|
|
SLChatr: Reverse Chronological Group Transcript for longhouse 2007-09-01:
[19:02:57] Ina Centaur: hi jack
[19:02:58] Jack Sondergaard: hi Ina
[19:03:06] Ina Centaur: btw..
[19:03:09] Ina Centaur: question from yesterday
[19:03:15] Ina Centaur: you mentioned if you read AS when you were young
[19:03:19] Ina Centaur: would have changed your life..
[19:03:24] Ina Centaur: what do you think would have been different?
[19:03:56] Jack Sondergaard: I didn't know how to deal with people who took advantage of me
[19:05:36] Jack Sondergaard: and I had friends who would not work but expected me to take care of them and I did
[19:05:36] Ina Centaur: hmmm
[19:05:43] Ina Centaur: does the book teach you how to deal with the looters though?
[19:05:51] Ina Centaur: it would teach you to withdraw... which is perhaps a bad thing
[19:06:21] Ina Centaur: hi joker. welcome to the last day of atlas shrugged discussions
[19:06:24] Jack Sondergaard: I think I would have known better what to say to them
[19:06:28] Ina Centaur: hi kain and jenni
[19:06:32] Jenni Kawashima: hello
[19:06:34] Jack Sondergaard: hi Kain
[19:06:34] Ina Centaur: welcome to the last day of atlas shrugged discussions
[19:06:46] Kain Scalia: Hello everybody.
[19:06:49] Ina Centaur: we will perhaps hold more discussions -- but elsewhere on a new sim in the near future
[19:06:50] Kain Scalia: /me is waitingfor thngs to rez
[19:07:08] Jack Sondergaard: hi Jenni
[19:07:14] JokerRick Gregory: Hello
[19:07:26] JokerRick Gregory: about how many meetings have you had?
[19:07:29] Jenni Kawashima: i dont belong here. i didnt read the book.
[19:07:34] Jenni Kawashima: enjoy your meeitng!
[19:07:37] Ina Centaur: lol..
[19:07:44] Jack Sondergaard: every day this month
[19:07:47] Ina Centaur: we've had 30 meetings in the past 30 days
[19:07:50] Ina Centaur: a chapter a day for each day of august
[19:08:02] Ina Centaur: today is open topic or galt's speech... or topics from the essay contest
[19:08:09] Ina Centaur: kain, btw are you aware of the ayn rand essay contests?
[19:08:20] Ina Centaur: they are open to all who are in university
[19:08:51] JokerRick Gregory: I'll take my leave as well, I hope to meet you for a first or second meeting :)
[19:08:58] JokerRick Gregory: take care
[19:08:59] Martin Scarborough: hello?
[19:09:00] Kain Scalia: I was not, but I'm going to enter it if I have the time :)
[19:09:15] Jack Sondergaard: hi Martin
[19:09:25] Martin Scarborough: any way in
[19:09:40] Jack Sondergaard: door on the side, just walk through it
[19:09:46] Jack Sondergaard: and up the stairs
[19:10:04] Ina Centaur: click on the atlas shrugged poster for the essay contest website
[19:10:23] Jack Sondergaard: hi Mute
[19:10:51] Mute Flow: :)
[19:10:55] Ina Centaur: hi korobas, this way to the discussion
[19:11:00] Ina Centaur: towards the beach side log cabin
[19:11:00] Martin Scarborough: I g uess the camera is stationary here
[19:11:08] Ina Centaur: you can alt-click to zoom
[19:12:13] Martin Scarborough: so whats up
[19:12:21] Martin Scarborough: I regert I have not read Atles Shrugged
[19:13:28] Jack Sondergaard: I listened to it from the audiobook I got on iTunes
[19:13:51] Kain Scalia: What chapter are you going to discuss today?
