tndbay

too bad rand didn't have skinner to give her some solid neurological foundations to tie epistemology to it. for truth is implicit and can be extracted automatically- this is what brains do. their relationship in time makes it possible to distinguish a cause from its effect. validating it with logic requires language, but long chain associations, whether labelled, defined and validated or not still are in the genus 'concept'

any real world situation will be infinitely less abstract, too. the context would be defined in infinite detail- the lines of responsibility distinguishable, the claims of ownership- all the details that can make it amenable to ethical analysis using the concepts of ownership and damage. if it still appears murky, zoom in to resolve details to black and white. then zoom out, to break goedel, and see if subsuming an issue can make things tractable. as a general rule, it is perhaps best to grant the claim of humanity to any creature who might be able to claim it and only reject that claim when the alternative is to reject your own. - peter

i can point you at the scotoma that's at root of the guru syndrome in the objectivist world. it was installed by rand herself. it is the anti-concept of 'ideas as property' ideas do not possess the nature of exclusivity that real material property does, however, as an author, depending on special monopoly privilege born of ancient royal and ecclesiastical fear of ideas, there is an obvious cui bono regarding a choice to further this anticoncept as a commonplace. it is objective reality that an idea can be in many places at the same time and that nobody can possibly steal an idea because, as any 3 year old child of 2 can tell you: if it isn't missing it can't be stolen! -peter

thanks for a great short story. thanks for the happy ending. reminds me of rod serling you selected the necessary elements to convincingly convey the concept. a g/f once asked me if there was Anything that could get me off the computer. then a friend came by with a new humvee, some time later, and let me drive it, so i immediately messaged her to report that a hummer could get me off. your scene has been replayed here more than once, believe me...

thank you for your site. it is stimulating in a way the neighbors just can't be... lol i have no credentials. i only ever saw rand on tv. once, though, i was the youngest and highest paid section foreman on a railroad. At that time i had 2 full time jobs, actually, and during daytime lunch break i read atlas shrugged. words are our cognitive tools, and she had such a nicely organised toolbox of precision tools i was enthralled. after writing 'who is john galt' on half a dozen box cars, i quit the RR. suddenly i knew i knew better and was determined to test it all empirically. it was especially easy for me cuz, having clear memories back to age 4, i could remember detailed chats with my mom, and even direct quotes from AS. i was her experiment. the galt motif persists to this day. i pirate endlessly from the speech, use addresses in Galt's Gulch such as Taggart Way; i had lots of jgalt@ emails at one time..lol - with no numerical suffixes, either. i still keep one. but my attorney advises me to confess nothing further, so...lol anyway, it looks like i've been having piggyback rides from objectivists since i could walk; i'm grateful for the boost. atm i'm 'illegal alien', so plz forgive what you may regard as excessive concern for anonymity. P-}

Hear my request you, nonexistent God, and in your nothingness gather these, my complaints, you, who never leave poor men without the consolation of deceit. You do not resist our requests, and our yearning you clothe. (?) When you are farther from my mind, the more i recall the placid counsel with which my (ama? = alma, soul?) sweetened my sad nights. How great you are, my God! You are so great you are but an Idea; reality is too narrow, however much it may expand to include you. I suffer at your coast, nonexisting God, for if you existed, i would truly too. (ojala que se mejore pronto...) once more but this time w/ unlicensed poetic swerving ... Hear my plea, you nonexistent god, and in the void assemble all the matters i entreat, you who never leave poor man without the consolation of deceit. The further from my mind you are, the clearer i recall, what sweetened my sad nights, the peaceful counsel of my soul. Reality, on you, my lord, is too short in the sleeve. And too tight in the seat, my lord- and this is why i grieve: When you get down to prey, next time you do it you'll rip the fabric of space and time as we knew it and that will reveal your vast fundament to me!

my standards are these: if the transgressor has the motive, means and opportunity to restore, repair or compensate the damage he's done, then fine- fix it and the claim vanishes and all is well- furthermore, the character has defined himself as responsible and safe to deal with. if the transgressor has no such means, then it fell to me to exercise due diligence and i must adjust my tolerance with respect to what i allow myself to gamble on. forgiveness *may* be in the program- but i must be able to find a way to forgive myself first for sloppy tolerance settings. that generally means taking the steps to prevent the same error ocurring in future. that may mean 'delisting' somebody from the roster of associates with whom i deal and bitching at myself til i think i learned the lesson. if the transgressor can but will not fix- then i have a salvage job. reclamation or compensation is first on the list, regardless of the transgressor's convenience. failing to achieve that, retribution might be next on the list- ahead of forgiveness. forgiveness is done at the sole discretion of the damaged party. the transgressor has no right to claim it. mr transgressor is obliged to inform himself that a victim may choose to set the price of his victimhood much higher than the life savings of the transgressor who may have made a seriously bad gamble as well. forgiveness is 'writing off a bad debt'. i've done it before to acknowledge my own failure in the bargain. it has to be accompanied by corrective action lest it be repeated and become a habit. i've done it before to achieve the value of closing the case and recover some of my own brain power. and i've done it before when the damage was simply irreparable. i admit that i don't run into the situation often cuz as a general rule i do everything myself, so i know who is responsible for the thrill of victory or the agony of defeat. that guy gets hammered when he screws up. as a result of that discipline i have practically zero outstanding obligations. none have much potential to damage an innocent and make him do theses on ethics like we do here. btw- it was a few weeks ago i actually completed ALL my promises and obligations in the whole world (but one) and i was not free! i was in danger of being bored- so i had to get up to my neck in something quick just to be comfortable...lol

gracias, gonzalo

i get it about keeping the monogrammed luggage- but what governed alyssa's choice of ayn rand? on a different topic- i'd like to see if my wife may be related- is there a genealogy available? if related, she'd be within a generation or so, i think

good spotting, roger. therefore we should ask the question afresh without reference to historical error. why is this called for? well, if 'art is the recreation of a metaphysical world view', more or less, then absolutely everything a person Chooses to do is art, objectively and absolutely. an individual is the architect of his own dreams- and usually does it with some kind of style. furthermore, if anything utilitarian must be dismissed from the realm of art, then that must mean that contemplation is itself of no utility. so, what is art, really? it's not always a recreation. art can also be a tool of discovery rather than exposition. an artist may do what he does purely for himself to learn from it. that may be to create - not re-create. i'll propose 'semiotic neologism' to start you off, eh? let's play Find the Flaw! (i've since posted a definition of Art elsewhere that appears to be fully consistent with all aspects of reality i've tested it against.)

the word also applies in engineering to the upper and lower limits of what will give acceptable performance. one can view the individual h. sapiens as a mechanism that performs certain useful functions (or not) for the pursuit of one's values. a person performing a function need not posses certain virtues to do his job well; if other attributes are irrelevant, he can still be tolerated in the specified context. that's where we find truth- in a specified context, not floating abstractly. then we examine ever larger contexts to see if other system performance may require adjustment of the tolerance, i.e., do we need to be more or less discriminating or general in order to achieve best economy til the projected exp. date of our dynasties or whatever, until the cost of evaluation itself exceeds the anticipated return on the effort. it's amazing what a mixed bag of brilliance and stupidity may be encompassed within a single individual. fortunately, the fit survive and the truth persists. the splitting and the lumping to find the equilibrium that nature agrees is adequate are part of the process that carries us forth.

tom kuhn wrote that the ingredients for a 'paradigm shift' were 2: when the current idea is widely understood to be bankrupt and at the same time there is an alternative idea that is widely understood to be adequate. as i watch the mystics rush headlong to their private Jonestown or literally bankrupt themselves trying to cover up their ugly nature- i also read that Atlas Shrugged may come out as a movie this year starring brad pitt and angelina jolie. does anyone have a presentiment about this?

there is a song, that for me comes close to what i imagined haley's concerto might be: Funeral for a Friend, by elton john (it's great, right up to the part where he opens his mouth- if you cut that off and fade it out nicely, you get an awesome concerto!) i don't like the author, but i love this work he did. the hammond organ splits the earth and the ascension after the victory is glorious. i don't listen to it too much lest it lose it's power for me. it elicits fairly specific 'visions' in my imagination- probably, at root, from associations installed from watching cartoons on saturday morning that formed my earliest associations with music to physical action or emotional state of little animals...lol you might like it if you try it, though. on the other hand, nobody likes a 3 am inquisition on his psychoepistemology just cuz he likes a beethoven tune. that's a song and dance that might properly be called malignant.