• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. The John Galt Theme

    I actually got the feeling that, if they use this in the movie, it will be more of a theme for the motor, or maybe something else that resembles relief. I can see Dagny looking into John Galt's eyes for the first time, and feeling that sense of relief and wonder. Of course, keep in mind, for the first movie, Galt is just a concept and a mystery. Try putting the music in terms of "Who is John Galt?"
  2. Public Employee Unions

    If you think about it, that's how it should be: It is conventional wisdom that teaching is the starting point for everyone's success in whatever field. Successful people had great teachers. This is essential how "experts" who hold clinics and conferences earn their money: provide a great resource and teach people how to use it. Dave Ramsay comes to mind, though I know little of his current financial situation.
  3. Public Employee Unions

    I see your points. From what little I know about unions, the downside is that they can keep bad teachers in schools for years and years, even if their activity can be described as criminal. On that basis, then yes, can the unions. I suppose, no matter what, if the service or product provided isn't up to snuff, there is no defending your stance...And if the product is up to snuff, you probably don't need to defend it. No?
  4. Public Employee Unions

    Educator contracts have delineations too. On top of that, at least in Texas, there is a Code of Ethics that you are required to adhere to, and are inspected on once a year. Granted, Texas is a "right to work" state, and doesn't require union participation. We have several organizations that offer insurance, and we have a retirement system that we pay into that (if I remember correctly) is in place of social security. We are provided for pretty well, in my opinion. That said, there are a number of advocacy groups that rise up when things are going right, such as when the state board of education decided to name an evangelical Calvinist as a major figure in US history. Does this answer the question you asked, Jason? Probably not. However, when you get into the discussion of education vs. industry (and I don't know where I stand on this), you will come across the argument where industry says you produce a good product and you toss out the bad ones, but education says you have to produce a good product, but you can never send out the band ones. Most educators don't see an equivalence. If you are at teacher, you can never treat a student as you would a bushel of rotten blueberries, because, at the end of the day, that student must leave your care with the knowledge and skills you gave them. If you treat them badly, then you are doing a disservice to them. [insert argument about self-sacrifice here.]
  5. Public Employee Unions

    Despite my being an educator, I know very little about private schools. That is partly because there is an incredibly small presence of them here. All of the private schools here are parochial, which to me is an abomination against children. But choice is choice. Anyway, back to topic, I'm curious if you all think that private school educators would benefit from a union, or is the problem really with unions period?
  6. Public Employee Unions

    I am a teacher, and I don't belong to a union, partly because I have no need for it. In our state we have unions that lobby for educators, and I reap benefits that way. I do however, belong to a professional organization that offers a buy in to some legal protections for a small fee every year. I see that as a legitimate expenditure.
  7. Thanks for the suggestions!
  8. Philosophy, for me, is the set of values collected and used to assess judgement and prepare for action. I guess, haha.
  9. Immunizations

    Lordy, I hope not! haha.
  10. Yeah, I can see that. I, myself, could probably make a judgment. I suppose my issue was with the premise of the previous argument, which wasn't the point of my question, so I retract for sake of consistency. I don't think there is a logical basis for saying, blanket statement, that one should be able to judge for themselves. Not every individual can, from what I know. Of course, this presupposes that Objectivism is THE right answer, and that anyone who reads into it should see it that way. I suppose anyone will look at any philosophical argument and see what is true based on their own perception of reality (or is that too post-modern?). In any case, I'd still like to know of any modern day writers (last 10 years or so) who have ideas that go hand in hand with Rand. I'm looking for suggestions. Thanks.
  11. Feelings

    I know seeking validation is lazy, but I have to say that all made a lot of sense. I do intend to read her work on art. But it's always good to see what the lay people think too. Thanks.
  12. No offense, and I see where you are coming from, but both of the last two posters are making an argument that I've heard from Intelligent Design advocates: "Just look around and you'll see I'm right" in a nutshell. There are lots of arguments I could make against just "need[ing] your own rational faculty and an allegiance to existence." It's like anything else. If I want to know the truth, I have to know both sides of the argument AND why one side isn't correct. Then I'll apply my judgment. What you're saying I should do is akin to asking me to take it on faith.
  13. Immunizations

    Though, I have to ask...if you really have 4 pages worth of information about why immunizations are dangerous, even in the current schedule, why is it not published? Why do you have this information if you can't share it? Can you share it? Will you? If you have a legitimate claim, you need to provide a legitimate amount of evidence, or you simply look like a conspiracy kook.
  14. Immunizations

    Forcing vaccination is wrong. I'll just say it. If you make any population do it, that is force, and would not be Objectivist. However, if you put it in the light of disease being an enemy against which the government should protect us (much like an invading army), then the government should do something. That said, disease doesn't always follow a vector of infecting those who come in contact with the infected. Some diseases that transferred via water or animal. Say we lock a group of people away because they have decided to be a danger to us all, but upon their demise, they poison the ground around where they are, and eventually cause an outbreak or some sort of other health issues to the people or the environment. It seems careless. I'm not a doctor, and maybe I have some ideas wrong there, but I think immunization is something that should be mandated, even if it means I have to pay for one or two other people to get vaccinated. Imagine that, if you could opt to pay for someone's vaccination, just to protect yourself...
  15. Feelings

    I am a music educator. What makes Objectivism so difficult is that, in my job, while there are lots of yes-no areas and lots of places where even after complex thought, a single answer can be defined, there is a lot of emotion involved. From reading what little I have of her essays, it seems that Rand decries the use of feelings for any judgement. In Atlas Shrugged, she seemed to hint that feelings are still relevant, but not something you can rely on in the face of evidence. So where does that leave music? Where does the feelingless approach fit in when you are making quality judgements about music and its elements? How do I remain Objectivist, yet be true to the art and the most powerful way of establishing a connection through art: how it feels?