[19:14:02] Ina Centaur: well, we generally talk about atlas shrugged, politics, life, the universe and everything
[19:14:11] Martin Scarborough: ok
[19:14:19] Kain Scalia: /me nods
[19:14:23] Ina Centaur: today is the 31st, and was supposed to be day 2 of galt's speech
[19:14:42] Ina Centaur: we can also discuss the essay topics
[19:14:48] Ina Centaur: http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=education_contests_atlas
[19:15:47] Kain Scalia: Aah, i like the topics they chose this year.
[19:16:10] Ina Centaur: yes, the one on justice is interesting
[19:16:15] Ina Centaur: btw, what do you think the conventional view of justice is?
[19:16:36] Kain Scalia: /me is already in the grou, Ina :)
[19:17:58] Kain Scalia: From what I have seen, there is a skewed view of justice in current culture that has more to do with emotional appeals than the observance of a law, and even of objective points. We are expected to sacrifice justice for mercy... in a way, as if we were expected to ignore cause and effect. People seem to appropriate the word "justice" for their own means... you know, PETA's "Vegan Justice", and so on and so forth.. but justice is justice, there really is no special 'flavour' of justice.
[19:19:01] Kain Scalia: Nobody deserves any more or any less than anyone else. And that is pure and simply one thing: Reality. That's what we all get. Why try to ignore that fact?
[19:19:05] Ina Centaur: ~ btw i just sent an invitation to the sLiterary group --- pretty much everything i have built here will be moved to a new sim
[19:19:16] Ina Centaur: the group will update and supply landmarks
[19:19:26] Kain Scalia: /me is in the right group...he checks.
[19:19:41] Ina Centaur: yes, justice should be unbiased
[19:19:48] Ina Centaur: conventional views of justice allow emotion to be factored in
[19:19:52] Ina Centaur: .. nepotism is inevitable.
[19:20:08] Giselle Rhode: what do u all think about enlightened justice?
[19:20:23] Kain Scalia: Giselle, can you define the term 'enlightened justice' for us?
[19:20:44] Giselle Rhode: justice used to be blind....
[19:21:00] Giselle Rhode: now the judges are looking into other considerations
[19:21:17] Ina Centaur: is enlightened blind?
[19:21:21] Giselle Rhode: e.g. the accused or plaintiff's life situations
[19:21:33] Kain Scalia: Let me see if I understand you correctly.
[19:21:47] Giselle Rhode: or the accused propensity for repent
[19:22:09] Giselle Rhode: or indeed, if the family is supportive of rehabilitation
[19:22:18] Kain Scalia: By enligthened justice, you mean to say that exact justice should be put aside because man is a victim of his circumstances and he is helpless to them, and therefore it was thsoe circumstances that made him become a criminal?
[19:22:30] Giselle Rhode: and is actively engaged in rehab efforts and reintegration
[19:23:02] Kain Scalia: There comes a second questin: Should it be the task of the government to reform people? Why? And if so, at the cost of whom?
[19:23:24] Jack Sondergaard: I think it would be difficult for me to say anything about it without knowing the details of a specific case
[19:24:09] Giselle Rhode: no specific cases unfortunately, just the movement towards enlightened justice
[19:24:21] Giselle Rhode: it's a new paradigm apparently
[19:24:56] Jack Sondergaard: but if it's a real serious crime, you might be careful about just accepting a verbal promise to reform
[19:25:09] Kain Scalia: Well, then the question I want to make is: What is the difference between the legal attenuating circumstances that "enlightened justice" considers, from the ones that actual justice considers?
[19:26:10] Kain Scalia: Does Enlightened Justice seek to excuse the individual of his responsibility, or does it hold him accountable when appropriate? (such as in cases where his cognitive judgement is not impaired by other factors than his own self)
[19:26:28] Jack Sondergaard: it doesn't sound completely new to me, I think the circumstances are often taken into account
[19:27:08] Martin Scarborough: is this specifically on the US?
[19:27:14] Martin Scarborough: in]
[19:27:17] Kain Scalia: There's the rub, Jack. Usually when there is very little difference between the old and the new, the case usually lies in that the new is not quite what it would appear to be.
