You should post this as a topic! We need discussion that doesn't pertain to Victor.

You should post this as a topic!

Yes, and put this search in the searchbox before you do post your bit to the list (this is a topic that has recieved attention, and can be dug out of previous threads with the right tools):

emotion shmurak marsha

-- my very first post to an O-list was on emotion. If you like I can show you some of the posts that might answer your questions. Nobody (or the guy next to him) reads these blogs compared to the list itself.

William

Hi William

Thank you immensely for your response. I am new to this type of discussion opportunity. I have longed

for others with whom I could rationally discuss and explore concepts I value and beleive important. Please help me get involved. I have digested, I think, most of Rand's works. And most of the Philosophers. Career

aerospace engineer/manager. I try to understand each philosopher from a dialectic/psychological

/psychoanalytical/evolutionary perspective. Would enjoy continuing the discussion and learning the specifics of posting,searching,etc. Thank you again.

Neale

You should post this as a topic!

Yes, and put this search in the searchbox before you do post your bit to the list (this is a topic that has recieved attention, and can be dug out of previous threads with the right tools):

emotion shmurak marsha

-- my very first post to an O-list was on emotion. If you like I can show you some of the posts that might answer your questions. Nobody (or the guy next to him) reads these blogs compared to the list itself.

William

I try to understand each philosopher from a dialectic/psychological

/psychoanalytical/evolutionary perspective.

Hmmm. If you haven't already, read Frederick Crews on Freud/psychoanalysis, anything you can get by Allen Esterson, Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen, Frank Cioffi, and the very interesting current-philosophical-outrages site Butterflies and Wheels , a British site that is part of my regular reading.

My favourite living philosopher is Susan Haack.

Would enjoy continuing the discussion and learning the specifics of posting,searching,etc.

Here's a series of tips that I have worked out:

1. Use Firefox (for Mac or Windows or Unix or whatever): mozilla.org

2. Install useful extensions for your purposes (look especially at tools for saving sessions -- meaning Firefox will preserve everything you had up on your screen); the most bestest greaterer extension is Scrapbook (Scrapbook is a tool that sucks up a portion or a full page, and allows you to suck up the content of links; it saves all the material on your local disk and provides a directory; you can thus research offline): Firefox extensions.

3. Use standard search technique. In the case of the OL search function, it is quite good, but requires some fussing and experimentation.

Here is an example: I used 'emotion' as a search term, and chose 'posts' as my presentation. The results highlight all instances of the word, and allow you to quickly skim an enormous amount of material to get to what interests you. Here is the link to the results of that search.

( the two best posters on Emotion wrt Objectivism are Marsha Familiaro Enright and Steven Shmurak. Enright has a PDF on her site for you,** and would no doubt be extremely pleased to hear from you (she had rather plangently hope to engender discussion of her article, "If “Emotions Are Not Tools of Cognition,” What Are They?: An Exploration of the Relationship Between Reason and Emotion,"** which appeared in the Journal of Ayn Rand Studies.

Shmurak (and links) can be found in the thread that bears his name (e.g, search Shmurak and emotion, or, if you are lazy**, the topic header "The Wonderful Way Shmurak Faces Emotion."

Here is an introduction to Enright: http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/in...entry1887)

So, do similarly with your other interests, and add precision to narrow your focus. There is nothing in Objectivism or this site that is especially new or helpful with research. Keep your focus and do your homework

:devil:

4. Bear in mind that there are a lot of stupid people posting on this topic on this list. Not to say that one cannot be both a good Objectivist and a good thinker, the point being that neither one is necessarily related to the other.

4.a There is a very useful function of the standard Google search interface: site search. Have you discovered that already, Neale?

5. You don`t have to "show your work" and you don't have to "do the work." But it helps establish your bona fides.

++++++++++++

**Autistic Spectrum Disorders

Source: Objectivist Living Forum -> Psychology

Address : <http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showforum=36>

The Wonderful Way Shmurak Faces Emotion

Source: Objectivist Living Forum -> Psychology

Address : <http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showforum=36>

Myers-Briggs and Objectivism

MBTI a key to getting O'ism 'out there'?

