• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Jonathan last won the day on April 17

Jonathan had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

237 Excellent

1 Follower

About Jonathan

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    Jonathan Smith
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It's a weird building. Beautiful yet ugly, and even creepy in ways. Flying buttresses? They're nightmares. Exoskeleton/spider-alien. But the building works as a whole, aesthetically. It wouldn't have the same impact without the dark characteristics.
  2. Yes, or anyone who screams "Not ART!!!" as loudly or louder than Kamhi does. Whomever dedicates the largest portion of their life to denying the validity of other people's aesthetic responses wins, and becomes the universal standard and limit of cognition and of aesthetic response. J
  3. "The" definition? Heh. Um, I think that people can have differing views on what is or is not art. I just think that any definition and criteria that anyone offers up should be consistent, non-contradictory, and it should treat everyone's aesthetic responses as being equally valid, not just Ayn Rand's and Michelle Kamhi's. If one's definition and criteria require, say, communication of intended meanings, then that should be true of all art forms, and then all alleged art works should be objectively tested, rather than Rand's or Kamhi's favorites just being arbitrarily and falsely asserted as having succeeded in communicating. As for your question some things not being art, I think the question is irrelevant. That's not a valid way of doing philosophy of aesthetics. One doesn't start out by imposing one's arbitrary wish to exclude certain things and then work back from there. When you do that, you end up with the contradictory mess that the Objectivist aesthetics is. You invent irrational standards, and then you end up with nothing qualifying as art. J
  4. The unintended result was the destruction of art. Nothing is art by Objectivism's definition and criteria. Perhaps someday one thing might become art, and then another, but, for now, nothing qualifies or has been objectively proven to qualify. Objectivishists value denying art status to abstract art more than they value consistency, rationality and objectivity. They will not abandon their rules which they use to reject abstract art, even when they are shown that those same rules have the same devastating effect when equally applied to their favorite works which they falsely claim are validly classified as art.
  5. Hmmm. Conspiracy-tinged? WTF. So, in today's world, NOT coming to an immediate conclusion that no malicious intent was involved is to present a conspiracy-tinged mindset? Merely keeping an open mind and expressing hope that a devastating event was an accident is vicious? Speculating about possible causes that might be worth considering is now bad and kooky? J
  6. No data were ever involved. It started with theory based on feelings. Just certain people's feelings: the people who believe themselves to be the universal standard and limit of cognition, and of aesthetic response. Then rules were made, and were applied only to certain things so as to eliminate them from the realm of Art. THAT'S NOT ART!!! Those exact same rules have never been applied to the things which the rule-makers wish to accept as qualifying as Art. How dare anyone suggest that they be so applied!
  7. Auntie has a new post at her blog: She won't be publishing my comment: "The Semmelweis in me makes me repeat this unanswered challenge once again, Ms. Kamhi: Prove that anything has ever qualified as art by your definition and criteria. Objectively demonstrate it. As of this moment, nothing has ever been shown to qualify." J
  8. You've probably heard of the concept "man cold" or "man flu." I've heard it mentioned in pop culture for a few years now, and have been observing it with interest. And I just experienced it firsthand for the first time. I'm not talking about the cold, but about certain women's reactions to it. The glee. The superiority. I have a cold. I'm still up and about. I've taken the standard over the counter remedies, but I'm coughing and sneezing, my nose is running, and my voice is a bit rough. Despite going about my life as normal, I've been ridiculed by a few women whom I barely even know. They're very excited about mocking me for having a "man cold," even though I'm not actually displaying the behavior that defines it (staying in bed, doing nothing, moaning -- in other words, being affected by it, where women with colds are said to not be affected, or are strong enough to not allow colds to affect them). It's very psychologically fulfilling to them to verbally kick men when they are experiencing illness or weakness, and to derive a sense of superiority from doing so. There's no accompanying interest in science or comparing symptoms and ailments. It's just pure psychological thrill of belittling the enemy. Anyway, it reminded me of this thread, and the excitement that Billy seems to experience in focusing on right-wing conspiracy believers, but not so much left-wing conspiracy believers. Seems to have a lot of similarities to the "man cold" relishers. J
