 |
| Comments on "Sunday Open Thread " |
|
 | Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 1:39:56 mst
Comment ID: #1
Name: William B
E-mail: wbeaumo1(at)gmail.com
Diana,
I'm a long-time reader and first-time poster to your wonderful blog. Anyway, have you seen The Dark Knight yet? I haven't yet, and my excitement over it has diminished partly because some Objectivists have given unfavorable reviews. Most notably, Objectivist writer/blogger Scott Holleran, who's a fan of Batman Begins, apparently didn't care for it. If you haven't seen it, are you having similar apprehensions?
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 2:31:47 mst
Comment ID: #2
Name: BrianS
E-mail: blspro (at) gmail
Rather than facing rebukes for their obstructionist policies to energy production, the Dems have turned out the lights in Congress.
Symbolic much?
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 2:50:48 mst
Comment ID: #3
Name: Jason Crawford
E-mail: jasonc(at)alumni.cmu.edu
URL: http://www.jasoncrawford.org
OK, random story:
Today I was in Starbucks and I heard a woman talking to her daughter, I thought I heard her say "Kira". Thinking maybe I was having a random run-in with a fellow Objectivist or at least an Ayn Rand fan, I asked about the name.
Turned out it was actually "Kiara"--and she got it from *The Lion King*.
Oops. Oh, well.
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 2:56:03 mst
Comment ID: #4
Name: Jason Crawford
E-mail: jasonc(at)alumni.cmu.edu
URL: http://www.jasoncrawford.org
BTW, re *The Dark Night*: Am I the only person who is not even interested in seeing it simply because the trailers made it look so ugly? Everyone is debating its philosophy and theme, but I can't get past the fact that the Joker's makeup is smeared all over his face and the Batmobile looks like a tank.
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 3:03:16 mst
Comment ID: #5
Name: BrianS
E-mail: blspro (at) gmail
Jason
Because Diana doesn't want any spoilers for the movie before she sees it, I won't comment on the Joker. But did you see the first film (ie Batman Begins)? Its the same Batmobile from that film, and I think its look fits thematically/stylistically in the original (and even more so in the sequel).
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 5:58:36 mst
Comment ID: #6
Name: djr
E-mail: dan.rohr(at)yahoo.com
Got done w/ my run yesterday and was picking weeds - prior to showering up. Being rather frustrated with the wild proliferation of them in just one week, I was in no mood for the 2 starry-eyed teen girls that showed up peddling religion (Mormons). If there was a god, I was already pissed at what he did to my yard. I repeatedly tried to get them to go away, but they kept at it (I'm talking about the girls, not the weeds).
Either they were trying to buy my faith or were big time altruists; they offered to pick the weeds for me, and give me water.
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 6:04:36 mst
Comment ID: #7
Name: John Powers
E-mail: johnpowers[]mac[]com
Dan,
Is this how it's supposed to work: Two girls selling religion offer to do my yardwork. Wow! Let me stop everything and completely change my metaphysical outlook right now!
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 6:52:09 mst
Comment ID: #8
Name: Diana Hsieh
E-mail: diana(at)dianahsieh.com
URL: http://www.dianahsieh.com/blog
Paul and I finally got to see _The Dark Knight_ on Wednesday. However, for people who haven't seen it yet, I still don't want to discuss it here on NoodleFood in any detail. (Feel free to link to outside reviews and posts, however.) So the rule still applies: NO SPOILERS!
I will make a few general comments:
Paul and I both loved it. I thought it was heads and shoulders above Batman Begins, which I enjoyed immensely. Heath Ledger was phenomenal as The Joker; I don't think I've ever seen a more horribly frightening nihilistic villain. Yes, it's a very, very dark, malevolent world. That's for good reason -- and it's also the only proper setting for Batman. (I'm sure that we'll see some dawn in the sure-to-come third movie.) So, if you like romantic comedies with puppies and kittens, this movie is not for you. Otherwise, I recommend it highly.
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 7:38:56 mst
Comment ID: #9
Name: Interesting
Here's the result when you sunder fact and value:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbyGM6TwY1M
Here's when you don't:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIoP7V6U-aQ&feature=related
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 9:24:31 mst
Comment ID: #10
Name: Ian G
E-mail: gilmore.ian(at)gmail.com
URL: http://agileminor.blogspot.com
I've been an Objectivist since the early 90s and I've always wondered about one thing - why aren't there more notable Objectivist artists?
There seem to be a lot of success in developing Objectivist scholars, but I don't see the same kind of critical mass developing in art.
It would be great to read a book or to see a play using Objectivist esthetics but not written by Ayn Rand.
I've also noticed over the years that esthetics is usually the least well integrated branch of philosophy in most of the Objectivists I meet, but I don't know if that is related.
_Ian G_
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 10:31:58 mst
Comment ID: #11
Name: William H. Stoddard
E-mail: whswhs(at)mindspring.com
URL: http://whswhs.livejournal.com/
I lately decided to reread Elizabeth Moon's "Vatta's War" series, and I ran across a striking passage in the fifth and final volume. The context is that the central character went from interstellar trader to privateer after a pirate group organized a terrorist-style attack that killed most of her family, and then worked her way up to leading a fleet funded by an alliance of planetary governments, but in the process she accumulated a lot of combat stress and emotional conflict that she hasn't dealt with. She's being spoken to by an older woman who's a sergeant with a mercenary force, and not directly under her command.
