Free Capitalist

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10...-UKs-judge.html

Not exactly. The contrast here is between rationalist, and rational. It's an -ism, an institutional reliance on reason only, to the exclusion of the senses. Another way to put it is "reason-ism" -- everything must come from reason and nowhere else. Since you throw away senses and the perceptual world, your thought processes are therefore bound to be self-referencing and disconnected from anything real or actual.

Why not read the Scotsmen themselves? Smith, Hutchinson. Even David Hume has good history, though he was terrible in philosophy.

Wow, great deal on the housing. Some of the courses look quite interesting, but I won't be able to make it this summer. I hope you'll have fun at the Dance Workshop!

Wow, very nice. I half expected this book to date from 1800s (with its precision and confidence), and so am glad to find it is from our period. I'll be looking into it.

A lot of these are exceptional. I've heard Dr. Peikoff's 30 years speech, it was great. Have listened to the Mary Ann Sures and Harry Binswanger reminiscences, which were excellent (by the way who was that woman introducing and concluding the audio segment? Her listnessness almost negated the full-of-life sensation from the presentation itself).

In other words, the Academy has lost practically all standards; is shameless. Therefore the actress has to take matters into her own hands, and remove herself from standing because her conscientiousness wouldn't let her stand to win. That's class.

What, Shrugging?

Obama didn't take Econ 101, Military History 101, American History 101 (what with his America-loving preacher), and a host of other basic classes. But he passed the Platitudes 499 class, and so is on the way towards aquiring the Baccalaureate.

I agree completely. Sense of life -- so so, but in terms of concept, and delivery, it was outstanding. Here you think you've stumbled into almost a horror movie, but... well I won't spoil anything but it's nothing so bad. And the message really is outstanding as well. I'm surprised no one mentioned Sixth Sense, which I (along with the populace at large) found amazing. But yet, I don't think M Night is of stature that he (and the media) sometimes make him out to be. He's artsy and original, but more conventional directors can quite predictably output more emotionally fulfilling and heroic movies, so he needs to work on being less artsy, and more fulfilling.

I was kind of forced to see it because of my gf, and I don't know, I thought it was a chick flick... Don't get me wrong, there was nothing bad in it either plot-wise or sense-of-life-wise, merely an absence of manliness and triumph which men really love, and a whole lot of drama, emotions, and dramatic emotions, which appeals a lot to the fairer part of humanity.

Right, Minerva, aka Athena, the goddess of wisdom (and thus goddess of wise war, waged on just principles). But whatever she is, isn't she beautiful?

This doesn't entirely fit under painting, I don't know, but these friezes were unknown to me, and I thought it could be interesting to post them here. These are the so-called Cancelleria Reliefs (or Anaglypha Traiani), discovered from 1938 to 1939, but still relatively unknown even today. http://www.rome101.com/Cancelleria/ Everyone always hearkens back to Greek friezes for true masterpieces, but these seem to me just as impressive. The expression in this image, in particular, I thought might be appealing to every member on this Forum:

Isn't he a couple thousand years older?

Amazing article.

I'm going to here save the article, exactly as it appears on the AP website, in case they'll change it later: Tue Jun 10, 8:32 PM ET http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Climate-Chan...951ac3100/print

The AP has a horrific history with photos. They have consistently doctored images from the Iraq war to make it look more disturbing and miserable, by photo-adding desolate smoke stacks, addint fires to the streets, photo-clipping desperate face expressions of the natives. etc.

It being a satellite image, from 1942?

Actually... that's a pretty interesting design. The reason they included gyroscopes in the legs, is so that the legs would move independently of one another, and allow the unit to overcome small rocks or minor impediments to one of the feet. The author is right, the unit wouldn't step like a human, but would have two independent gyroscope-controlled legs, so that one leg might go across a rock, while the other rolls by extended straight up. The only thing they're missing is a gyroscope in the body, to keep balance for the torso.

I suppose the environmental stances of the LPP are scientific? Eugenics has also been called 'scientific'. Just because you call something scientific doesn't automatically make it so.

It may not need to be attached, but it still is.

Ok, I see what you mean there, and completely agree with you. But how does that comport with your earlier post, that the LP must mention a moral justification for liberty, or else violate the foundation of its platform? LP platform should mention political principles, like 'lower taxes'. I don't necessarily agree that it has to have philosophical statements, in order to have legitimacy. What needs to have philosophical statements is the libertarian movement, and that doesn't have legitimacy by being absent of them. The LP, as all parties, is an ad hoc organization, at the moment (and for the foreseeable future) overrun by people with views completely incompatible with political freedom.

Then I don't understand the connection between that and her 'ad hoc' comment. What's wrong with voting for a party whose sole platform is 'to lower taxes', without any philosophical statement to that effect. AR expressed clear support such a party.

A political platform shouldn't be expected to be a philosophical statement, should it? As far as I know, political parties are just ad hoc organizations. The fundamental problem is not with the Libertarian Party, but with the Libertarian Movement -- which says that no justifications for liberty are necessary; that simply any justifications will do, that all are just fine. The problem with the Libertarian Party is incidental -- it is currently filled with cranks who believe environmentalism more strongly than even an insane person would, and believe US was attacked due to its guilt and interventionism. (Non-neo-con) Republicans are essentially classical liberals, and have a much more consistent political philosophy for government.