blackhorse

Firehammer does a good job exposing the problems of pop culture objectivism. I find him to be more of an Ojectivist than many self proclaimed ones. Like I said, I don't agree 100% with his content , but I find that I agree with more of his work than not. It's refreshing to hear his idea's amidst the cacophony of Objectivists supposed defenders. He is an obvious admirer of Ayn Rand and Objectivism. Another fellow that I like is G. Stolyarov II at the Rational Argumentator http://www.rationalargumentator.com/index/

Mark, I fully agree with your assessment. Like I said, I like most of what he has to say, even the part about homosexuality, but not everything. I don't agree with his assessment that man is inherently evil and what you have mentioned above regarding the Chinese mothers. I am still combing over his website and I find it a refreshing turn from "pop culture objectivism". Thank you for your insight.

studiodekadent,His arguments seem cogent to me. He doesn't go off on wild tirades in his work, but methodically builds his case, which is more than I can say for many supposed Objectivists. You may disagree, but Firehammer has a quality to his work that I find refreshing. That's just my two cents. He does make a good case some of the departation of Rand's idea's from current Oist scholars.

Is anyone here familiar with the Independent Individualist? The site is run by a "Reginald Firehammer" who seems to be a quasi-Objectivist of sorts; he extols much of Oism but has disagreements as well. I actually quite enjoy most of the content. His columns are well thought out and presented. I like most of what he has to say. Any thoughts? http://usabig.com/atnmst/about.php

The new Constitution could be something similar to this updated and objectivist oriented one based on the current U.S. Constitution. http://wiki.objectivismonline.net/New_constitution

Thanks, Michael.

It seems that too many people are drawn to filth and anti-hero's in movies...which is a good barometer of what values a culture at large embraces ---- check out there arts. (the same culture that elected Obama) Ayn Rand knew the value of art and I think that John Carter's current plummet (it may recoup in the long run) is due to a culture that values the wrong values and cannot see the merit in a heroic movie. Sure, John Carter may not have the best writing or perfect character development, but it looks as though it is presenting a positive heroic value in general. I have a hunch that I will enjoy the movie.

Yes it is on Barsoom. From the reviews I have read I hear that it is good old fashioned pulp fiction where the bad guys are BAD and the good guys are GOOD.-none of this moral ambiguity garbage that fills most action/sci fi movies these days. It's high sci-fi operatic romance, something that is sorely lacking in cinema these days. I look foreward to seeing it (in 3-D, too!)

I am going to see John Carter tomorrow. I am a huge fan of that serial and read all the books (thanks to my Dad's collection) when I was younger. Has anyone had the chance to see the movie, yet?

Dennis, I did not know that. Thanks for the information. William James IS a hero, too! ---and American is first!

I want to say thank you and pay my regards to this man. A true hero and "man of the mind" indeed. http://en.wikipedia....i/Wilhelm_Wundt "...The establishment of Wilhelm Wundt's experimental laboratory in 1879 is often regarded as the formal beginning of scientific psychology."---Nathaniel Branden

Thatcher and Rand are my two favorite women of the 20th century.

Richie Rich is another great animated series for Objectivists and their kids. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richie_Rich_(1980_TV_series)

The mother of all animated cartoon serials that I would say is the most objectivist friendly; Johnny Quest. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonny_Quest_(TV_series)

Romney will win Florida. I expect him to be the eventual GOP candidate. I am fine with it, to be honest. Obama must be defeated.

Without the net I wouldn't have access to crucial info like this. I am sure that in the days before our information age Romney would have been presumed the candidate already. But thank my deist god that information and knowledge are at our fingertips. http://dailycaller.c...vidual-mandate/

Florida is going to be a tough fight. But thanks to the internet and modern multimedia technology and information exchange (which has come a long way even since 2007 when Obama was running) people can't be BS'd like they used to. I can see Newt emerging as the victor, because the electorate is able to know Romney's RINO GOP establisment credentials.

http://www.realitysandwich.com/strange_sounds ...has a link to news articles about it.

Kind of eerie. Any explanations? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZ2ZcmMxehk

WhyNot, you are entitled to pick and choose what you like about Ayn Rand and Objectivism. I choose to give her more credit than others on the matter. But to claim that she was wrong is not giving Miss Rand credit on critiical thinking of the subject. You don't know how much and to what depth she has thought on the matter. Because YOU may dislike her thoughts on the matter do not give them any less weight and reality. What do you think a "forum" is? If everything said has to be in unanimous support it would not be a forum, but a testifying weigh station. So what about "forum rules". Civility yes, but their forum rules reads like a nazi manual. The moderators at OO are nothing less than the modern day proto-objectivist that tends more toward anarchism than objectivity. If they feel threatened by others ideas they resort to personal attacks all the while grand standing as defending "objectivity"

http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking Canada at #6 and the USA at #10!

My dear Deist god, please let Mr. Disney know that we are deeply sorry that Obama has disgraced Mr. Disney's visionary park with his presence.

The irony of the whole thing is that OO is allegedly pro free speech and anti SOPA, yet they delete more comments there than you can shake a stick at. It's BS. If they are so afraid of robust debate that they feel the need to silence those who dissent, than i suggest such people are hypocrites and work counter to really hashing out dialogue and idea's. Babies is a fitting word for them. Michael allows people their opinion even though he may disagree, but at OO it is goose step or get out. Objectivism doesn't need any more self righteous assholes.

I bet Gingrich wins South Carolina.

I was posting on OO regarding Ayn Rand and homosexuality (I prefer to defend her idea's regarding the matter) and they deleted my posts!-all the while they have this huge website stint going on against SOPA and defending free speech! One poster called me a homophobe (which I am not) and his post was left up. I have been nothing but articulate in my debating there. Is it just me or is that website run by hypocritical babies?