Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/30/2018 in all areas

  1. That's a fun old thread. But reading it again I'm a bit embarrassed to find on page 3 that I wrote "recidivus" when I certainly meant "redivivus".
    1 point
  2. Oh Lawd, every US President in the modern era is a subject of humor.
    1 point
  3. I think "microcosm" is entirely accurate, and it's a shame that reviewer blocked your essay, Roger. In a clumsier rendition, I'd also suggest that a work of fine art is an 'omni-distillation' - all reality reduced to one, 'new reality'.
    1 point
  4. uh-huh,...Objectivists, as a whole, will abandon Rand's views on abortion when any one of the following events become an epistemological/metaphysical certainty: 1) Leonard Peikoff and Nathaniel Branden each write a preface to new editions of each other's surveys on Objectivism, in effect, "kissing and making up" (er, symbolically, of course). 2) David Kelley's and Will Thomas's The Logical Structure of Objectivism is finally published with laudatory comments from Yaron Brook. And the book is published by ARI. 3) Obama reads Atlas Shrugged and appoints Walter Willams as his economic adviso
    1 point
  5. Welcome to OL! The passage I put in bold succinctly explains why we need experiments (and other structured empirical investigations) in applied psychology. Robert Campbell
    1 point
  6. Once again, the silly fool has no idea what he is talking about. Once again, he is the cyber equivalent of Ellsworth Toohey doing all he can to discourage people from pursuing individual growth and achievement, giving them excuses not to take actions that could potentially improve their lives. It would be one thing for him to admit that he lacks the personal courage to pursue a technique that has helped so many people improve their lives. But he wants to raise a quasi-scientific smokescreen to prevent others from doing it. He is enshrining his own ignorance as a self-righteous bulwark in
    1 point
  7. Roseanne Barr was dumb to say what she said, but she is ROSEANNE the loud mouth, prejudiced, blue collar character (and person) that she is. Doesn’t she live in Hawaii, a state of extreme tolerance to racial issues? Left wingers can say the most horrible outrageous things, like wishing someone were decapitated and get away with it, but the Social Justice hypocrites could care less. Roseanne should have been booed, and maybe lose some of her viewership, but it was a bit much to just fire her, like ABC and her talent agency did. And talk about intolerance and an agenda! Interracial couples
    0 points