Megan_Robinson

Members
  • Content count

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Megan_Robinson

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 05/09/1986

Contact Methods

  • AIM skeetamatthews
  • Website URL http://
  • ICQ 0

Profile Information

  • Location Philadelphia
  • Interests History, philosophy, poetry, music, Seinfeld, cookies, debate, the list goes on....
  1. Clash of cultures

    I fully agree with Burgess' early post about the method of debationg history, but I'd like to throw in a few matters of principle to help weigh the debate. It has been alluded to here that the US government had some right to not treat the Indians as people because they viewed themselves collectively. Does a person's seeming abdication of the individual nature of a human deprive him of his nature? Is he, because he roams around the plain shooting buffalo, without rational faculty? Does this mean he does not have rights? Can I shoot my communist neighbor morally? Does the end justify the mean? Given that there was a better use for the land, would not free and uncoerced trade with the Indians have made for a better outcome? I'm pretty convinced that the actions of the US government were morally condemable in some cases. Not to say that the settlers were wrong to selttle the land, but that it could have been done morally.
  2. My Prof's Bizarre Theory

    I took an "Africa in The 20th Century" class a few semesters ago, I was told by my professor (who was African) that African leaders are corrupt because they inherited european systems, which allow for corruption, and they cannot be blamed for embezzeling money, because the banks they use to hide the money are European. Oh, and of course, Kenya's landmine problem is entirely the fault of Europeans, because the mines are manufactured in Europe (I am completely not making this up).
  3. Happy Birthday to Megan_Robinson

    Yesssssssss.....I have been waiting for months for my birthday to come, just so I could have a message like this! Thank you very much Stephen. HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ME!!!
  4. Good Bye Lenin! (2003)

    I saw this movie initially because I am a German student, and the movie is in German. I thought it was very well directed, and the themes themselves were powerful (on top of the plot being nothing short of comical). The entire idea of the DDR was treated so secondarily that it more or less left the viewer with whatever sentiment of the DDR he had when he began the film. What some would see in the movie as comical (the removal of Lenin's statue, for example), others would see as sad, but no one is directed on what to feel. So the movie is, to me, bitter-sweet but in different ways to different people. I enjoyed it. PS. Does anyone know if Rand got the idea of the public calender in Atlas Shrugged from the public calender in the DDR? Or is this just a coincidence?
  5. The Brothers Karamazov

    This is great. This book was suggested to me by my philosphy professor, and is on my list of books to read this summer. I'm glad to see that so many of you enjoyed it, this makes me even more anxious to start reading.
  6. Goodbye Lenin

    I'd like to suggest the movie Goodbye Lenin for review. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0301357/
  7. Apropos of Nothing

    Oops. I forgot I was posting on my boyfriend's computer and he had himself logged in (he never posts, he's shy). Just to correct the confusion, the above post was from me, Megan Robinson.
  8. Apropos of Nothing

    I named both my computer and wireless network after chinese food that I had just eaten. My computer's name is Sesame Chicken and the network in the apartment is called "mooshu". My "significant other's" computer is unofficially named Jessica. He is a programmer and spends a lot of time with "her", so I eventually began to refer to it as "another woman" and named it accordingly. Now when he wants to program I roll my eyes and say: "Oh, so you and Jessica want to be alone." I'm sure those who overhear such conversations are mightily confused.
  9. Jokes

    How many Marxists does it take to change a lightbulb? None, every bulb holds the seeds of its own revolution.
  10. Infinite regress

    In a word: Ah Ha! I'm sorry it took me so long to reply, though I read your speedy reply not long after it was posted. Thats the college life! The idea of infinity as a potential and not an actual process makes a great deal more sense. To take your example of sub-dividing a line. It COULD be done, but because of constraints on our mortality, eye sight etc. it is not physically plausible. I am very happy, too, to understand as you said in your own words: "there is no such "thing" as infinity". Infinity understood as a concept of method (which is the only non-contradictory and thus correct understanding) clears up the confusion, and cloudy veil surrouding "the mystery of infinity" (as some would have us to believe it). Stephen, your last post has been invaluable to me. It essentially sealed up any misconseptions or clouded concepts that had earlier completely confused and frustrated me. Thank you for your posts and the link!
  11. Infinite regress

