Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by mckenziecalhoun 11 years, 9 months ago
    Let me add an aspect most people don't consider:

    Drive a car with a gas pedal and gas mechanism for a week - WITHOUT brakes.

    Try it the other way around - brakes without gas.

    That's what Republicans and Democrats are for.

    Socialists are the monkey wrench in the engine.
    Objectivists, Constitutionalists, and others are the steering wheel.

    The day our government AGREES on everything, it's time to flee, fast.

    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by geneligman 11 years, 9 months ago
    Thanks for posting this Khalling. I did not know it was available, and it is quite a good talk. Though there was only a few things that were new in it for me, it is very good to hear the principles laid out again, and Yaron is one of the best.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by MikeJoyous 11 years, 9 months ago
    Jehosophat, this was such a pleasure for me. I loved Yaron's passion, his talking about his own deepest values. To me, that is what Objectivism was missing. I loved when he said what he did *not* know. Too many Objectivists, both I have known personally and on the Net, act like robots repeating Rand's words, rather than people who are actively trying to integrate what they do know about Rand's thinking with their own personal experiences. I also see that, to get personal, when some folks see that I have reason to back up some of my ideas, they don't admit they were mistaken and appreciate what they learned in talking with me. Nope, they just run away:( I can't envision Yaron acting that way. When he knows something, he knows it. And when he does not know something, he says so, openly and honestly. I tell you this was the most enjoyable video I have seen about Objectivism except for Rand's own TV interviews, which I also loved.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by geneligman 11 years, 9 months ago
      Mike, you hit on an important point. Good Objectivists think. They don't repeat Rand's words. In fact, when Ayn Rand found people quoting her work, she always stopped them and asked what they think, rather than what they had memorized. A complete and integrated philosophy is a very complex set of abstractions. One cannot come to an understanding of the concepts without a great deal of inductive learning, which leads to integration. Keep going down the track you are on, because it leads to exactly the right place.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by MikeJoyous 11 years, 9 months ago
        Hi Gene, Danke schon, amigo:) I once heard Branden say that he knew exactly the limits of Objectivism, that is, what was really known, and what was not known. But he didn't elucidate on that point. When I heard Brook explaining his view of gun rights, and what he does *not* know, I felt like a piece of the puzzle had just come into place. Brook actually showed me in that video what it *means* to think about different issues from an Objectivist perspective. I've heard Peikoff lecture on different topics and, except for the lecture about fundamental philosophy which he did (with Rand looking over his shoulder:)), his work seemed overly filled with abstractions which made it hard for my mind to function. By the way, I heard that story about Rand not wanting to talk to the Randroids:) Hmm...you know, Gene, my email address is mikerael50@yahoo.com If you'd like to say Hi, please do!
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by squareone 11 years, 9 months ago
    We will all use Objectivism in our own way, since we all vary in many ways and as a result some elements of this philosophy will be given different emphasis by different people.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 9 months ago
      Some of us don't use Objectivism at all.
      I, for one, prefer libertarianism with a strong dose of capitalism based on an Austrian economic philosophy, all wrapped up in a foundation of faith.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by CircuitGuy 11 years, 9 months ago
        Are you here then b/c there's enough overlap between Objectivism and your program?'' I'm here b/c I liked the books. I'm not sure if I agree with Objectivism.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 9 months ago
          Yeah. Except for the atheism part, I can pretty much agree with the rest. AR didn't really go deep on economic theory, and I think that she would have been well merged with the Austrian school.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by CircuitGuy 11 years, 9 months ago
            My reading of it is she's saying people should follow what makes sense to them after careful consideration. So she's saying don't follow atheism just b/c esteemed people follow it.

            Sometimes people say in UU, you "can believe whatever you want," but that's not technically correct. People believe what makes sense to them. They only control what they say they believe.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ dhinet 11 years, 9 months ago
    Very good, thank you for posting the link. I wondered if I was alone with most of the the thoughts Dr. Brooks expressed so well.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 11 years, 9 months ago
    We take philosophy serious (I like that). Is that why some think we're a little weird and even obsessed sometimes?

    As an aside, has anyone ever learned why Ayn, in interviews has that continued, jerking left and down glance?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 11 years, 9 months ago
      My son learned about a theory that says we look right or left depending on which part of our brain we' re thinking with.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by iroseland 11 years, 9 months ago
        its one of the tells you learn in Neuro Linguistic Programming. Or NLP. According to NLP once you understand a little about how a person thinks you will be able to predict where their head is at by observing the tells. Most folks will look in totally different directions when recalling a known fact from long term memory vs constructing a narrative ( creating fiction ) ..
        While some of NLP is total BS. There are some nuggets of very useful truth in it. Also, you will quickly see that you are not alone in understanding the tools of the trade. Obama was using it all over the place back in 2008 during speeches.. Just think about how many times the speeches used broken counting or asked people to imagine a light from above.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Non_mooching_artist 11 years, 9 months ago
        That's interesting. I'm going to begin observing people with that thought in mind.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 11 years, 9 months ago
          He says if you are in an argument, and it gets emotional, check out the positioning of the participants. Try to align yourself on the left side of your opponent. Likewise if you want to gain empathy or illict a stronger reaction position yourself to the right. If someone responds to you always by their eyes darting right they are emotionally answering or reacting then speaking. Someone who looks down to the left is analyzing their response
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Non_mooching_artist 11 years, 9 months ago
            This is quite interesting. I'm going to be really scrutinizing people!
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 11 years, 9 months ago
              it's a theory, but...might be worth watching. he has pointed it out to me a couple of times, and in particular the Mike Wallace interview with Rand. As Zen says, it's very distinctive. My son says while Wallace is framing up the question, she listens looking right-she's reacting. She doesn't have to analyze the question, but she is very analytical with her responses. In the Donahue interview, she is looking to the right much more, especially during the Q and A. It's not perfect but there is a trend.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by RonC 11 years, 9 months ago
                I have my own theory. People lie!. Some do it so much they can even beat the polygraph. My theory is to listen carefully and judge them by what they do. If a man says he intends to fundamentally change the country, then proceeds to highjack the banking industry, the welfare industry, project government ownership into heavy industries, and cause the collapse of the health care system; then I would say he told the truth. On the other hand, if a tenant tells me she can't pay the rent because the mail has been delayed by bad weather, I kind of believe she was lying. When I carried mail, weather was just part of the job. My Biblical friend says "Judge the Fruit!" I guess that's the same idea.
                Reply Cancel
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by 11 years, 9 months ago
                  Well we know Rand was not lying when she was explaining her philosophy in those interviews. I think this theory is more about *how* people think when they're conversing or getting their thoughts across to someone else. Did you watch Dr. Brook's talk? What did you think of it?
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo