Comments on: My 40k http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/ philosophy, politics, science, atheism, religion, ethics, life, objectivism Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:16:58 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Metro State Atheists http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-5078 Metro State Atheists Wed, 29 Oct 2008 05:51:18 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-5078 Congratulations Congratulations

]]> By: evanescent http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4826 evanescent Sun, 22 Jun 2008 09:06:35 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4826 52,597, but thanks anyway! LOL 52,597, but thanks anyway! LOL

]]> By: nullifidian http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4822 nullifidian Tue, 17 Jun 2008 23:21:43 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4822 40,000 is the only <em>five digit integer</em> to start with one 4 and end with four zeroes. If it's just a "number", then any number of the form 4([012356789][0-9]*)0000 (as a regular expression where it can be replaced with any agreeing series of digits) also qualifies, as well as the various decimal forms, depending on significant figures. Just to be a nit-picking contrary bastich! ;-) Congratulations on 40k hits! I'm sure it's well past that now, though. 40,000 is the only five digit integer to start with one 4 and end with four zeroes. If it’s just a “number”, then any number of the form 4([012356789][0-9]*)0000 (as a regular expression where it can be replaced with any agreeing series of digits) also qualifies, as well as the various decimal forms, depending on significant figures.

Just to be a nit-picking contrary bastich! ;-)

Congratulations on 40k hits! I’m sure it’s well past that now, though.

]]> By: Ralph http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4533 Ralph Sat, 15 Mar 2008 03:27:21 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4533 You deserve more than 40,000. You deserve more than 40,000.

]]> By: Favela http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4504 Favela Mon, 10 Mar 2008 09:57:24 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4504 I understood your two and a half words to be <i>skeptical</i> of certainty and then tried to be as succinct in expressing my <i>affirmation</i> of it. Not a big deal. I understood your two and a half words to be skeptical of certainty and then tried to be as succinct in expressing my affirmation of it. Not a big deal.

]]> By: John Morales http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4503 John Morales Mon, 10 Mar 2008 01:48:52 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4503 Favela: I think you too were less than clear. Frankly, I'm not sure what you're trying to say, other than to clarify that this absolute certainty is domain-specific. Care to explain? Favela: I think you too were less than clear.

Frankly, I’m not sure what you’re trying to say, other than to clarify that this absolute certainty is domain-specific.

Care to explain?

]]> By: Favela http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4502 Favela Mon, 10 Mar 2008 01:17:36 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4502 <i>Absolute certainty</i> in that I know that I exist and have the power to sustain my existence. Absolute certainty in that I know that I exist and have the power to sustain my existence.

]]> By: John Morales http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4501 John Morales Sun, 09 Mar 2008 21:48:44 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4501 Absolute certainty, eh? :) Absolute certainty, eh? :)

]]> By: Ergo http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4498 Ergo Sun, 09 Mar 2008 19:51:21 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4498 Also, to the ignorant outsider or to a person bound to empiric probabilities, the absolute certainty afforded by the use of reason that Objectivism champions can be rather disconcerting, and therefore, identifiable with the only other worldview that claims absolute certainty, namely, religion. But Objectivists refuse to concede the ground of absolute certainty to religion, and we refuse to accept the dichotomy between rationality and absolute certainty. Reason is an absolute. Life is an absolute. A speck of dust is an absolute. That we exist is an absolute. All of reality is an absolute. Consciousness that percieves this reality is an absolute. Also, to the ignorant outsider or to a person bound to empiric probabilities, the absolute certainty afforded by the use of reason that Objectivism champions can be rather disconcerting, and therefore, identifiable with the only other worldview that claims absolute certainty, namely, religion.

But Objectivists refuse to concede the ground of absolute certainty to religion, and we refuse to accept the dichotomy between rationality and absolute certainty. Reason is an absolute. Life is an absolute. A speck of dust is an absolute. That we exist is an absolute. All of reality is an absolute. Consciousness that percieves this reality is an absolute.

