Hazard

Everyone is responsible for their own choices and actions, even if the consequence is death. What is your standard for determining when rights belong to someone? Jordan

Michael, A miscarriage is not the intention of the mother. It is an accident (right?). Just as it is not manslaughter when a man's own heart fails him. It's unstoppable. Jordan

Brant, Why store your books when you know you wont be able to find them later? Jordan

Thank you for the consideration, Bill. Actually, I am quite pleased that my welcome has turned into a full blown debate. I enjoy such an environment. Gulch, If you consider a human as "a living organism which possesses a volitional conceptual consciousness" then I would not consider myself as a human a year and a half ago! So does this mean that I was simply a living organism without rights, not actually human, until I was 16? I know that technically I had a decisive conception of my own consciousness, but I was such a pitifully brainless lemming back then that I wouldn't consider it as such. No logical proof there, just a thought. From a more logical vantage point: The US Constitution did not create the rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness; it just identified them. Thus, the Constitution is not proof that a fetus does not qualify as a human. If the Constitution did create our rights, then does that mean that anyone who is not American does not have a right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness? Jordan

Wow, that is an incredible story. Jordan

G.S., Respectfully, you have contradicted yourself. Is it true that you believe that truth does not exist? Well that is what you just wrote, therefore you do believe in truth. Otherwise the statement that you made would be false, in which case you would believe in truth anyway. Truth must exists because in order for it to not exist, it would have to be true that it does not exist - again contradiction. However, if you believe that contradictions exist then I suppose we must remain at odds. There is no point in explaining the theory of the EM spectrum to a blind person unless they have a scientific curiosity about it. It won't give them any sense for what a color looks like. Dragonfly, Assuming Flagg's logic is flawless, the Solipsist's viewpoint cannot be logically consistent because it would contradict Flagg's logic. And I do not understand your statement about the relationship between truth and the consistency in what he experiences. What form and interpretation are you referring to? Jordan

Adam, That is a good analogy, though I didn't completely grasp the end I think I get the idea. I am Prolife - when a woman and a man mutually agree to partake in the act of sex they are responsible for what ever consequences that may bestow upon them. In the case of rape, I have no idea what to think, because I still believe that the baby has a right to life. But my previous example applies to most cases. Jordan

Adam, I was introduced to Ayn Rand by my Dad who learned of her through a Objectivist Radio Host. But I go to a private school, and they don't have any debate club. Gulch, That video is very interesting. Thank you for your enthusiasm in sharing your views with me. And thanks to the rest of you as well.

Well if the "proof deals with Objective reasoning and logic" then it only applies to objectivists I guess, not solopsists. B) Allow me to rephrase my statement: If the Solipsist rejects the existence of reason and logic than it is impossible to prove the falsehood of Solipsism to the Solipsist (just as it is impossible to prove to someone that ignores reason and logic that 2+2=4) but it is possible to prove the falsehood of Solipsism to those who acknowledge the existence of reason and logic in the objective universe. Just as it is impossible to explain to someone who was born blind what a color looks like, so is it impossible to explain a logical proof to someone who rejects logic. Aside from my main point: Do Solipsists acknowledge the existence of truth? Jordan

First off, thank you all for the welcome. Gulch, I discovered Objectivist Living while searching Google for more information on Ayn Rand. I enjoy philosophical debates, so I soon realized that OL is my kind of forum. What exactly do you mean by "plans for myself"? As for your cause, I did not begin to follow politics until recently, so I am not informed about Ron Paul, his stances, or how he is treated by the media. Mike, Yes, I have listened (in Audiobook format) to The Fountainhead and part of Atlas Shrugged, of which I am about half way through. I very much enjoy her books. Ayn Rand, in fact, is the one who engendered my fascination of Philosophy. At times, I have been over zealous without fully understanding Objectivism, but I am still learning. I'd say that I know enough to keep up with the Objectivist vocabulary. Jordan

Hello, My name is Jordan O'Leary. I am 17 and live in Michigan. I attend the same school as Bradbradallen. I have been browsing Objectivist Living for a while now, and I've thoroughly enjoyed reading the debates. I look forward to discussing and debating with you all. Jordan

Dragonfly, You are arguing that Flagg's argument is invalid because the Solipsist rejects Objective truth and reason, yes? Whether the reason exists in the Solipsist's opinion or not is irrelevant. Flagg's proof deals with Objective reasoning and logic; the Solipsist's acceptance of that in no way modifies the truth of his statement. Jordan