J.K. Gregg

Members
  • Posts

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About J.K. Gregg

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    J.K. Gregg
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://tetracide.wordpress.com
  • Skype
    Tetracide

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Sacramento, CA
  • Interests
    Politics, Psychology, Technology, Futurism

J.K. Gregg's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

0

Reputation

  1. Energy is not consumed. See conservation of mass-energy. What is reduced is the Gibbs Free Energy of a system, that is the energy capable of doing mechanical work. See http://en.wikipedia....bbs_free_energy Ba'al Chatzaf I knew this. Semantics is a bitch.
  2. Instead of starting a new topic, I decided to just append this one with another question that is tangentially related to my creative writing. I am trying to determine which formula I'd like to use to measure advanced civilizations. There are a few different theories out there, including: The Kardashev scale, which measures civilizations by the energy they consume; Gerhard Lenski's scale which measures civilizations by the amount and use of information; Robert Zubrin's scale which measures civilizations by how wide-spread the civilization is in space. I am wondering which of these three posited scales is superior to the others, if there such exists. Let me know what your thoughts are.
  3. Thanks for all of your responses and sorry for the typo in my post. I ask because I have taken on a personal project of formulating a fictional constitution of a objectively proper government. I had originally left the expansion of inferior courts up to the supreme court, but realize the error in this. To advance the conversation a bit: what are your thoughts on term limits on judges?
  4. Who do you believe the framers left the establishment of inferior courts up to the congress and not to the Supreme Court? Is there a conflict of interest in allowing the judiciary to expand itself? I suppose congress, in its power of the purse, would need to approve such expansion, but why at its own behest, and not of the Supreme Court's?
  5. Objectively speaking... Would a security alliance between two states be a proper exercise in government authority? If so, would an agreement including the clause that an attack on one alliance member is an attack on all be rational? Thanks, J.K. Gregg
  6. Thank you for all of your posts and book ideas. Mr. Marotta touched on something important. My novel will take place within an Objectivist society; the vast majority of individuals subscribe to an individualist, Objectivist culture. The conflict will occur between the Human race, and another species that is non-objectivist.
  7. Hello again, everyone. Hope all is well with you. I am working on a science fiction novel based in a futuristic Objectivist society and need some help crafting the universe in which my story will take place. I have asked friends and family for their insights, but they tend to be influenced by altruism or other non-objective positions. I really would like to spend some one-on-one time with a fellow creative Objectivist that is willing to work with me on my terms. In particular, I'm trying to establish a view of what a purely objectivist state would look like. Anyway, let me know if you are interested in helping me out. Thank you, J.K. Gregg
  8. Is time objective? In my free time, I have been working on a science fiction novel based in an Objectivist, human society, and as I was developing the universe I began to ponder the nature of time. We take time for granted, but upon review, it seems so subjective. It's based on the rotation of the earth, and its orbit around the sun. We've developed seemingly subjective months that have, over the course of human history, has changed in number and length (and even those changes were subject to moods and opinions of roman emperors). So, is the current way we mere mortals measure time objective? Is there even an objective way to measure time? I'd be very interested in your thoughts. Thanks, J.K.
  9. Well, allow me to describe -- in brief -- my political maturing. I became interested in politics on September 11th, 2001. 9/11 was such a dramatic event, it really sparked great curiosity within me to learn more about the world (i.e. why this happened; who did it; what do "they" believe; what do "we" believe; etc.) My family fostered that curiosity in a conservative context. My Grandfather and Uncle -- who are the political ones of the family -- are very conservative and guided my thinking towards conservatism. It wasn't long before I became a flag waving, gun-touting, kill-em-all neoconservative. I joined a few online forums, surrounded myself with other Republicans, and spent my free time bashing leftists as country-hating simpletons. Once I entered college, I met who is now one of my best friends. He was (and continues to be) a very intelligent and cogent person. I immediately admired his clarity of speech, his thoughtful logic, and unemotional reasoning. He was a libertarian. We would spend hours debating and conversing over every issue you could think of and those long conversations took their toll on my conservative psyche. It first began with gay rights (he was gay and that was "his issue"). The logic of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness and its universality began to question other premises I had with other subjects like Social Security, and foreign policy. Little did I know but I was dabbling in a philosophical structure and had no idea. College really brought out the intellectual in me. I developed a thirst for political theory that seemed to never be quenched. But one day, while I was looking for some libertarian quotes, I ran across the following Ayn Rand quote: "I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." I absolutely loved it. I had never heard of Ayn Rand before, but that single quote sparked my interest. I browsed the web to find a plethora of information about Rand and Objectivism. It seemed to resonate with me in a way that no other system did. Over the next four years, Rand's and other Objectivists' works are all I read. I first read Anthem, then Peikoff's OPAR, then tackled Atlas Shrugged in the summer of 2008. Since then I've been collecting other works like Dr. Tara Smith's books on values and rights, and Rand's other non-fiction. Now, as Ninth Doctor correctly noted, I did not change my political views -- I found justification for them. See, as much as I enjoyed libertarianism, it was very pragmatic and experience-based. Arguments against government growth were nestled in the notion that such growth in the past has never quite worked and in some instances hurt more than helped. While I agreed with this, it didn't seem like an iron-clad argument to me. Those nagging "why" question always arose; why should the government not provide welfare?; why should the government only be restricted to the constitution? It was Objectivism that answered all my questions in a clear, logical way. In 2001, I was a simplistic neoconservative Republican. Seven years later, I would fully embrace the term Objectivist. But, as I noted before, it has been a lonely trip. Even my gay friend remains a libertarian with serious objections to Objectivism. I'll tell you one final story: One day, my father, after hearing me make some comment in response to something we heard on talk radio, asked me, "Why don't you want to do what Rush Limbaugh does? You know, like a radio talk show." And I responded, "You've probably seen on reality TV those people who are drug and alcohol-addicted welfare moochers with three kids of three fathers which they don't even parent properly. And you know how you have no sympathy for them when they complain that they never have time to party or enough money to pay the rent because they spent it all on booze, drugs, and something other than their children? Well, that's how I feel about America in general -- for years it has been chugging along the wrong path and my radio show would be the most boring because my answers would all be the same."
  10. I had no idea! Very interesting. Thanks for the heads-up. Fear not Mr. Marotta. My skin is as thick as they come. Thanks for the warm welcome (and the visit to the blog).
  11. You obviously have the potential to deliver insightful opinions.

  12. Thanks for the welcome William.

  13. Welcome to OL. There is a lot of scope for discussion here -- hope you enjoy yourself and get the Oish talk you miss at home . . .

  14. Hello fellow Objectivists, For online purposes, my name is J.K. Gregg. I've been an Objectivist for only about five years and am still very new to the philosophy as a whole. I have read a variety of Rand's books, including Atlas Shrugged and Anthem. Anthem in particular was the first work of Rand's I read, and it began a monumental change in my life. I have been an active member of the Google Group OActivists - a group of Objectivists that try and advocate Rand's ideas in the varying mediums of journalism. I have a blog that I use as an intellectual playground, Persona Non Grata, and I've also published a few works with The American Thinker (an online daily magazine). Ever since I shifted from being a Libertarian to an Objectivist, I've found very few individuals I can talk to about my views and philosophy. My fiancé, bless her heart, is not very political or interested much in philosophy so I've been on a search for Objectivist communities that I can integrate with and further develop my understanding of Objectivism. I am 22 years old. In December 2010 I graduated from the University of California - Riverside with a bachelors degree in International Affairs. I'm currently attending graduate school online with American Public University in their Intelligence Analysis program. My ultimate career goals are to serve my country in a civilian capacity, hopefully in the intelligence field. As I already alluded, I'm engaged to a wonderful woman. I'm living in California's capital city, Sacramento. I'm excited to meet all of you and enjoy stimulating conversation with fellow Objectivists. Best, J.K. Gregg P.S. - I've noticed that George H. Smith frequents this forum. I read his book Atheism - The Case Against God and very much enjoyed it. I had no idea Mr. Smith was an Objectivist until I started reading his book and noticed the references to Rand. It only made the book more enjoyable.