"'What you do best, ma'am, is command in combat. You are a natural, and you have enough training to add skill to natural instinct.'
'I thought I just got my friends killed,' Ky said.
'Ah. And that, you see, is the hole you've dug yourself into. . . . Everyone does it. All the decent people, anyway. Nobody gets out of combat without scars. . . . Most of usâ€"well, lots of us, anywayâ€"were brought up to be good, decent citizens of wherever we grew up. Religious, some of us. We had all sorts of social rules for how to behave, among them not killing other people, and not letting friends get hurt if we could help it. You had that kind of raisin', didn't you? . . . And now you kill people for a living. . . . But the thing is, if you didn't, the people who do nothin' BUT kill for a living would win. If you hadn't come in to Boxtop and shot up some enemy ships, I'd be dead, for one. So would a lot of my friends.'"
I thought that sounded pretty good; it's a clearly stated moral principle, and an essentially correct one. I'd be happier with it if it didn't have the reference to religion, but at least it presents religion as one source of moral beliefs, and not as the only possible one, or even the best one. I liked the passage and thought it worth quoting.
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 10:43:01 mst
Comment ID: #12
Name: Burgess Laughlin
E-mail: burgesslaughlin(at)macforcego.com
URL: http://www.aristotleadventure.blogspot.com
>"I thought that sounded pretty good; it's a clearly stated moral principle, and an essentially correct one."
William, what is the "moral principle" that is "clearly stated"? I don't see it. Would you quote it?
P. S. -- As an aside: I try to always remember that a concept or principle is no more objective than the context from which it arises. Peter Schwartz's lecture "Contextual Knowledge," available from The Ayn Rand Bookstore, helped me understand that.
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 11:18:41 mst
Comment ID: #13
Name: B. Dietz
E-mail: dietzint34(at)yahoo.com
William B,
Where is Scott Holleran's review of the new Batman movie? It is not at Box Office Mojo.
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 12:07:57 mst
Comment ID: #14
Name: arwen
Scott's reviews are on his blog now. www.scottholleran.com
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 13:20:48 mst
Comment ID: #15
Name: Christian S
E-mail: mrcrippa(at)hotmail.com
Hi!
I'd be greatful if someone could tell me what Objectivist magazines there are.
Thanks,
Chris
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 13:56:46 mst
Comment ID: #16
Name: Burgess Laughlin
E-mail: burgesslaughlin(at)macforcego.com
URL: http://www.aristotleadventure.blogspot.com
As a regular, substantial donor to The Ayn Rand Institute, you will receive publications periodically.
The Objective Standard is foremost among publications by Objectivist academics and other specialists: http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/index.asp
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 14:07:43 mst
Comment ID: #17
Name: William H. Stoddard
E-mail: whswhs(at)mindspring.com
URL: http://whswhs.livejournal.com/
"William, what is the "moral principle" that is "clearly stated"? I don't see it. Would you quote it?"
Already did:
"And now you kill people for a living. . . . But the thing is, if you didn't, the people who do nothin' BUT kill for a living would win."
That is, there are people whose whole lives are founded on violence, as their means of survival, and that's evil. But the only way to prevent the victory of that evil is to respond to them with violence; and the choice to do this is legitimate, and not cause for guilt. The point of the passage is the rejection of a moral standard that says that violence as such is wrong.
As to "the context from which it arises," that's the entire five-novel series, I'm afraid; if my short plot summary isn't sufficient for you, we probably should not discuss the matter further, as I can't reasonably expect you to read that much material.
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 14:33:32 mst
Comment ID: #18
Name: Adam Reed
E-mail: adamreedatalumdotmitdotedu
URL: http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/areed2
I'd like to share with NoodleFood readers: my blog, Born To Identify, at http://borntoidentify.blogspot.com/ . I intend to share my identifications from now onward, starting with a recent posting, "How Pragmatism Kills Enterprises and Nations."
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 15:28:08 mst
Comment ID: #19
Name: subzero
Hi Diana,
I'm just wondering if you consider the guy that posted above a "false friend of Objectivisim".
He wrote an artitle (I thought a pretty good one) on the relationship between Object-oriented programming and Ayn Rand's theory of concepts. If you're curious, you can find the article at
http://www.objectivistcenter.org/events/advsem03/ReedOOP.pdf
|
| Sunday, August 3, 2008 at 15:59:43 mst
Comment ID: #20
Name: Adam Reed
E-mail: adamreedatalumdotmitdotedu
URL: http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/areed2
subzero,
Diana was in the audience when I delivered the paper at an Objectivist(not)Center Seminar. We both changed our minds about that outfit after integrating additional knowledge. That's the way rationality works.
|
| Monday, August 4, 2008 at 13:27:46 mst
Comment ID: #21
Name: Jim May
E-mail: seerak(at)gmail.com
When the lights of New York go out, will our job be done?
http://www.nypost.com/seven/08042008/postopinion/editorials/powerin ...
|
| Wednesday, August 6, 2008 at 19:57:57 mst
Comment ID: #22
Name: Cecil R. Williams
E-mail: c1992w(at)gmail.com
After watching both videos my first thought was, "Too bad there is no way I can get my money back with which I supported the Kelley group in years past...."
Cecil
|
|
| Post Your Comment on "Sunday Open Thread " |
|
|
|