    Thank you all for your help. First of all, just to clear up why I stated that Aquinas uses infinite regress in 4/5 of his proofs: The 4th (argument from gradation of things) implies infinite regress in that things cannot be graded backward into infinity, but rather must have some source of good as the ultimate source (in the nonsensical neo-platonist tradition, of course). The above is slightly irrelevent. But you are correct in that the infinite regress argument is explicitly used in 3 of the 5 proofs. Stephen: Your reply is (as always) very much appreciated, but it leaves me with a few more questions. 1) What about infinity? Is an infinate regress possible? Infinity has never been something that I've thought about often, but I have heard from those knowledgable of math and physics that it is a sticky little bugger. Now that I am thinking about it, I'm a little confused about the conept in its entirety. It has, in effect, "blown my mind" . 2) This is simply a clarification. If I understand correctly, God, placed in the context of existence (by defining him as an existent entity), is thus by necessity subject to the same regress as the rest of existence (if such a regress exists), hence if he were to "exist" (the term used loosely) it would have to be in a state not only outside of nature as many theists say, but outside of existence, which negates his existing in the first place. I'm not sure if this is what you meant to tell me, but this is what I took from it. It makes sense to me, but it is entirely possible that it is a garbled mess, because as I stated above, I'm confused. I'm sorry, but I still don't understand this issue fully and I am quite frustrating myself because of this fact. I'm missing the connection between existence exists and hence an infinate regress can't. Maybe if I understood that more clearly things would make more sense. Sorry for the trouble.
  12. Infinite regress

    I'm sorry. This is, of course, supposed to read: "Thank you for your reply" I simply missed it in my proof-read. Very sorry.
  13. Infinite regress

    Thank you fofr your reply. I'd like to begin apologizing for not providing enough information. I wasn't sure if infinite regress was a common philosophic problem and I was simply unaware of it until recently, or if it was something also new to everyone here. In either case my ommission of a certain level of details was due to my not wanting to show that I don't know the correct view on this issue, which is a misrepresentation of reality. Of this I am guilty and very regretful. In regard to Ininite Regress: I'm speaking specifically here of St. Thomas Aquinas' Five Proofs of God's Existence. In it he uses the impossibliity of infinite regress in four of five of his proofs. The most common similarity between them is essentially summed up in his first proof: The argument from motion. It is not far removed from the Aristolian "prime mover", but differs from Aristotle in that it it slightly meshed with neo-platonism. Aquinas argues that we see in the world things being moved from a potential to actual state; this is motion. As things proceed to move from potential to actual into infinity, it must mean that things either have been moved backward into infinity, or must have been initially moved by something. This, he says, we know to be God. I'm sure the answer to this problem is quite obvious, and I'm just missing it. My philosphy professor is a pragmatist or rather should I say a sympathizer of pragmatism (though still a good teacher as he does on occasion outline a principle he's using). He can on occassion lose focus and confuse an issue. This would be an instance of such an occasion.
  14. Infinite regress

    I apologize for anyone who finds this trite or elementary. But lately I've been thinking about infinite regress, that is things receeding backward into infinity. It causes a number of problems (namely it threatens causality) but how can such an issue be resolved (as in dissolved ) and if not how could it be integrated?
  15. Standing Invitation

    Thank you for the encouragement Stephen. The problem of multi-culturalism here at Temple is one that saturates the university to it's very core. The Princeton Review praises Temple, not for its liberal arts program, or new policy of developing the history department exclusively by hiring as many well-qualified professors as possible, but for its devotion to diversity. Now that I've let off that steam. I believe, however, that you may be correct about the student body, Stephen. I was at a debate tournament this weekend, and upon being asked my major by the afore mentioned little"o" objectivist team member, I responded: "History, but I'll soon add a double in Philosophy." He replied "Just like Ayn Rand." Suddenly, another of my team members whirled around and said "I LOVE Ayn Rand!" We proceeded to discuss Atlas Shrugged. I admit that I thought very seriously about starting a club last semester, and became discouraged. With this new encouragement, however, I will give it more thought. Starting a campus club seems to me to be a very large undertaking. Has anyone here ever actually STARTED a club, and if so do you have any advice?