bmacwilliam

"In fact having the potential of an indefinate age-less life span would make life far more precious, since if you died in some silly accident you would be losing a lot more of a life than that bound by 'natural' life spans. " Not thinking correctly. Life is very important to the individual either way, it doesn't become more precious because death is just less likely. Importance to the individual determines behaviour. Just because someone dies in a freak accident at age 2000 as opposed to age 40 doesn't mean the older's life is more valuable to him - in fact since he's had more life, I could argue it's LESS valuable. How would immortality affect birth then? Families? How would immortality affect ethics, politics and economics? Retirement? Evolution? Could we live for a millenium without going psychotic? Maybe, maybe NOT. How would immortality not profoundly affect just about everything we call human? Sloppy thinking. Bob

Well, I see your grip on reality is as loose as ever. I would never dream of suggesting you would ever actually agree that your drivel was accurately exposed for the nonsense it is. You'd have to be based in reality for that. Bob

Yes.

"Traditional employment however, exists to pocket as much money as possible, while paying the employees as little as possible." Is there a problem with that? An employer will 'buy' employees at the best (lowest) price they can. An employee however, is largely responsible for determining his own value through his performance. A high performing employee can demand a good price and perhaps even a premium to keep him out of the hands of the competition. "I enjoyed not a single advancement or promotion throughout my employed years." Not everybody has equal skills or abilities. Everbody however, can improve. Did you deliberately ever make a consistent effort to be better at your job? If not, no time like the present. Your issues seem to stem from a long list of poor choices and irrational attitudes. You mentioned high-income as the solution, yet you know that's not a possibility. The reality of finances is always income VERSUS expenditures. You must drop expenses below income or you're screwed. Everybody has to live with this reality. You direct a lot of anger toward the tax man and evil government - even threatened the police. Use the energy to improve yourself. Do you do a competent job at home repairs? I know many wealthy contractors that started with nothing - one handyman ad in the paper. You write well - much better than some very educated friends of mine. What about freelance reporting? Often experience is not required You could even slide your video skills in there maybe? It's out there, but all that others will give you is opportunity - you have to deliver. Bob

Victor's correct on this one, but you've got it askew. " Do you seriously embody the notion that all things, to be truly valued, must be taken away from you?" No, but the possibility of losing them, combined with rarity or difficulty in acquiring them, among other attributes, does create value. "Must Angie be taken from you so you can value truly value Angie?" Ok, I'll leave that alone, but talk about a lob-ball!! Seriously, she must be FREE TO LEAVE at any time for her to have value. "Death does not give life value, it does not make a life have meaning," Yes it does, but you don't have to die to live (it's the possibility of death at any time). The eventual inevitability of death does indeed make life precious. "I think you need to sit down and think about this mentality a little more, this attitude" Victor needs to sit down and think about a lot of things, but in this case it's you who needs the reflection. "its unnatural to want to live for ever, immortality would be boring, bla bla bla." Forever? Mortality is a defining characteristic of being human. Change that and more things change than you might think - all the rules change. But nothing wrong with living for a very very long time. Bob

Yes, that is my contention. I do not need special insight into you to conclude this. I love my wife fiercly. I have loved her and been with her for many many years. I think our love is very real. Could I have developed anything even remotely approaching this before meeting her? That is just about as ridiculous a question as I could think of. Objectively, much of my love and attachment is based on things that require proximity, I mean that's why we live together and don't like being apart. Of course there's more than that and we have an intellectual connection and so on and I understand what you're saying about connecting on that level. Connecting on that level is a good reason to meet and see what happens. This is what you're doing, but in your mind you've taken it way way beyond this - not good. Even if it's possible to develop real and strong feelings (and not based on a fantasy ideal) in this situation (which I doubt), the premature committment strikes me as totally inappropriate. That's why I asked you about your parents - get another opinion from an appropriate source. I find your behaviour to be unhealthy and irrational. Bob