[19:27:19] Giselle Rhode: i wouldn't know...i'm not in the legal profession, but i thought it was refreshing, for better or for worse, to look beyond what the person has done, into the familial and other support networks that assist in reform efforts
[19:28:07] Kain Scalia: Alright, let us have a specific. A rage-bound individual who suffers from a violent temper and is of a violent and excitable character has raped and murdered a young woman.
[19:28:12] Jack Sondergaard: take a drunken driver accident for example, their judgement was impared, but they shouldn't have been driving drunk either
[19:29:02] Jack Sondergaard: it would seem such a person poses a danger to society
[19:29:02] Kain Scalia: By the account of enlightened justice, we will take a soft, caring look at this man's familiar surroundings, and let him go with a slap on the wrist with the promise of reform.
[19:29:05] Martin Scarborough: I think has been taken to the extreme
[19:29:18] Kain Scalia: Forget society, ti is an abstraction. He poses a danger to individuals.
[19:29:33] Giselle Rhode: i don't think violent crimes fall under the ambit of enlightened justice
[19:29:39] Jack Sondergaard: society is a lot of individuals
[19:29:50] Kain Scalia: In essence, it seems to me that enlightened justice is a continuing trend in legal affairs where personal responsibility is eschewed for a system in which accountability is not a currency, but something to be avoided.
[19:29:50] Martin Scarborough: a form of political correctness and part of "dont teke responsibility for your own actioj attitiude
[19:30:15] Kain Scalia: Yes, Jack, but it still remains formed of individuals. It does not have a will, it does not have a body. There is no such thing as a collective brain.
[19:30:22] Kain Scalia: /me nods to Marin.
[19:30:41] Jack Sondergaard: if that is what it is, it is not really enlightened
[19:30:41] Giselle Rhode: what then, of the theory of the wisdom of crowds?
[19:30:44] Martin Scarborough: I mean I remember listneing to that grabage in Talkshows in the 80;s
[19:30:51] Kain Scalia: It's the logical continuation of a woman suing a restaurant for hot coffee. You know what case I mean.
[19:31:10] Martin Scarborough: Cases are always looked at and judged individually that is a given
[19:31:20] Martin Scarborough: yes
[19:31:24] Kain Scalia: Well, Giselle, the wisdom of crowds burns witches, shuns homosexuals and sometimes stones them, and supported black slavery.
[19:31:29] Martin Scarborough: it Was mikey D's
[19:31:30] Kain Scalia: Tell me how wise collectivism seems?
[19:32:17] Martin Scarborough: Define collectivism
[19:32:43] Kain Scalia: Collectivism: the ideology which defers to the crowd, the state and the collective over individual will, knowledge and ability.
[19:32:49] Jack Sondergaard: there's a book out now called "The Wisdom Of The Crowd", but it's not about what has just been presented
[19:32:50] Martin Scarborough: the "It takes a village to raise a child" mentality, or something else
[19:32:56] Kain Scalia: Essentially: the individual must live for/by the state, others, etcetera. An iteration of altruism.
[19:33:28] Kain Scalia: Enlightened justice also has another ugly extension: hate crimes laws. Now, I am homosexual, but I do not spport hate crimes bills. A crime is already a hate crime. We should instead push towards enforcing the laws taht exist and make sure they are accomplished, not create special laws.
[19:34:21] Kain Scalia: And specially not those that hinder freedom of speech. I will support anyone's right to call me an f-word. If they aggress me, that's assault, and it's covered under the law which protects me.
[19:34:29] Martin Scarborough: I feel that way about gun lawas as well yes
[19:34:41] Kain Scalia: /me nods.
[19:35:20] Kain Scalia: I come from a country that has become socialist/paternalist. I have experienced these trends very much firsthand. Even before I knew Ms. Rand's work, I was aware of the motivations of those who seek the unearned.
