

Sarah

Post 104

Sunday, July 3, 2005 - 1:09pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Pfft... biology. Ha! I'll not have my name besmirched by being associated with such a... dirty science. Worms and whatnot. That's all 'dem biologists do ya know. Worms. Yup.
You obviously haven't done any research in molecular biology lab before...it's not dirty at all.

Oh I see, "getting down and dirty with worms"...you are talking about a different type of biology entirely :-0

What are you then? A cosmologist? Well, there are the "big bang", "string theory", "black holes" and "pulsars" if you are desperate for subject matter ;-)


Post 105

Sunday, July 3, 2005 - 1:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
sigh

What have I done?

Post 106

Sunday, July 3, 2005 - 4:35pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
What have I done?
I don't know, but I'm still keen to know what your science background is.


Post 107

Sunday, July 3, 2005 - 5:39pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
My science background? A blossoming theoretical physicist, focusing on relativity and related topics right now.

Post 108

Sunday, July 3, 2005 - 7:17pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Wow! I'm impressed!

I'm working on the elixer of youth and one day you might be able to send us back in time.

Perfect ;-)


Post 109

Sunday, July 3, 2005 - 8:34pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
MSK, since your urge is getting harder and harder, I surmise you're not really holding anything sacred. ROFL!

Indubitably, Sarah understands now.

Life, the universe and EVERYTHING indeed!

Post 110

Sunday, July 3, 2005 - 10:52pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Dayaamm num++!!!!

LOLOLOL...

Stooooop!!!!!! Are trying to get me in trouble with Kat?

Michael


Post 111

Monday, July 4, 2005 - 12:56amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
What's another SOLO soap?

Ok, I'm seeing claws heading this way... gotta run...

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 112

Monday, July 4, 2005 - 1:06pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Nah, my claws are not out today.  Michael may be a dirty old man and joke around a lot, but he has earned my love, respect and trust and it would be really hard (I mean difficult) for him to get in much trouble with me.  When it does get harder and harder,  he knows that all he needs to do is to just go into the kitchen for a bit.   ;-p

(Edited by katdaddy on 7/04, 3:47pm)


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 113

Monday, July 4, 2005 - 6:09pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I'm confused, what is it that Michael's cooking up in the kitchen that keeps getting Kat so excited? Because whatever it is, I could use the recipe...


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 114

Monday, July 4, 2005 - 9:10pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ah, the claws are on vacation this 4th of July. As a gesture of goodwill, I'll also take a day's leave from surmising the relative sacredness of this thread.

Whatever that MSK recipe is, it's a good bet half of it is catnip. Katdaddy keeps calling him "Colonel", so the other half could be breaded fried chicken. Sounds yummy already... please pass the catsup....

Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 115

Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - 1:16amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Andrew,

How about starting with an ice-cold can of whipped cream and strawberries? Then go on from there?...

Num++

Kitten once made a post to me when I mentioned something about alternative forms of marriage (gay, multiple, etc.). I said that of course this would exclude children and other species. She asked if that was a Dear John Letter and signed it as Kentucky Fried Kitten. I laughed until the tears flowed that day.

The Colonel is a long story that has a lot to do with Branden in the Rand...

Michael


Sanction: 8, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 8, No Sanction: 0
Post 116

Monday, September 12, 2005 - 12:08pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Let's look at what we mean when we feel that life is meaningless.  We're really saying that nothing seems worth the effort, nothing seems worth living for -- in other words -- we see no values worth achieving.  Meaninglessness = Valuelessness.  Ergo, the meaning of life is value achievement.

Post 117

Monday, September 12, 2005 - 5:44pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hoy Jennifer,-

Another victim, jolly good....
Let's look at what we mean when we feel that life is meaningless.  We're really saying that nothing seems worth the effort, nothing seems worth living for -- in other words -- we see no values worth achieving.  Meaninglessness = Valuelessness.  Ergo, the meaning of life is value achievement.
Very post hoc ergo propter hoc, if you know the phrase. For others would say that value achievement and effort are done for the sake of living; that life is the primary.

Everyone here has fine, often warm-fuzzy, reasons for the sake of life but who can say what life itself is for the sake of? Why choose life? Ayn Rand teaches us to trace the virtue of honesty back to the ruling values of self-esteem, purpose and reason. These in turn trace back to 'Existence exists. I want to live.' Pretty deep stuff, deep enough for most.

It reminds me of "....she swallowed the dog to catch the cat to catch the bird (how absurd to swallow a bird) to catch the spider (that wriggled and jiggled and wriggled inside her) to catch the fly....."

Nobody knows why we swallow the fly. Perhaps we'll die. :)

 


Post 118

Monday, September 12, 2005 - 6:54pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Rick, the way I see it is:

You don't have to choose anything as your values-- there is no morality without them. There is no objective reason to choose to have a value.

But you can choose to have a value. If you do, you've got something to live for, and you've got morals.

Post 119

Monday, September 12, 2005 - 7:35pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
What's all this buzzing I hear? Folks still debatin' 'bout "premoral" choices, eh??

Nobody -- and I mean nobody -- has tackled this speculative, watershed insight of mine  ...
there is a default mode of choosing happiness over non-happiness which locks rational agents into initially choosing life
What's the deal, folks? Did you think I'd forget (and that you could then return to the discussion -- without addressing this stop-gap, pivotal point)? 

Ed
[posturing like a 600-lb silverback gorilla]


Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.