Interesting. Very interesting you'd conclude I'm much older than I am. Technologically, I'm hip man, I'm groovy. I was in the midst of all the internet insanity at the end of the last century working for a small company with crazy ideas on the edge of the MIT campus in Cambridge MA. When I came back to Canada I was deemed one of the country's 75 'Strategic Architects' of the internet scene dude, and invited to Microsoft's main campus for a conference that included meeting with uncle Bill himself. Hey, I'd like to think I was good at what I did, but the invitation was of course based on money more than anything else. I just happened to be the lead Software Architect for a Financial/Financial Technology company that was raking in a Bajillion dollars per second and part of that Bajillion could potentially go to Mr. Gates if my decisions went Microsoft way. That's why I was 'deemed', but my point is I ain't no old-school anything especially when it comes to technology. "Are you telling us that we aren’t actually feeling an intense affinity of shared values—an intense feeling of admiration, of desire, of respect, of painful longing? " Yes, yes I am. Oh, you're feeling something strong allright. The "painful longing" is the key phrase. Pain is a powerful motivator. I think you two are in love with the thought of being in love the way you think you are - if you think you know what I think I mean. Might you have a future with this? Sure, it's possible, but in my opinion, you're working hard to NOT let that happen. Bob

You've made up this so-called dislike out of whole cloth, as far as I can tell. In the one comment I've made here anywhere near that subject, I said that the reasons for such a situation can be many and varied, can easily involve matters that are entirely private, and are not at all susceptible to a facile external moral judgment. Unlike your own comment, later in that thread, I actually adduced support and historical examples for what I said. Look into the concepts "party crasher" and "disingenuous" and get back to us when you've fully ingested them, would you? Victor is the only one who needs to be particularly concerned about his parents. (Or would be, if they were alive.) If you'd read his memoir of growing up, you might have discerned some sound reasons for why he might not want to bother. Beyond what he chooses to reveal, it's none of your or anyone else's business. And even then, it's a matter of context. This is, primarily, a celebration thread. And people actually have the temerity to suggest that Objectivists are dour bastards who are incapable of accepting the joy of others without analyzing it and moralizing about it. What EVER would give anyone that idea? {/sarcasm} "Victor is the only one who needs to be particularly concerned about his parents." It is extremely unwise to dismiss out of hand the opinion of a third party who loves you when you're clearly not thinking straight. That's my point. "Look into the concepts "party crasher" and "disingenuous" and get back to us when you've fully ingested them, would you?" Party crasher, OK. The truth has a nasty habit of doing that. Disingenuous, No. "I said that the reasons for such a situation can be many and varied, can easily involve matters that are entirely private, and are not at all susceptible to a facile external moral judgment." Sure they can. That's called "rationalization". Look into that and and get back to us when you've fully ingested that, would you? Bob

Victor, you're trying to slide out of this one. I am sure you do not think that I predict that your family (parents, grandparents, sister, whatever), or other third party with your best interests at heart would NOT wish you all the happiness in the world. C'mon now. You wrote " but I am planning to move to California to live with Angie. Talk about a big step. I have vssen an immigration lawyer who has quoted around 45-hundred." My question is how they would react to THAT knowing you HAVEN'T MET. How is the opinion of someone that cares about you and is NOT caught up in the fantasy irrelevant? That's called 'denial'. Bob

"I seriously doubt he feels humiliated in the form you imagine he feels. If you are really committed to that vision, I think you will be disappointed." Agreed. This type of person is incapable of that. But he felt really angry when presented with some little, inconvient truth didn't he? Good enough. Bob

