Wolf DeVoon

How is the Cruz kid a "white man"?

11 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

I argue from the back to front in one direction.  The point I am making is that the physical laws of nature insofar as we know them has no moral or ethical content.

Fine, let's talk about biology. Evolution favored a class of primates with normative abstractions, which eventually made physical science possible.

You can't win this one. Physical laws of nature have to be known and obeyed to yield useful application (useful to who?)

Physical survival of an individual or an entire clan depends on good behavior (reason, law, justice).

Hahahahaha.

Quote

 

Dear Wolf DeVoon:

Your paper “When Will a Constitution Bring Leviathan to Heel?” has been accepted for presentation at the 2018 Annual Conference

of The Association of Private Enterprise Education®, to be held April 1-4, 2018 at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas, NV.

 

Hahahahahahahahaha, like I can afford to go, have a hotel night. Jeez.

On 2/11/2018 at 12:52 PM, BaalChatzaf said:

There are no moral facts. The laws of nature has no moral content. Morality is a human artifact from start to finish, from top to bottom. One could find moral "aspects" in the way science is practiced. For example emphasis on factual truth, openness in the way one reaches conclusions. Science when properly practiced has virtues and aspects resembling morally admirable qualities.

Arguing out of both sides of your mouth. The means of gaining knowledge is regulated by moral facts. The laws of nature are opaque to all species except those who are capable of deceit, fantasy, and murder. Scientists have feet of mortal clay and their balls in a vise, too often led by generals and conquerors and scientific bodies clinging to bullshit. You know this is true, Bob.

On 2/10/2018 at 5:07 AM, anthony said:

Comparisons (with others) are odious and subjective. There are no common 'rules' (e.g. kings beating queens, etc.)

That's downright funny. Of course there are rules, except nowadays queens beat everything

On 2/9/2018 at 4:34 PM, Nerian said:

Suicide is always an option.

Don't be silly, son. I already told you that I'm sunk chin-deep in hardship, which worsened last week, a totally bizarre fight that my 16-year-old started.

Guess what? -- none of it matters, no depth of anguish or hunger or winter or abuse -- because https://www.amazon.com/dp/1985339005

We play the cards we're dealt. I don't particularly envy anyone else's fate. One life was plenty, thanks. Slightly less than 25,000 days so far, a big inventory of adventures and disasters and modest triumphs. What else can life offer, except a spiritual treasury of wandering in the world, making decisions? Whether one wins or loses at the fabulously endowed gaming table of competition with 6 billion others, there is no alternative but to play the cards we were dealt by DNA in a place and time not of our choosing.

Hmm. I considered what Anthony said above, and I think rather that the human condition is to play the cards you were dealt.

1 hour ago, Brant Gaede said:

You said that's true of 98% of us.

--Brant

does not compute! does not compute!

Okay, only true of 2%, Ayn Rand had it backwards. It is the exceptional man who is incompetent.

22 hours ago, Brant Gaede said:

Please, take a deep breath. You're either a productive human being or not. Not doesn't necessarily mean wrong; you may be living off of past work, etc.

Overstating your case ironically runs it into the ground. That was also a forte of Ayn Rand. 

--Brant

I spoke of it to acknowledge that I can't feed myself, no power of technical skill, no talent to produce anything the market wants.

Money by doing what? -- flipping hamburgers, sweating copper tubes under a bathtub, or telling tall tales? hauling crates and hides and sacks of wheat? or driving a car or a truck? or factory shift work? -- I've done all those jobs, required no skill whatever. And worse: none of those jobs would have existed without the enormous legacy infrastructure gifted by our forebears who fought wars, invented and built whole industries, drilled hundreds of thousands of oil wells and built refineries and pipelines that haven't been expanded or upgraded since 1970. A curious year, 1970, peak domestic auto production and peak oil production, long before you were born. The internet was a gift of DARPA and CERN, government agencies. Speaking of which, government spending explains your entire life as a schmoo, a guy without scientific, medical, or engineering skills. Do you like television? -- then thank Philo T. Farnsworth who invented it, a statue in his honor being taken down for some trivial reason, a lack of space to honor an unproductive schmoo. Read how much Farnsworth sacrificed to give you a window to the world. And consider Frank Zappa, who you did not know nor pay a single penny for a genius who illuminated the world at the price of his life, typical of many who gave you x-rays and world security, the Green Revolution and human rights. No genius? No military service? -- you're dead weight, bub, a delusional ingrate who doesn't understand economics. Your money is a $20 trillion handout in Federal debt, a $500 trillion pyramid of derivatives backed by what's known in the trade as good collateral. Guess what that is? U.S. bonds -- worthless paper without the men and women of genius, gambling in life to keep you and hundreds of millions of other schmoos alive, masses who think that they pay their way by doing nothing of note, shopping in stores that they did not build or finance, consuming a bounty that they did not mine, grow, import, manufacture, or transport -- none of which would have existed without daring pioneers and the power they bequeathed. Have a computer? Thank William Shockley, an asshole no one liked, and Ada Lovelace, who public schmoo history ignored.

Ayn Rand said that 2% of mankind feed and clothe the other 98%. She was right.

3 hours ago, Nerian said:

In my life nothing has moved me as much as the beauty of girl. Am I the only one? I'm serious.

I used to think that, until the humbling honor of my first day on the set, directing a feature film. Failing to make a lasting career of filmmaking, I began to write fiction and of all the characters I created, the women were far and away my favorites. With Rand, of course, it was the reverse, mooning over an ideal man, the hussy.

3 hours ago, Nerian said:

You literally can do without it (engineering and biology), personally. Humanity cannot. Massive difference. That's what money is for.

Has little to do with money, bub. You are the recipient of modern medicine, clean water, and IT, courtesy of your betters.

44 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

There are many, many free classics that you can do this with if you like this system of reading with text and audio at the same time as I do.

Michael

Thanks for additional media tips. Unfortunately, I can't read or listen to Shakespeare, either, just won't go in. Maupassant, Moliere, Hawthorne, Dostoyevsky, the whole crew, although curiously I understand Balzac completely because he was crazy. Happens with modern authors, likewise. Two pages of Stephenson or Irving, I'd rather eat glass than give them another atom of attention. Great handicap being practically illiterate, except every word of Hammett, Chandler, Rhodes, Rand, and Fitzgerald. Possibly a vitamin deficiency. I deeply regret that Hemingway waited so long to kill himself, age 12 would have been better, Melville, Dickens, and Poe age six.

30 minutes ago, KorbenDallas said:

There's a context, subtext, and impression that's being given off.  (Btw, I should mention that I don't have time to argue about this.)

Over my head. If it's not on the page, it goes right past me.

17 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Nobody's interested in Manon?

Michael

Thanks for linking to Gutenberg. Pretty hard slog for a heathen. I'm sure it's excellent

20 minutes ago, KorbenDallas said:

Well I just re-read it, and I stand by what I said earlier:  It was definitely creepy. 

Help out a stupid person (me) and point to what you're verklempt about. Thanks in advance.

9 hours ago, regi said:

a charming girl (well into her seventies I would guess) named Virginia

I know it's too late to fix anything, but the way I read it, Regi spoke about flirting with a girl age 70 not 17

11 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Girls, not women?

Hmmmmmmmm...

 

So you guys are hunks crushing it with the womens?

Be careful with how much you talk about gays. People who talk a lot about a target group and go on and on channeling the emotions and thoughts of the members give the impression that this target group is VERY important to them. It's almost like a personal threat of some sort...

 

Michael

It's a topic that arises naturally in discussion of love. I've never concealed my frank opinion on any question, but don't need to say it twice.

2 hours ago, regi said:

OK, it's my turn. The following is a Valentine's post I did in 2016

I understand and agree. Glad you posted it.

I like the metaphor of magnetism, of which there are many kinds, large and small, permanent, induced, rare earth, electro, flexible, horseshoe. Sciabarra is a dime store horseshoe, picks up light junk-- rusty nails, bottle tops, and ironic graffiti. Straight men are bar magnets of various sizes. If we're not careful we pick up trash and get stuck behind iron bars. Little men are refrigerator magnets, overjoyed to win any kind of female. The fair sex are electromagnets; they have to be careful about who they flip their switch for, because once they bond S to a man's N, they're stuck for life, unless a crash weakens N and she turns off S. I've crashed head first into brick walls on occasion, scrambled my ionic alignment and became weakened, lost women when they de-energized their EMF.

To review, a woman with great potential chooses carefully, and when she comes near a magnetic guy, it might happen. She throws a switch and they're stuck.

A little passage from (ahem) a favorite book:

Quote

“I've looked my entire life for someone like you,” I said simply. It was true. A little tear welled up in her right eye. She nodded in agreement. So we were stuck now.

(blah, blah, blah, details of magnetic bonding...)

It took a long time for anything else to happen and then she panted and drooled, wrapped her lovely hands on my waist, both sides, slipped her fingers into my belt and pulled me closer, sad eyes locked with mine. Neither of us were happy now, because it meant so much to us.

A postscript for amusement value, to explain how straights view pansies, magnetically speaking. For an 8th grade science fair, I assembled a giant AC coil and a tall thick iron bar, plugged it into a wall socket, pushed a button and launched dainty aluminum rings flying across the room, dented same on impact.

Love guru Chris Sciabarra sez: "I have an almost boundless capacity to be loved and to give love in return. And I mean love in all its facets: the love of family, of friends and colleagues, and of those special people that come into our lives now and then, with whom one can share the kind of love that is spiritually and physically intimate. I can’t think of anything more life-affirming than love." Liar.

Thanks.

Sure. Rand's work was keyed in high dudgeon, triangles, and fatality, using that term as Victor Hugo did. I believed some of it. It's conceivable that stainless heroes exist, men who are celibate and virile (jeez, what a combination!) and gladly stand aside if the babe they love walks off with someone else. Family was not one of Rand's strong suits, mentioned only in passing that Ragnar's wife was a glamorous movie star, and that a mom with two kids had chosen motherhood as a career, which it is most certainly not. It is a destiny for some, a choice for others to toy with petulantly or to reject outright, a common cuckoo ignoring her young.

I've known a lot of married couples, life partnerships that turned out fine, and certainly they doted on one another. I'm not certain that's love. It's nesting. There's an old German proverb: "Little birds in their nest agree." Most men are pleased to have a reasonably attractive, reasonably intelligent wife. Can't blame them for gratitude if it works out well. In the old days there would be a passel of children to wrestle through adolescence, then grandchildren to cherish. Modern first and second marriages are a little different, but the basic idea is the same, be helpful and affectionate, candid, sexy, industrious. Not love. Nesting.

Let me noodle a bit on what love might and ought to be.

Not unappreciative of other considerations, but I would like to return to the topic of love.