[19:35:25] Martin Scarborough: These seem like all new ways of putting politicall correctness into law
[19:35:31] Martin Scarborough: and I say no
[19:35:43] Kain Scalia: Yes. Political correctness.
[19:35:48] Kain Scalia: I'm latino. Not a "hispanic american".
[19:35:56] Kain Scalia: I'm short. not "vertically challenged"
[19:36:04] Kain Scalia: Give me the bald, honest truth any day o fthe week.
[19:36:20] Martin Scarborough: I'm white, Cracker if you like.
[19:36:24] Kain Scalia: /me chuckles.
[19:36:44] Kain Scalia: But yes... I have noticed one thing concerning justice.
[19:36:56] Kain Scalia: The *moment* you have a word in front of justice? Something fishy is afoot.
[19:37:22] Jack Sondergaard: yes, I remember a President once wasting 20 minutes not answering a question, he should have just said "I don't know"
[19:37:36] Kain Scalia: The current president?
[19:37:45] Jack Sondergaard: no, decades ago
[19:37:51] Martin Scarborough: hehe
[19:37:53] Ina Centaur: (which president.. lol^^)
[19:38:00] Martin Scarborough: Carter?
[19:38:03] Jack Sondergaard: I think it may have been Nixon, but I'm not sure
[19:38:04] Ina Centaur: /me is passively observing. eating a late dinner
[19:38:18] Kain Scalia: Yes. I would gladly follow a man who would give me honesty.
[19:38:27] Ina Centaur: (GWB)
[19:38:47] Ina Centaur: well, the problem is - most people expect the president to know things
[19:39:14] Ina Centaur: it's bad image for pres x to answer "i don't know..." ... when the mother of some lost soldier boy asks him why her son died
[19:39:35] Ina Centaur: so, he'd answer with the pc, "he died to save our country."
[19:39:53] Jack Sondergaard: maybe he really believes that
[19:40:03] Kain Scalia: At which point, of course, I would grab his argument and turn it around by asking "Mr. President, are Jenna and (the other one) also going to be giving up their lives to save our country?"
[19:40:10] Kain Scalia: "When can we expect them on the front?"
[19:40:23] Giselle Rhode: isn't it in the political education of politicians to sprout rhetoric? lol
[19:40:23] Kain Scalia: He believes in sacrifice? He gets a double serving.
[19:40:35] Ina Centaur: "yes, right when the supply of 18 who register to vote" have decimated
[19:41:21] Giselle Rhode: the administration cares more about aggregates than the individual
[19:41:23] Kain Scalia: On an interesting note: Ayn Rand declared any military draft immoral. It doesn't appear in Atlas Shrugged, but she mentions it in "Capitalism: The Unknown idea". i thougth i'd mention it due tot he pertinent topic.
[19:41:34] Martin Scarborough: Most of the people in the Militay are there becuase they want to be
[19:41:36] Kain Scalia: ideal.
[19:41:51] Martin Scarborough: and making the decison to got to war is never an easy one
[19:41:59] Ina Centaur: true; the military has its own supply of "looters" ^.~
[19:42:11] Jack Sondergaard: yes, that's true of the people I know in the military
[19:42:28] Jack Sondergaard: that they want to be there
[19:42:35] Kain Scalia: And in the case of Afghanistan it was the correct one. But Iraq? Hardly a tactical decision worthy of Alexander. Specially since we are knee deep in it while Iran is polishing its nuclear armaments witha cheshire grin.
[19:42:40] Giselle Rhode: yes, they want to see some action
[19:42:44] Martin Scarborough: What do you mean by "Of looters?"
[19:43:13] Martin Scarborough: That was always a concern of mine with Iran
[19:43:39] Kain Scalia: But the other problem that we are facing is a philosophical one.
[19:43:50] Kain Scalia: We CAN'T go to war for our best interest. We have to go to war to save someone ELSE.
[19:44:04] Kain Scalia: Cadets at west point academy are only taught one theory of war: Just War Cause, or Jus Belo.