Bob, I have had contact with Ethan off line. We have some strong disagreements, but our communication has been friendly. From what I know of his character, I seriously doubt he feels humiliated in the form you imagine he feels. If you are really committed to that vision, I think you will be disappointed. I learned about spanking people with some very ugly characters in my past. When these people spank someone, there is physical contact and it is not pretty. Did you really spank Ethan or did you simply make a post on RoR? But I have even a more basic question. Do you get some kind of spiritual fuel from this kind of thing? Do you get some kind of sense of accomplishment? I'm serious and my perplexity is real. I imagine myself on my death bed. I am looking at three other guys also getting ready to die. The first says: "Well, it has been quite a ride. I wrote about 180 songs or so. About 40 hit the top 100 and 10 are now standards. It made me wealthy and has spread joy to many folks. It's been a good life." The second says: "I've had it hard, but it was worth it. I managed to put myself through medical school by working part time while I studied, and holding down two jobs in the summer. Later I invented a new heart surgery procedure that has saved the lives of thousands of people. They have paid me well for this and I'm proud of the life I have lived." The third says: "I built up a computer business from nothing. I made a pot load of money and enriched the lives of millions of people. My products are now an industry benchmark. My family is set and I can go in peace." Then I look at them and say: "I made some Internet posts and told some people off real hard. I won some arguments and spanked them good. Boy, let me tell ya', I sure as shootin' showed them! They won't forget me soon once I'm gone! No siree!" Doesn't that sound a bit, er... empty? Also, the first three are much more likely to be remembered by mankind than the last. So what is it that is so attractive about trying to beat other people and humiliate them all the time? I try to internalize the feeling and all I get is a big nothing. I know it exists because I see you and others do it. But for the life of me, I don't know what it feels like. I can't imagine the value in wasting the precious unrepeatable minutes of my life on constantly trying to humiliate people I despise. Michael Constantly? Certainly not. I have certain strong convictions, others not so strong. Keeping an open mind and willingness to learn and grow are valuable and laudable merits. This attitude takes a certain amount of humility, clearly absent in some. I don't like nor respect this type of person. I may be abrasive at times sure, but I do admit when I'm wrong, and I do admit where my knowledge grows thin. I value this highly and therefore I admire this in others. I found Ethan close minded, arrogant, and most certainly wrong. He made a very strong, very clear, and very wrong assertion. There is a certain amount of satisfaction in verbally slapping someone in the face with facts in these situations and watching what happens. It is also intellectually challenging, and I do get something out of it. The results are interesting and unpredicatable. That makes life worth living no? That's what happened with Victor. I got irritated with his behaviour and I thought I'd throw around a few obvious truths that for whatever reason, others had decided not to point out, then see what happens. Interesting results don't you think? Trolling? Only if I'm full of crap, but I'm not. "I built up a computer business from nothing. I made a pot load of money and enriched the lives of millions of people. My products are now an industry benchmark. My family is set and I can go in peace." Nice!! I wholeheartedly agree. FWIW, I have built two software companies from nothing and sold them (they're still going strong - no kidding!) and I'm currently engaged in building a totally different business from nothing and this is the most exciting one yet! Bob P.S. - In 'real' life, at school as a kid, and in hockey (as an adult too) I was the non-fighter who took great pleasure in kicking the crap out of the bully when necessary. That's just me.

http://rebirthofreason.com/Forum/NewsDiscu...ns/1443.shtml#7 Now, let me address this. Ethan got all huffy because he got verbally spanked in that argument - HARD. I see you conveniently left out the previous post that got him all freaked out. ________________________________________ "Ethan wrote: All the problems I've ever heard attributed to Objectivism are actually attributable to either complete misunderstandings of the philosophy or are examples of bad behavior from someone who claims to be an Objectivist, but who holds positions inconsistent with the basic ideas of the philosophy. I'm tired of reading things from those who mischaracterize Objectivism and Objectivists. Bob's reply: Like this one from Barbara's speech? "Those who question our ideas and those who oppose them, we are told, are not merely unintelligent, ignorant, uninformed; they are evil, they are moral monsters to be cast out and forever damned." Ah.... that would be Rand who told "us" that. Maybe she's just "someone who claims to be an Objectivist". Bob ___________________________________ Man, I can still hear the echo of that spanking... Bob P.S. The main point I was making had nothing to do with Barbara at all, or the content of her speech. No slight, insult, or even the slightest disagreement was directed toward Barbara at all. I was pointing out that Ethan's point about evil, moral condemnations, rage and other cultish behaviour and attitudes stemming from 'bad' Objectivists - not really Objectivists at all was wrong. I just pointed out, with a reference from Barbara that MY opinion is that much of this originated from Rand herself.

