RickWilmes

Members
  • Content count

    909
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RickWilmes

  1. Another link that just shows Atlas Shrugged box office sales. http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2011/ATLAS.php
  2. Another site showing box office sales.  Slight drop on Saturday.  Sunday's results will be interesting. http://boxofficemojo.com/daily/chart/?sort...4-15&p=.htm
  3. Box office sales for April 15. http://www.the-numbers.com/charts/today.php
  4. Hi Ray, Lisa and I went to the matinee in Portland.  Estimate about a hundred people and there was applause at the end. It has been along time since I saw a movie where the audience showed their approval. Loved the train scenery, reminded me of my drive to St. Louis through that country several years ago. Favorite scene was Wyatt, Rearden and Dagny having dinner after fighting for their values and earning success.  The scene embodied happiness for me and I was reminded not only of the struggles that were overcome to build the John Galt line but also the struggles that were fought to have the movie produced in the first place. I will see it again this week. Final thought,  all the critics remind me of the detractors against Rearden Metal, they need to shut up and get out of the way.
  5. Do concepts change?

    "As this thread has now been given a title and as I have a backlog of questions/comments to answer and can't get to them at once" Take your time.  Some questions to consider as you work through the back log. 1. Do all concepts change? 2. Has the concept table changed?
  6. Do concepts change?

    Tom, I am wondering why on one hand you claim concepts change but than on the other hand deny that first-level concepts can include attributes and actions that are perceived, examples are red and rolling?
  7. Do concepts change?

    Tom has raised the claim that concepts change. Do all concepts change or only some change? If only some concepts change than I am wondering why first-level concepts like table, ball, pushing and red have not changed but concepts like optimism and transmission have changed as Tom has claimed?
  8. Do concepts change?

    Why has the first-level concept table not changed? Why has the first-level concept ball not changed? Why has the first-level concept pushing not changed? Why has the first-level concept red not changed?
  9. The Logical Leap and criticism

    OK you don't see his pain, I do. Stick your own tongue on the pole and I am certain you will feel pain. Unless you take morphine, as you said earlier, but taking morphine concedes to the fact that sticking your tongue to a cold flag pole causes pain.
  10. The Logical Leap and criticism

    A single particular instance, i.e., the concrete example. I watch a boy stick his tongue on a cold flag pole. The tongue sticks. The boy crys out in pain. The generalization: Wet tongues stick to cold flag poles. Effect: A boy is crying out in pain. Cause: His tongue is stuck to a cold flag pole.
  11. The Logical Leap and criticism

    "It would be nice if you would offer some proof or evidence of such assertions." Granted this is a dramatization, but this is all the evidence I need to know that wet tongues stick to cold flag poles which causes pain.  I also realize other individuals may not grasp that induction after watching the video.  I am certain they will grasp the induction if they stick their tongue to the pole instead.
  12. The Logical Leap and criticism

    Are you now disagreeing with your own example? "The wet tongue of a dead man may stick to a frozen pole, but will cause no pain." "Dead men feel no pain," is a generalization I inferred from the example you gave me.
  13. The Logical Leap and criticism

    So pushing a ball against the wall can cause it to roll?
  14. The Logical Leap and criticism

    Dead men feel no pain is a generalization.
  15. The Logical Leap and criticism

    Walls stop balls from rolling is a generalization.
  16. The Logical Leap and criticism

    Wet tongues stick to cold flag poles is a generalization. So is boiling water burns hands. So is pushing a ball makes it roll. So is fire burns. So is taking morphine relieves pain. The induction is the fact that wet tongues stuck to cold flag poles cause pain.
  17. The Logical Leap and criticism

    It should also be pointed out that PaulsHere has conceded to the fact that sticking your wet tongue to the flag pole causes pain; otherwise, there is no need to take a sufficient amount of morphine before doing the experiment.
  18. The Logical Leap and criticism

    If you don't want to think of it as a perceptual level experiment you can also think of it as a proposition or a triple dog dare. The one thing I am certain of is that sticking your wet tongue tongue to a frozen flag pole causes pain. This is my one shot example that Tom denies exists. I disagree, anyone want to try my perceptual level experiment?
  19. The Logical Leap and criticism

    Put your tongue on the frozen pole and the answers to your questions will become crystal clear. Think of it as a perceptual level experiment.
  20. The Logical Leap and criticism

    Here is my one shot example of a generalization/induction. Sticking your wet tongue to a frozen flag pole causes pain.
  21. Induction, generalizations, and causality

    What about defining deduction?  Why should cause-seeking depend on how you define induction and not deduction? Isn't causality presupposed when it comes to the method of induction?
  22. Emotions are not tools of cognition

    I have read all three of his books, get his monthly e-mail, bought one of his wallets with a notepad and pen. The book review is what motivated me to read GTD.  Your original post reminded me of this from the review. "The book is a logically structured presentation of an approach to time and life management that is grounded in good epistemology and designed to facilitate productivity in light of certain features and limitations of the human mind. The problem, Allen says, is that all the commitments you have made are “on your mind,” which overwhelms you to the point that you cannot think clearly and be productive. The question becomes, why are all these things on your mind? “[T]he reason something is ‘on your mind,’” Allen writes, “is that you want it to be different than it currently is” (p. 15). Allen’s formulation is deliberate. Many people have not really thought about the commitments they have made, and therefore have neither “clarified exactly what the intended outcome is” nor “decided what the very next physical action step is” (p. 15). And yet, inherent in allowing a commitment into one’s life, Allen says, is a further commitment: a “commitment to . . . define and clarify its meaning” (p. 17). Allen explains that, in order for your mind to let go of this corollary commitment so it can be clear and ready to focus on the task at hand, you must envision the outcome you desire and decide what is the very next physical action you must take in order to move the current state of affairs toward that outcome. Thus arises one of two main prongs of the GTD approach, “disciplining yourself to make front-end decisions about all the ‘inputs’ you let into your life so that you will always have a plan for ‘next actions’ that you can implement or renegotiate at any moment” (pp. 3–4)."
  23. Emotions are not tools of cognition

    You might want to take a look at David Allen's books, particularly Getting Things Done.  Here is a review of the book, http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues...david-allen.asp. Here is his website, http://www.davidco.com/.
  24. Induction, generalizations, and causality

    When man seeks or acquires knowledge, man uses the method of induction and deduction to acquire that knowledge. If cause-seeking is a particular type of knowledge seeking than is it deduction or induction?