Source: Objectivist Living Forum -> Psychology

Address : <http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showforum=36>

http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/in...lite=%2Bemotion

or,

http://tinyurl.com/2zr2ru

**The Wonderful Way Shmurak Faces Emotion

Source: The Wonderful Way Shmurak Faces Emotion - Objectivist Living Forum

Address : <http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=785&st=0&p=7417entry7417>

**If “Emotions Are Not Tools of Cognition,” What Are They?: An Exploration of the Relationship Between Reason and Emotion

http://www.fountainheadinstitute.com/Emotions.pdf

_________________________________--

From Marsha's Acknowledgements and first note. This is an excellent place to orient your quest. She has done her homework and it shows!!!!:

Much thanks to all those who have generously helped me with this work, by

talking, reading and commenting: Robert Campbell, Murray Franck, Louis James,

Chris Matthew Sciabarra, the members of the New Intellectual Forum, and the

members of the New York Objectivist Salon. Foremost, however, thanks goes to my

husband, John Enright, for his unflagging willingness to read the work . . . over and

over and over, and for his excellent editorship.

1. Chris Matthew Sciabarra (1995) offers an extensive, well-researched and

thoughtful examination of Rand’s views on reason and emotion, as well as her views

on the psychoepistemology of art. Neera Badhwar (2001) has succinctly commented

on many of the same difficulties and discrepancies—and research issues—regarding

the relation between reason and emotion as I do in this paper.

2. I want to state for the record that my intention is not to be derogatory

to Rand’s thinking in the least, for I have the greatest respect for it. I have learned

too much from her, and benefited from her wisdom and insight far too often to

complain that she erred, she didn’t have all the answers, or that her answers were less

than complete! These days there seems to be a wave of whining about the negative

effects of Rand’s ideas on those who once accepted them. While I’m sorry for any

bad effects her ideas, her attitudes, or her errors, may have had on my life, it

behooves me to take responsibility for having accepted and used them.

3. For a long and interesting discussion on the subconscious and implicit

premises, see Campbell 2002.

[ . . . ] &cetera

Neale,

Hello. Just a quick introduction. I've been "around" the Objectivist world for a long time, since Fall '63 (first read Atlas in spring '61), and I've posted a fair amount on OL. You'll find my name as 5th, I think, in the list of "top 10" posters. I'm currently as much as possible in hiding, for several reasons, a prominent one being a health condition which makes working at a computer screen rather an ordeal (long-term complications from childhood polio).

I didn't, as I recall, post anything on the emotion subject. It's too long and complicated. But William has given you excellent pointers to finding "the good stuff." There is definitely good stuff on OL, though it often needs digging to find it.

Meanwhile, I want to thank William -- thank you, William -- for the link to Butterflies and Wheels.

I hadn't known of that site. On clicking the link, I found on the front page a link to lots of information about a subject which came up at one point on OL, that of whether or not Mileva, Einstein's first wife, significantly "collaborated" in the work of his Annus Mirabilis, 1905. I did not have time when the subject came up to find sources, and my husband didn't have time,** but I knew that it had been well argued that the story is "one of those," good for attention but without real foundation.

Now I can send this link to the OL poster who had pretty well swallowed the tale.

http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/infocu...in's%20Wife

Again, thanks, William.

Ellen

** My husband's a physicist, and a minor expert on Einsteiniana, gave a lecture titled "Einstein, the Myth and the Magic" to several groups, lay and professional, in 2005.

EDIT: Oops; I originally gave the date of the Einstein Annus Mirabilis as 2005; it was of course 1905.

___

http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/infocu...in's%20WifeAgain, thanks, William.

No oroblem. I like that site, and I like the "Notes and Comments" section very much. It's where Ophelia Benson rants about daily philosophical outrages. I aspire to her clear and pointed style and her facility with the bow and arrow of reason. It is not pleasant to get thwacked in the ass by reason, when the arrow has been targeted by OB.For those who like critical thought, it's [among] The Place. The politics are neither huggy-wuggy socialist nor shrill wishful thinking. And they answer their mail . . .