Right Victor! That's good! Rational too I'd say! If you had left it there, all is well. I'm finding it a little hard to believe that you can't agree that turining your life upside down, deciding to move, professing the deepest love mankind has ever known, naming your future children and whatever else... BEFORE seeing how the bond grows stronger is more than a little over the top. Bob

I think Bob has a good point here. You can hardly complain if you flood this list with hundreds of hysterical, saccharine love declarations, which might be understandable when sent in private, but which become embarrassing and annoying in a public display. So far I've avoided to comment on it as I considered it a private matter, but now everyone is picking on Bob and the wagons are drawn around darling Victor I feel I can no longer keep silent. Diplomacy is perhaps not Bob's strong suit, but I think he has made some good points with which I agree. Can't you guys just wish Victor and Angie well with some caveats? Geez... My Taiwanese wife has a term for this: Jipiu, which roughly translates to minding someone else's business. Jim What's the term for waving around your private business in public? Bob

Very interesting, very interesting indeed. What's most interesting to me is that you accuse me of 'anger' here and of 'rage' in another post. I feel neither. I suggest you look inside and reflect on why you need to project your anger and rage onto me. I asked some hard questions, pointed out some harsh reality that you both refused to face. I suggest that this is the source of your rage, and if you feel angry again reading this, then its confirmed. You need to face the rage, not me. I'll keep the insults out of it, but foolishness is foolishness. I have no desire nor motivation to be diplomatic or implicitly supportive. I'm just poking at the truth, perhaps in an abrasive manner, but it's the truth nonetheless. It also doesn't surprise me that Greybird took the chance to insult me. He doesn't like the fact that I don't think its a good thing for men in their 40's to live with their parents. He accuses me of shrouding malice in concern through a question about Victor's parents. I am neither malicious nor concerned. The question is a good one and still stands unanswered. Remember, it is YOU who brought this into the public eye, not me. If you didn't want to be questioned, you shouldn't have posted all of this. Simple as that. "have uprooted themselves and moved a considerable distance to be with their loved one and are now living together." See, you're still not getting it. Did they uproot and move a considerable distance BEFORE meeting? Bob

Of course I don't know what you've experienced, but I know what you haven't experienced - meeting. "I suppose we’re both rather pathetic then? And, by implication, as all the others are who met via the internet. " Meeting via the internet, (or let's say initial contact) and the internet itself is not pertinent. The little problem here is that you have not actually MET yet at all. To have all these big plans is not a problem in and of itself, but to do so before meeting is foolish. It has nothing to do with how you found each other. The medium is irrelevent, but to answer your question - Yes, you both are pathetic. Bob

I don't believe it. Love at first sight? That's a big stretch. Love without meeting? C'mon now, no way. No, you are not. You are in love with an idealized fantasy version of this person and vice-versa. What's motivating me to respond to this silliness is the ironic disconnect between reality and fantasy by someone who claims to place a high value on reality. Victor, that's not irrational. What's irrational (and pathetic) is offering your entire life up on a plate to someone you HAVEN'T MET. That is not rational, not reality based at all. You're setting yourself up for a big fall doing this. Not just in the emotional sense, what I also mean is that I believe that this behaviour itself drastically increases the chances of failure. I get the image here of a man at the end of his first date lying on the ground clinging to the woman's pant leg professing his love and begging her to marry him. Be that guy and you're gonna burn. Well, I actually think it's too late. Bob

Bob, This actually is what is happening. (That is also what happened with Kat and me, except I ain't specifying the hours because that ain't nobody's business.) Some of Victor's and Angie's plans are merely overlapping. All the rest I see here is just abrasive rhetoric between you and Victor. Michael There's more than that happening. Victor has professed profusely his profound love for somebody he's never met. He's said he's decided to MOVE there. Still hasn't met her. This goes beyond taking an interest on someone online and wanting to meet. The issue is not about being abusive, abrasive, or taking pleasure in other's strife. There is a however, certain pleasure in pointing out the bald-faced hypocrisy and irrationality in just about everything "Victor". His behaviour is totally irrational wrt falling in love with someone he's never met. His behaviour regarding the plagiarism issue is dishonest in several ways, but that's off-topic. His ramblings on THIS thread have a distincitive histrionic tone, and it's irritating on that level too. Tell me, and this is the second time I've asked this question and of course got no response because we all know what the answer is.... Forget about me, what about someone that has Victor's best interest at heart like a parent say, would they encourage the behaviour he's shown? Bob

Meeting online is not a problem. Meeting online is fine and dandy. Your delusions are the problem. Bob

