anonrobt

her noodlefood, it seems, is egg[head]less... therefore, too starchy for my tastes...

You mean after 16 years you haven't??

The virtue of rationality described in this way would also apply to a bank robber planning a raid. It would in fact apply to everyone engaging in planning an act involving the selection of suitable means in order to achieve a personal goal, whatever that goal is. You seem to have a passion for interpreting Rand in most unsympathetic manner possible. I only quoted a fragment of Rand's discussion of the virtue of rationality. This was for the purpose of illustrating the "disposition" aspect of her treatment. If you read the full discussion in "The Objectivist Ethics," you will find that, for Rand, the virtue of rationality is a kind of generic virtue, one that subsumes a number of other virtues, specifically, independence, integrity, honesty, and justice. These would clearly not apply to a bank robber, no matter how thoroughly he planned his crime. So how about giving Rand a break from time to time, even if you don't agree with her arguments. Adopting a proofreader's mentality while considering snippets from her work won't get us anywhere. Ghs Yes - she keeps trying to turn concrete examples into floating abstractions...

Are you suggesting there could not be a Francisco D'Anconia? While most of my life has been directed in more specific areas, largely excluding other areas of endeavors or thought, any which I did decide to devote my time to turned out to be a very competent affair, with only the limits of aging and life limiting the distance which could be gone... am I then a 'freak'? not a 'normal' human being? then if normal, why not others also normal? [granted, on the south side of the bell curve, matters are different, but none of us are discussing them, and to bring them up would be straw-dogging]

My thoughts too - as well as - how does he stop?

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/shame-on-wikileaks-framing-lawful-engagement-as-anti-american-propaganda-part-one/ http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/shame-on-wikileaks-framing-lawful-engagement-as-anti-american-propaganda-part-two/

I think I’ve seen the two of you duke it out on one site or another. FWIW, just looking at this thread, Michael seems the reasonable, polite contributor, and Jonathan just comes across as a dick. It’s like how Xray chases Jeff Riggenbach from thread to thread, even after he’s told her he doesn’t want to talk to her on any subject. I believe the social sciences have provided and explanation for this behaviour: ROFL... sadly, so true...

Very interesting, and illuminating - indeed!!

'some evidence in monkeys'?? sure? or maybe ye confusing with apes - they both primates, but they not the same...

Dan, If you're talking about the government of the United States, which projects its military power nearly worldwide, your remarks carry some plausibility. But think about Norway or the Netherlands; in both countries, members of Islamic immigrant groups are frequently at odds with everyone else. Are these clashes happening on account of Norway invading Iraq, or the Netherlands maintaining forces in Sa'udi Arabia, or either country's government propping up a widely hated regime in Egypt? Robert Campbell I'm not as familiar with the cases of Norway or the Netherlands, but the problem there seems to be individuals in those immigrant groups and maybe the social context there -- not the worldwide clash of Islam and the West and not the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Pakistan and the likely future acquisition of the same by Iran. In other words, this is a problem with local people clashing with each other and global Islamic or Western imperialism. However, perhaps you meant this in the context of Adonis's statement about Muslims being a force to be reckoned with and certainly there is the demographic possibility of descendants of Muslim immigrants becoming the majority in those countries. (Though there's no genetic determinism here that either this must be so or that such descendants will remain Muslims or even Muslims of the kind that would be threatening to everyone else.) Tho there may be 'philosophical determinism' by the nature of what Islam is...

To be clear about this--what I am saying that it is possible that there are existents that don't exist in time and place--but that it is impossible for us, as existents that exist in time and space, to know anything about them. We can't say that they actually exist; but we also can't say that we know they don't exist. The same bar that keeps us from knowing anything about them also keeps us from knowing that they don't exist--and therefore to state, rather categorically, that nothing can exist outside of time and space is to make an invalid statement. If time and space are seen as types of relationship, than they are linked inextricably with existents. You can't have a relationship without at least one existent--and generally, there are at least two. Jeffrey S. No - to say that one can't say that something actually exist is to say that for you they do not exist [they may be suppositions or 'mind games', but nothing more] - to say you cannot say they don't exist is an invalidation on the face of it , as one does not prove a negative, for the burden of proof is to the one who says 'it is'... anything else is playing to fantasyland... on what basis can you make a claim 'it is possible'?