  9. Thanks, FalsifiaBilly! And here's a refresher for you: What is the Scientific Method? The scientific method is a process for experimentation that is used to explore observations and answer questions. Does this mean all scientists follow exactly this process? No. Some areas of science can be more easily tested than others. For example, scientists studying how stars change as they age or how dinosaurs digested their food cannot fast-forward a star's life by a million years or run medical exams on feeding dinosaurs to test their hypotheses. When direct experimentation is not possible, scientists modify the scientific method. In fact, there are probably as many versions of the scientific method as there are scientists! But even when modified, the goal remains the same: to discover cause and effect relationships by asking questions, carefully gathering and examining the evidence, and seeing if all the available information can be combined in to a logical answer. Even though we show the scientific method as a series of steps, keep in mind that new information or thinking might cause a scientist to back up and repeat steps at any point during the process. A process like the scientific method that involves such backing up and repeating is called an iterative process. Whether you are doing a science fair project, a classroom science activity, independent research, or any other hands-on science inquiry understanding the steps of the scientific method will help you focus your scientific question and work through your observations and data to answer the question as well as possible. Steps of the Scientific Method Detailed Help for Each Step Ask a Question: The scientific method starts when you ask a question about something that you observe: How, What, When, Who, Which, Why, or Where? For a science fair project some teachers require that the question be something you can measure, preferably with a number. Your Question Do Background Research: Rather than starting from scratch in putting together a plan for answering your question, you want to be a savvy scientist using library and Internet research to help you find the best way to do things and insure that you don't repeat mistakes from the past. Background Research Plan Finding Information Bibliography Research Paper Construct a Hypothesis: A hypothesis is an educated guess about how things work. It is an attempt to answer your question with an explanation that can be tested. A good hypothesis allows you to then make a prediction: "If _____[I do this] _____, then _____[this]_____ will happen." State both your hypothesis and the resulting prediction you will be testing. Predictions must be easy to measure. Variables Variables for Beginners Hypothesis Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment: Your experiment tests whether your prediction is accurate and thus your hypothesis is supported or not. It is important for your experiment to be a fair test. You conduct a fair test by making sure that you change only one factor at a time while keeping all other conditions the same. You should also repeat your experiments several times to make sure that the first results weren't just an accident. Experimental Procedure Materials List Conducting an Experiment Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion: Once your experiment is complete, you collect your measurements and analyze them to see if they support your hypothesis or not. Scientists often find that their predictions were not accurate and their hypothesis was not supported, and in such cases they will communicate the results of their experiment and then go back and construct a new hypothesis and prediction based on the information they learned during their experiment. This starts much of the process of the scientific method over again. Even if they find that their hypothesis was supported, they may want to test it again in a new way. Data Analysis & Graphs Conclusions Communicate Your Results: To complete your science fair project you will communicate your results to others in a final report and/or a display board. Professional scientists do almost exactly the same thing by publishing their final report in a scientific journal or by presenting their results on a poster or during a talk at a scientific meeting. In a science fair, judges are interested in your findings regardless of whether or not they support your original hypothesis. Final Report Abstract Display Board Science Fair Judging Throughout the process of doing your science fair project, you should keep a journal containing all of your important ideas and information. This journal is called a laboratory notebook. See the Science Buddies resource Science and Engineering Project Laboratory Notebooks for more information. Educator Tools for Teaching the Scientific Method Need a hands-on activity to familiarize students with the scientific method? Try our scientific method lesson plans: Teaching the Scientific Method with Paper Rockets for elementary school Learning the Scientific Method with Paper Rockets for middle school Teachers who are Google Classroom users can assign a beginner student quiz or an intermediate student quiz to test student understanding of the scientific method. The quizes can be used as a pre or post evaluation — or even both! Additional quizzes and assignable science fair project submission forms are available on our Google Classroom Integration page.
  10. Yeah, but I've heard that she loves Hitler. They say that she's a black white-nationalist, and was caught on tape admitting that she wants another holocaust. Why would they say stuff like that if it wasn't true? Huh?
  11. No, it's time for a refresher in falsifiability, repeatability/reproducibility, and the rest of the scientific method. 'Member all of the questions that I've asked which you and your darling little snuggletits Brad haven't answered? Tee hee hee? Buh, buh, buh, look over there! Tasty steamed octopus! Squid a l'orange! Salamander foie gras! Oh, my, how embarrassing. He's not heard of foie gras. Listen to his mispronunciation of it. Tee hee hee. Such a rube. No? Still no answers? Just more of the same? Not even any new and original kinds of distractions? J
  12. Why is this thread focused so much on Alex Jones? He's only mildly kooky and conspiratorial compared to his leftist counterparts who have much larger audiences. Muh collusion! Muh what are they hiding in the report!