[19:44:08] Martin Scarborough: but many leaders concluded that he had the weapons and connections and all he had to do was cooperate with teh inspectors and let them in which he repeatedly refused
[19:44:21] Kain Scalia: Which states that you cannot attack to save your own self interests, but that you should sacrifice yourself to save someone else's.
[19:44:46] Giselle Rhode: whose lives are being saved in iraq?
[19:44:58] Kain Scalia: Why, don't you know? The peace-loving Iraquis, of course.
[19:45:06] Kain Scalia: We're rebuilding their society for them.
[19:45:15] Kain Scalia: Etcetera etcetera etcetera yakkity yak,.
[19:45:17] Martin Scarborough: Who are refusing to defend themselves
[19:45:27] Giselle Rhode: oh, u mean so that the sunnis and shias can go back to fighting among themselves
[19:45:35] Kain Scalia: Yup.
[19:45:47] Martin Scarborough: Is there any hope for the Middle east?
[19:45:55] Martin Scarborough: Or is it just a Hydra
[19:45:58] Kain Scalia: As long as Islam and religious totalitarianism stand? No.
[19:46:13] Kain Scalia: Anywhere in the world that irrationality reigns is a lost jungle, until the roots of irrationality die.
[19:46:19] Jack Sondergaard: it was a little difficult for them to defend themselves under Sadaam
[19:46:21] Giselle Rhode: islam is peaceloving, as is all religions
[19:46:36] Kain Scalia: If you believe that, then I am Queen Margheritta of the Falklands.
[19:46:47] Kain Scalia: ;)
[19:46:49] Giselle Rhode: its the interpretation of it, and the politicisation of it by extremists
[19:46:55] Kain Scalia: No, Giselle.
[19:47:06] Giselle Rhode: the holy roman empire wasn't that altruistic
[19:47:06] Martin Scarborough: I lke to be open minded
[19:47:07] Kain Scalia: I studied theology for six years. I know the bible and the quram backards and forwards.
[19:47:22] Kain Scalia: Islam is a primitive, brutish, venomous and violent religion.
[19:47:24] Martin Scarborough: But Islam I do not trusrt on anyreal level
[19:47:31] Kain Scalia: And christianity is hardly any better, it has just had to adapt more.
[19:47:33] Jack Sondergaard: but to the radicals, they only love and let live others of their own religion
[19:47:48] Ina Centaur: yus
[19:47:59] Martin Scarborough: And Yes Christianity has has its evil in history
[19:48:06] Giselle Rhode: yes, just see ireland
[19:48:07] Kain Scalia: It has its evil in its own precepts.
[19:48:09] Martin Scarborough: but the good is even more tangilbe
[19:48:22] Kain Scalia: There can be no benevolence coming from a philosophy whose own seed is the damnation of everything that makes a man a human.
[19:48:23] Martin Scarborough: nad it changes eveolves and is more democratic
[19:48:34] Kain Scalia: Which, i believe, is covered in the first part of the John Galt speech, right Ina?
[19:49:46] Martin Scarborough: Jihn Galt
[19:49:49] Martin Scarborough: ??
[19:49:49] Jack Sondergaard: there are some Muslim nations that are very friendly to the US, they are not all terrorists
[19:49:51] Martin Scarborough: john
[19:49:58] Martin Scarborough: ok
[19:50:07] Kain Scalia: No matter how much one may try to be apologetic for christianity, the simple seed of Original Sin cannot excuse it. If you remove original sin, you take away the entire integrity of its internal structure. But if you leave it there, you ahve a philosophy that damns man for being man.
[19:50:18] Ina Centaur: yes, the belief of original sin can only shed a core of evil.
[19:50:29] Kain Scalia: And Islam is very much the same.
[19:50:53] Kain Scalia: In fact, the only religion that doesn't believe in an original sin is Buddhism, but unfortunately it believes in the destruction of the mind... so it seeks to destroy the individual through another attack.