]]> By: evanescent http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4496 evanescent Sun, 09 Mar 2008 13:19:10 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4496 John, I can't speak for other people, but I haven't encountered such an attitude in Objectivists that I've interacted with. However I will grant his: Objectivism is a rational coherent complete worldview. This is exceptionally rare today (if indeed it exists at all). Religion is the only other attempt to provide such a worldview. Most atheists and humanists etc hold a mass of conflicting subjective philosophically bankrupt ideas that they cobble together from bits and pieces of other philosophies and New Atheist ideas and call it a worldview. So, when comes along with a total self-consistent worldview that accounts for itself based on reality, it seems so radical and unusual it could be misconstrued as religious to the ignorant. But really, this is only because today's culture and society is in such a sorry pathetic state of affairs. All religions ultimately depend on faith. Objectivism depends on one thing: reason. A religious Objectivist is a contradiction in terms. So is a blind Objectivist, or a cultist Objectivist. Unless one fully understands Objectivism and accepts it themselves rationally, they shouldn't call themselves an Objectivist. John, I can’t speak for other people, but I haven’t encountered such an attitude in Objectivists that I’ve interacted with.

However I will grant his: Objectivism is a rational coherent complete worldview. This is exceptionally rare today (if indeed it exists at all). Religion is the only other attempt to provide such a worldview. Most atheists and humanists etc hold a mass of conflicting subjective philosophically bankrupt ideas that they cobble together from bits and pieces of other philosophies and New Atheist ideas and call it a worldview. So, when comes along with a total self-consistent worldview that accounts for itself based on reality, it seems so radical and unusual it could be misconstrued as religious to the ignorant. But really, this is only because today’s culture and society is in such a sorry pathetic state of affairs.

All religions ultimately depend on faith. Objectivism depends on one thing: reason. A religious Objectivist is a contradiction in terms. So is a blind Objectivist, or a cultist Objectivist. Unless one fully understands Objectivism and accepts it themselves rationally, they shouldn’t call themselves an Objectivist.

]]> By: John Morales http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4495 John Morales Sun, 09 Mar 2008 12:03:06 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4495 I seem to have expressed myself less than clearly in my attempt to be charitable; to rephrase, I consider any (relatively) coherent philosophy which does not invoke the supernatural is more rational than any religion I know of. I note, however, that I have interacted with Objectivists in whom their expression of the philosophy seemed indistinguishable from religious belief. I seem to have expressed myself less than clearly in my attempt to be charitable; to rephrase, I consider any (relatively) coherent philosophy which does not invoke the supernatural is more rational than any religion I know of.

I note, however, that I have interacted with Objectivists in whom their expression of the philosophy seemed indistinguishable from religious belief.

]]> By: evanescent http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4494 evanescent Sun, 09 Mar 2008 11:19:00 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4494 John, Objectivism isn't a religion - so whatever you were studying it wasn't Objectivism, and if it was, no one who understands Objectivism could call it a religion. John, Objectivism isn’t a religion – so whatever you were studying it wasn’t Objectivism, and if it was, no one who understands Objectivism could call it a religion.

]]> By: John Morales http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4493 John Morales Sun, 09 Mar 2008 10:22:11 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4493 No Favela, I see no end in sight. I admit I found Objectivism rather appealing in my early 20's, and further that I consider it more rational than any religion I know of. My comment was based on my belief that the likelihood of an intelligent, rational and thoughtful person remaining an Objectivist for very long is remote; I judge Evanescent to be in that category. I may of course be wrong. No Favela, I see no end in sight. I admit I found Objectivism rather appealing in my early 20’s, and further that I consider it more rational than any religion I know of.

My comment was based on my belief that the likelihood of an intelligent, rational and thoughtful person remaining an Objectivist for very long is remote; I judge Evanescent to be in that category.

I may of course be wrong.

]]> By: Favela http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4492 Favela Sun, 09 Mar 2008 09:41:24 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4492 Is it to be assumed, then, that you are at the end of yours, John? Where is that? Is it to be assumed, then, that you are at the end of yours, John? Where is that?

]]> By: John Morales http://ellis14.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-40k/#comment-4490 John Morales Sun, 09 Mar 2008 00:34:31 +0000 http://ellis14.wordpress.com/?p=231#comment-4490 "I’ve moved from just “atheist” to “humanist” to “anti-theist”, before discovering Ayn Rand, and I proudly identify myself as an Objectivist now." I see you're not at the end of the journey, then. “I’ve moved from just “atheist” to “humanist” to “anti-theist”, before discovering Ayn Rand, and I proudly identify myself as an Objectivist now.”

I see you’re not at the end of the journey, then.

]]>