Well, I see your grasp on reality is as strong as ever. Bob

Reality != Malice Bob Edit: But seriously, explain to me how professing one's deepest love and deciding to uproot one's entire life (assuming he has one) and moving thousands of miles away to another country is rational - BEFORE MEETING THE OTHER PERSON!!! Victor's proven he's got some potentially serious problems, yet this behaviour above doesn't qualify as "warning" behaviour? Hmmmm... Explain that one to me. Bob, So this thread is open game for you, is it? Hmm, says more about you than me. But tell me, what do you think of the idea of falling in love on-line--that is: before actaully meeting the other person? Is that screwy too? Is that possible? Does it happen? Forget about moving, what about just falling in love? "So this thread is open game for you, is it?" You want it private, then keep it private. Falling in love is fine - it's wonderful. To think that you've fallen in love and to have decided to move without ever meeting someone is definitely screwy. Don't take my word for it though, go and book a session with a therapist and ask him/her. Ask a third party, a skilled third party and then follow their advice. Let me ask you this... Do you think a parent - ANY (sane) parent - would condone or encourage this type of behaviour from a child (and I mean an adult child)? What I'm asking in other words is that is there anyone, older and more experienced in these matters than yourself, that has your best interest at heart, that would approve of your actions outlined here BEFORE you've even met? Bob Bob, so it's "too think" we are in love? We don't know it--we (or *I*) "think" we are in love? I can tell you, we are in love. And we are meeting this month (May 23) at Niagara Falls. Is that screwy, too? I mean, all the trouble and expense of making arrangements? Fine! I edited the earlier post and explained all that stuff is great. I suggest you enjoy it because I'll bet dollars to doughnuts it ain't happenin' again. Bob

Reality != Malice Bob Edit: But seriously, explain to me how professing one's deepest love and deciding to uproot one's entire life (assuming he has one) and moving thousands of miles away to another country is rational - BEFORE MEETING THE OTHER PERSON!!! Victor's proven he's got some potentially serious problems, yet this behaviour above doesn't qualify as "warning" behaviour? Hmmmm... Explain that one to me. Bob, So this thread is open game for you, is it? Hmm, says more about you than me. But tell me, what do you think of the idea of falling in love on-line--that is: before actaully meeting the other person? Is that screwy too? Is that possible? Does it happen? Forget about moving, what about just falling in love? "So this thread is open game for you, is it?" You want it private, then keep it private. Falling in love is fine - it's wonderful. To think that you've fallen in love and to have decided to move without ever meeting someone is definitely screwy. Don't take my word for it though, go and book a session with a therapist and ask him/her. Ask a third party, a skilled third party and then follow their advice. Let me ask you this... Do you think a parent - ANY (sane) parent - would condone or encourage this type of behaviour from a child (and I mean an adult child)? What I'm asking in other words is that is there anyone, older and more experienced in these matters than yourself, that has your best interest at heart, that would approve of your actions outlined here BEFORE you've even met? Edit: - Meeting online - Taking an interest - Progressing to phone conversations - Agreeing to meet and meeting up - Having hot, sweaty jungle-sex for 72 hours straight ALL GOOD! Knock yourself out!! Deciding you're in love and deciding to uproot one's life BEFORE meeting smacks of EXTREME desperation and sets oneself up for a very unpleasant dumping episode. If I was a bookie I'd give at least 2:1 odds that she'll not want to see you again with that attitude. Bob

Reality != Malice Bob Edit: But seriously, explain to me how professing one's deepest love and deciding to uproot one's entire life (assuming he has one) and moving thousands of miles away to another country is rational - BEFORE MEETING THE OTHER PERSON!!! Victor's proven he's got some potentially serious problems, yet this behaviour above doesn't qualify as "warning" behaviour? Hmmmm... Explain that one to me.

"The solution to every problem is to kick it square in the nuts." - Eric Cartman

Oh, I could think of a few adjectives... Now, that's sweet 'n all, but is it just me or is this all just a little but over the top for someone that's never actually met the other person? Sanity doesn't seem all that likely here. "Desperation", "delusion" seem much more likely. It ain't right. Getting interested in someone online? Sure, but the stuff above is screwy. Well, hey at least he provided a reference for the poetry. One thing I regret in advance is that he's unlikely to post the inevitable outcome of her dumping him in the very near future and the resulting anguish and eventual rationalizations. That would at least be entertaining to read. Bob