[19:50:53] Giselle Rhode: islam has its roots in the OT
[19:51:27] Jack Sondergaard: but not all Christians agree on what the implications of original sin are
[19:51:41] Martin Scarborough: Christianity directly addresses the troubles of people and does not make excuese for it. You have to learn to step outside yourself,
[19:51:48] Kain Scalia: Essentially, it comes to this: All religions seek mastery over the individual. In order to attain this, they dos o by attacking the very means that man has to live on the world: Reason. They create faith, which tells yout hat you must not listen to reason but to believe them blindly.
[19:52:00] Kain Scalia: If you step outside yourself, Martin, who do you step into>?
[19:52:11] Giselle Rhode: i'm sorry but i just don't care much for any religions that damn non-believers
[19:52:39] Martin Scarborough: True faith does not reaquire you to give up your reason.
[19:53:03] Jack Sondergaard: that applies to mystical religion, but there are many people who believe there is a God who also believe in reason
[19:53:06] Kain Scalia: Yes it does. Marin. The concept of a tripartite deity. The concept of even a supernatural being who cannot be detected by rational means or even sensorial data.
[19:53:17] Martin Scarborough: Man often thinks of himself as the center of the universe.
[19:53:43] Martin Scarborough: Do you believe that there is a God or the possibility of one
[19:54:11] Kain Scalia: There is no evidence to support the existence of a supernatural being. Furthermore, the question of a divinity existing is of no relevance to man's life on earth.
[19:54:16] Ina Centaur: hmm.. i'd say that modernity has forced man away from the mancentric view
[19:54:33] Ina Centaur: rather, that man isn't the center of the universe, and our galaxy is actualyl quite far away from the singularity that's the center of the U
[19:54:37] Martin Scarborough: Not as far as his ego is concerned
[19:54:39] Kain Scalia: man is not the center of the universwe. Man is. It is as simple as that.
[19:54:50] Kain Scalia: Martin: Is 'ego' a bad word?
[19:54:52] Martin Scarborough: I done mean phisically cnetral
[19:55:24] Martin Scarborough: What good do you see relegion having done?
[19:55:41] Martin Scarborough: Do you think the world would be safer or better if THere were no religions?
[19:55:51] Kain Scalia: It has done nothing good from its own seed. Its members have done good things only when they have abandoned superstition and adhered to reason, even briefly.
[19:56:03] Martin Scarborough: nad by ego I mean pride and selfishness
[19:56:18] Martin Scarborough: how do you mean?
[19:56:30] Kain Scalia: Pride: accurate appraisal of what one accomplishes and what one does, knowing full well the extent of one's abilities.
[19:56:36] Kain Scalia: Selfishness: Concern with one's own self interest.
[19:56:54] Kain Scalia: Therefore, martin, you praise someone who does not know his abilities, who constantly despises hismelf and has no self esteem, and who really does not care about his welfare?
[19:57:14] Kain Scalia: I have a question, Martin: Do you , as a christian, believe your gifts and abilities are yours, or do they come from God?
[19:57:16] Martin Scarborough: well You try ti life them up
[19:57:35] Martin Scarborough: give suffering a contexte limit or meaning
[19:57:35] Jack Sondergaard: to get rid of all religion, you would have to kill over 90% of the people who live in the world, the communists tried to accomplish that and millions died and were tortured
[19:58:00] Martin Scarborough: but human pride and selfishness is the cause of most evil and suffering
[19:58:05] Kain Scalia: Indeed?
[19:58:16] Kain Scalia: Communism is all about giving to the other.
[19:58:18] Kain Scalia: Living for others.
[19:58:23] Kain Scalia: Putting The Common Good above yourself.
[19:58:25] Martin Scarborough: and communism failed
[19:58:32] Kain Scalia: And that doesn't tell you something?
[19:58:39] Martin Scarborough: tells me alot
[19:58:49] Giselle Rhode: the communism that we saw was not the ideal type as conceptualised by marx
[19:58:54] Kain Scalia: You see, Martin, when you are SELFLESS, you have no self to regard, and you regard other selves like so. Therefore, whom you sacrifice FOR THE GREATER GOOD is irrelevant.
