Betsy Speicher

To member Brianna:

Wishing a very to member JMR.

To member Bert:

THE FORUM is now closed to new posts. All existing posts will remain available and can be searched, read, and downloaded. Members can also continue to message each other.

That's because it isn't a source for stress, and never has been. When I first encountered hostility for stating what I thought was true, way back in the NBI days when I noticed seemingly dishonest actions on the part of Branden and questioned them, the reaction I got from some other students was "That's Nathaniel Branden. Who are you to question him?" I was very shocked by that but even then, I wasn't stressed out about it, just puzzled. When I asked them why they reacted that way, they couldn't give me an answer that made sense. Since then, being the outspoken "judgemental" person that I am, I have run into plenty more hostility along the way, but I am no longer puzzled and I realize it comes with the territory. When I am attacked by those who find themselves backed into a corner because something I said or did exposes their pretenses, or threatens to, I tend to be amused. I know they can't touch me because I'm right and I think, "There they go again!"

I join the groups that interest me because of the topic and/or the people who belong to it. Once you join Facebook, "friend" me and check out the groups I belong to. If any suit your fancy, join them.

That is a pretty good theoretical answer to what you assumed was being asked, but I would approach the statement differently. The statement strikes me as odd and the first thing I would do would ask the person who said it "Whatever do you mean? What are you referring to? Why did you bring this up?"

Perhaps you missed it because, depending on the cognitive context, consciousness can be regarded as an entity with attributes. For instance, you could compare the consciousness of a cat with that of a human being and note that human consciousness has the attribute of being conceptual and feline consciousness does not. In other contexts, consciousness can be regarded as an attribute (or action) of a living entity. A clue as to what the cognitive context may be is how you are using the word "consciousness" in a sentence. If you're using it as a noun -- "Existence is primary and is the object of consciousness." -- it is probably as an entity. If you are using it as an adjective -- "Animals are conscious living entities." -- it is probably as an attribute.

Hi Eric, Most of the action is over on Facebook these days, but if you're looking for a high-quality Objectivist forum, Harry Binswanger has changed his list and it now operates more like THE FORUM. It costs $$, but you can try it free for two weeks. Go to http://www.hbletter.com/

Contact ARI and/or Dr. Ghate and see if they can help you find the videos.

Videos of Dr. Onkar Ghate’s chapter-by-chapter discussion of Atlas Shrugged, delivered in June 2007 at the Clemson Institute for the Study of Capitalism, have been made available on the WWW free by the Ayn Rand Institute's Objectivist Academic Center. It is available in three parts of approximately 1 1/2 hours each. Part 1, Part 2, Part 3.

In what sense does Chalmers hold that there are areas we will never know? What areas is he referring to?

Why do you dislike Cheney so much?

Maybe they have avoided the external consequences of what they did, but there's no way of avoiding the horrible psychological consequences.

Sure. Introspective awareness is "material provided by man's senses" too, but in the form of sensations -- pleasure, pain, hunger, thirst, etc and the somatic manifestations of emotions -- rather than the extrospective "five senses" -- sight, hearing, touch, smell, and taste.

I agree that it is a definition and an accurate one at that.

No, but now I'm curious too. Let us know when you find out.

Those are truths about reason and logic, but they're not definitions.

"I Love Rand" was arguing that ownership and having a property right are not the same thing and I was trying to point out that they are the same because both refer to what actions you may take with regard to a physical thing. He was arguing that if you buy a copy of Atlas Shrugged and cannot legally make copies and sell them because the Estate of Ayn Rand owns the copyright, then you don't really own that book.

Oh, no!

That's wrong for the reason's we've already given you. Repeating this assertion adds nothing. At this point, I don't know whether you are 1) A troll who actually hates Rand 2) Someone who is out to promote the idea of government ownership of natural resources to fans of Rand by googling for and pulling random quotes out of context and misinterpreting them to support his position, unaware that his interpretation is dead wrong and at odds with Ayn Rand's fundamental principles. 3) Someone who is honest and heard a thing or two about Ayn Rand that he likes, but has little or no first-hand experience with Ayn Rand's own writings other than a quote or essay here and there. That's OK because we all start with ignorance, yet what concerns me is how you speak with authority and certainty while making claims about Rand that just ain't so and how unwilling you have been so far to answer our objections or correct your own mistaken views. I'll assume the best, that it is the third possibility. Even so, at this point, I will not continue this discussion until you first answer a question I asked a few posts ago: What do you know about Ayn Rand and what is the source of your knowledge? Ayn Rand or what certain people have said about her? What books and articles by Rand have you actually read?

Actually, I was asking why you love Rand, as indicated by your screen name. If you love Rand because you think she supports ideas which she, in fact, rejected, maybe you don't love her as much as you think you do.