Stephen Speicher

Oh, I see. It is from one of those posts where you messed up the attributions and I did not delete that post as I now routinely do. My mistake. (Not that "required listening" is a bad thing to say about Understanding Objectivism. )

What do you mean by "appreciate?" Do you mean "agree with?"

Why? Will you give a test at the end of this thread and mark on a curve based on what we each have read? Seriously, though, more important is what you have read of Mill before making such judgments as likening his ethical views to those of Ayn Rand.

I think you misunderstand, and conflate different things. The essence of masculinity lies in character, but the sexual relationship between between man and woman takes its lead from physiological differences. I for one am not surprised that a 7'-6" man chooses an SUV to drive, rather than a Volkswagen beetle. Is there something "dangerous" in saying that the man's choice in size of vehicle is in some important sense governed by consideration of his biology?

Apparently you are not doing too much wrong, since you were able to make this post. I also see that you have now successfully replied to the hip-hop thread, so I guess the issue, whatever it was, is resolved. If you have any further problems, feel free to ask in the QUESTIONS forum or write to me personally. In any case, welcome to THE FORUM, Mark. It is a real pleasure for me to have you here as a member.

imdb.com listing for South Park (1997) TV show suggested for rating by mcgwiddles.

Book suggested for rating by Cicero.

imdb.com listing for Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow Movie suggested for rating by Uno Momento.

Well, with all those rumors floating around for months, according to this report in today's Variety (9/21/06) it has now been confirmed that Angelina Jolie will be playing Dagny Taggart in the movie version of Atlas Shrugged. Is Brad Pitt next to sign?

imdb.com listing for Numb3rs (2005) TV show suggested for rating by Nate Smith.

imdb.com listing for V for Vendetta (2005) Movie suggested for rating by Mercury.

Oldsalt (Janet Busch) asked that I post this for her.

imdb.com listing for Cinderella Man (2005) Movie suggested for rating by Vespasiano.

imdb.com listing for Miracle Movie suggested for rating by redfarmer.

imdb.com listing for Heroes (2006). TV show suggested for rating by Stephen Speicher.

I think you missed the point, Martin. The aspect of the formula I referred to does not correspond to anything real in physical reality. That is why we call it a concept of method. Whatever you do in the physical world after the calculation, has nothing whatsoever to do with the calculation itself. Look, I'm sure you must be familiar with what is (mistakenly) called the imaginary number "i." It is used everyday in calculations, by engineers and scientists alike, but you simply cannot point to it in physical reality. It is a concept of method.

And how is this relevant to the argument I presented?

Since I love the entire subject, I feel that way too. It is frustrating, however, not to be able to wrap my mind around a thought or an idea. Perhaps if you think about it some more you may be able to express your idea differently, and then maybe your view will be better received.

Non-terminating, non-repeating decimals are irrational numbers.

Martin, all measurement implies some degree of precision, so I just do not see any important significance linking this with infinity. If infinity is accepted (not all do) as a proper concept of method, then its essential element is the potentiality of a process, whatever mathematical process that may be. Infinity is not some very big number, it is a process, and I fail to see any connection there to "precision omission."

Perhaps I am missing your point, but this is just a process converging to a limit, a process which you stop at intermediate points. Rather than being "omitted," precision is being established.

I see you started to work on computer algebra. Are you at all familiar with Clifford algebras? A rather flamboyant yet brilliant mathematician, not too far from you, in Finland, developed CLICAL, a computer system for Clifford algebras. The Scandanvian mathematics community is a fairly tightly-knit group, so with your interest in math I thought you might be aware of him. Unfortunately Lounesto died in a tragic swimming accident a few years ago, but his book on Clifford Algebras and Spinors remains the finest introduction to this area of mathematics. Lounesto worked at the Department of Mathematics at Helsinki University, and though he was a somewhat strange character, I miss his wit, wisdom, and knowledge in that field.

One would hope that would be the case. However, look at how long Aristotle was lost to the world.

Creationism defaults on the fundamental methods and procedures of physics: It is not a variant of physics which depends upon reason and the scientific method. But that is different from the case of philosophy. There are many philosophies that study the fundamental nature of existence, even though they are not completely, or even mostly, correct.

It may be new to some, but personally I found nothing new. Although it was not presented in these words, in essence the notion reduced to infinity as a concept of method for which we use the standard epsilon-delta approach. I was very disappointed in the course. p.s. Pat Corvini is a she, not a he.