Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, MisterSwig said:

Our new episode is an interview with Gennady Stolyarov II, a longtime fan of Rand who is now the chairman of the Transhumanist Party, a political group that supports policies favoring life extension research and technology, with the goal of eliminating the problems of aging and death so people can live healthy, immortal lives. Check it out!

 

Stolyarov...the guy who used to used weird spellings like "filosphy" instead of "philosophy"? Something about "An Objective Filosofy of Linguistics"...

"Were I the sole individual employing the English language, I would initiate a thurow reform effort to rebuild it from the ground up.  Nevertheless, I would like to first focus attention on one adjustment, so as to reveal the basic premise behind the filosofy of linguistic innovation, which has in fact shaped language throughout the centuries, and has probably always met a tuf crowd of warrantless traditionalists and collectivist orthografers.

"The improvement of the language should be gradual, with time windows given for the proliferation and assimilation of each individual reform. The orthografic consistency of 'f' sounds should be a sufficient amelioration for at least the next three months. Afterward, further faults of the language should be pointed out and remedied. "

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/10/2021 at 10:38 AM, ThatGuy said:

Stolyarov...the guy who used to used weird spellings like "filosphy" instead of "philosophy"?

That's how it probably would have been spelled had it not come from a Greek root word. Personally I appreciate the variety of English spellings for the same sound. But as long as I understand you, I don't care very much how you spell a word, unless you intentionally scramble the letters, which is annoying and a waste of my time when you bust my crow with such silliness. It takes extra time for me to unscramble longer words.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our new episode is an interview with Richard Ebeling, the BB&T Distinguished Professor of Ethics and Free Enterprise Leadership at The Citadel military college. We discuss how he was introduced to Objectivism, his role in discovering the lost works of Ludwig von Mises, and his new article on Marxo-Nazism. Check it out!

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

This episode was recorded last year, before Scott and I started doing the show together. It is him interviewing me about my background coming out of a Protestant worldview and becoming an atheist and Objectivist. Scott also asks me about his favorite subject, life extension, which takes us on several philosophical tangents.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Supposing it becomes possible to live forever through technological advances, we would still need to value those advances in order to keep our lives. So unless we effectively destroy our biological nature in favor of transferring consciousness to robot bodies, I don't think we'll ever stop valuing things. (Not that I believe we could actually transfer our mind into a robotic system.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Values, which are identified, discovered, created, nurtured, protected, developed and so on: "the motivating power" of one's actions and essential to our "psychological as well as physical survival" (from AR).

Therefore, and self-evidently, one pays for one's values with one's resources, the currency being energy and thought and dedicated application etc. ... and time.

"A part of one's life". Rand

["Since a value is that which one acts to gain and/or keep, and the amount of possible action is limited by the duration of one’s lifespan, it is a part of one’s life that one invests in everything one values. The years, months, days or hours of thought, of interest, of action devoted to a value are the currency with which one pays for the enjoyment one receives from it". ]

Time passing by is what we know gives our activities a distinct *edge* - or urgency. The investment of a proportion of one's life time, that pays off in fine emotions when the values are worthy and objective ones.

However, given (in theory) unlimited time or lifespan, what I'd call the valuing capacity must - at some point - gradually decline. (As if one had an endless supply of counterfeit money to pay for goods with. The values gained would lose their value-significance).

Up until that point of decline, an extended while equally healthful lifespan is a desirable goal, you bet. I venture it may not (eventually) be much more than 2 x present life expectations to be biologically/technologically etc. feasible. That could be badly wrong. Developments will arrive more rapidly. While not close to the extremes of life extension you propose Mr Swig! But I am not knowledgeable on the mechanics of life extension. Instead, the relevant nature of mind, the psychology- and a base to rational selfishness - fascinate me about this subject.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now