Things have just started to get interesting. --Brant Yup. Now it is a fight to the death between independent voters and the democrats. November is coming and the knives are being honed. Every democrat in a district or state with a large independent vote who voted for the Abomination, is now vulnerable. What happened in Massachusetts, can happen elsewhere Ba'al Chatzaf Oh no...no no no no.... Yes - methinks this will be a long HOT summer, FAR more contentious than those of the Bush election years....

In all this discussion, am seeing that the supposed definition of art is rarely being given - she wrote "SELECTIVE re-creation" of reality... wouldn't this make for some differences in viewing the definition? for one, it most emphatically does NOT mean copying, or 'mimosis', or imitating... it means taking the essence of the objects, according to what the artist considers as the essence, and in accordance with the artist's sense of life - and utilizing THAT as the presentation in the work [again according to whether the sense is that from the eye, the ear, or the hand]...

You're right there - was surprised seeing her in such short hair - does not look good on her...

Yes, and rightfully so - great one here, a real blow-out...

I for one love this - a terrific commercial - and one which could, slightly altered, be applied to Pelosi and a number of others..

Hi Joel, I'm not quite sure what you mean by the first book this is one of the shortest chapters of the Qur'an, Surah Fatihah. What racist things did you find that was racist and hardcore violence? I don't mind at all, I think you ask questions with a sincere wish to understand and I'm happy to oblige.. A Kafir is not just someone who doesn't believe in Islam or God because they don't know or it hasn't been proven to them.. Rather, a Kafir is someone who knows very well that Islam is the truth and still refuses to accept it.. Not only does it mean that they refuse to accept it for themselves, but they try to say to others that it's not true and try to conceal that truth from others and try and persecute those who are preaching it including by using violence.. That is the real meaning of Kafir, we're talking about one who knowingly conceals truth to prevent people from finding God even though they know it is the truth... That is a terrible crime to commit.. Then what is someone who knows very well that Islam is a lie, that there is indeed no god, and that all religions are, however gloriously ritualized, just primitivisms that do not address the reality of what it is to be human and to flourish as humans, that there is no 'truth' being concealed but an exposure of this lie?

Are you implying all lies are immoral? In that lies seek to fake reality - of course all lies are immoral...

The same might be asked of novelists, poets, painters, sculptors, dancers, composers, musicians, etc., no? God bless the obvious. We don't have to argue. --Brant poke, poke True, but was this an attempt on your part to call into question the entire project of esthetics? Or do just mean people don't need to know, think about, or take sides in esthetics theory to create art? If the latter, this is little different than most people not knowing, thinking about, or taking sides in linguistics theories being able to use language and even use it well. No to the former and yes to the latter. However, much of what I've read qua esthetics I don't respect, much. --Brant Understood. I've read some esthetics I've respected, some I haven't, but I don't think I've read any esthetician who argues artists must know esthetics to produce art. (Granted, there's no reason an artist can't enter the field of esthetics and a esthetician can enter the field of art. E.g., some novelists have presented their theory of the novel -- people like Henry James, E. M. Forster, Milam Kundera, and, of course, Ayn Rand. It typically appears when they do this, they're nearly invariably presenting an esthetics that justifies or validates their art work.) Duh - ye think they'd present one which would invalidate their own art work???

Yes - Drunken Master is one of the greatest movies ever...

Have to remember, The Fountainhead, truncated as it for some seems to be, was still a two and half hour movie, long in general in those days, and still a good length movie today - to give it the full treatment would had meant one the length of Gone With The Wind, not a likely event...

not really - I've been of mixed minds on this one, as 'common sense' seems to say yes, the marching will vibrate all to hell and pieces... but - there's too many things in the real world that, despite 'common sense', do not work in such a fashion, else everything would had fallen long ago... I think an issue of 'context' is involved that is being overlooked... or, maybe not - just not know...

That has been conjecture - but never proven... even Mythbusters couldn't prove the conjecture...

Sounds like 'rubes' is the word ye looking for...

The Magdalene Ritual, huh...