[19:59:08] Kain Scalia: You are wrong, Giselle, The communism we have seen is EXACTLy the type Marx saw.
[19:59:17] Martin Scarborough: Marx's cant be achieved
[19:59:20] Kain Scalia: Marx's communism is man as a sacrificial animal to serve others and the state.
[19:59:29] Kain Scalia: Not to his own interests, NOTHING to his own interests, but to others'.
[19:59:33] Giselle Rhode: communism was supposed to take place after economic development
[19:59:44] Kain Scalia: And how can you bring economic development without capitlaism?
[20:00:00] Kain Scalia: And how can you have a system that decries capitalism, while at the same time growing fat off it?
[20:00:02] Giselle Rhode: yes, communism was supposed to happen after capitalism
[20:00:07] Kain Scalia: Check your premises.
[20:00:17] Kain Scalia: So, you are saying that without capitalism, communism would have never survived?
[20:00:23] Kain Scalia: Rather telling about communism, hmm.
[20:00:26] Giselle Rhode: the inherent contradictions of capitalism would collapse and give rise to communism
[20:00:33] Giselle Rhode: as far as the theories go
[20:00:35] Kain Scalia: Perhaps, i don't know, ti is because..communism is all about trying to get what you have never earned?
[20:00:59] Giselle Rhode: but communism as the world has experienced just bypassed economic development and went straight into the final stages
[20:01:01] Jack Sondergaard: even the current "communists" are adopting capitalism to survive
[20:01:18] Martin Scarborough: how is sacrifice for the greater good irrelevant?
[20:02:03] Kain Scalia: Martin: WHo dictates the common good?
[20:02:35] Martin Scarborough: Im simpluy talking about compaassion and genuine concern for others
[20:02:38] Martin Scarborough: not a madate
[20:03:04] Kain Scalia: No, you are not. Define common good or do not address the point further. You cannot debate while clinging to things you do not define.
[20:03:20] Ina Centaur: yes, but compassion and genuine concern for others is vague -- which others, and compassion/concern to what extent..
[20:03:28] Martin Scarborough: Did I use the term common good?>
[20:03:33] Kain Scalia: Yes, you did.
[20:03:37] Martin Scarborough: suffering
[20:03:40] Martin Scarborough: okay
[20:03:44] Kain Scalia: Define compassion and geniuine concern for others?
[20:03:55] Martin Scarborough: any one in need or suffering
[20:04:16] Kain Scalia: Why are they suffering? What causes the suffering? Who causes it? How is it caused? Where does it cmoe frmo?
[20:04:28] Jack Sondergaard: you need to ask why they are in need or suffering, how did they get that way
[20:05:05] Martin Scarborough: okay
[20:05:11] Jack Sondergaard: and if I help them, will I be left with no resources to take care of my own needs, and thus end up as a parasite myself
[20:05:16] Martin Scarborough: DO you see selfishness and a common problem
[20:05:55] Kain Scalia: Selfishness is the only means by which man can exist. If he is selfless, he will sacrifice himself for another, and that one will sacrifice himself for another. Selfishness is what gives man his sense of identity, his desire for survival. Without caring for one's self, one does not care for one's life.
[20:06:12] Kain Scalia: One question, martin.
[20:06:26] Kain Scalia: I have one questin for you, and then I will follow into a hypothetical.
[20:06:35] Kain Scalia: First: Is love unconditional, since christianity says it must be selfless?
[20:08:09] Jack Sondergaard: there are over 6 billion people in the world, and it will take the work of over 6 billion people to take care of them, so it's no use for a philanthropist to think "I will save the world" because no one person or group can, each one must take care of themselves first, and then see what they can do to help a few others who have some real disability
[20:08:33] Martin Scarborough: Self awareness is what makes is recognize ourselves and understand our individual nature not selfishness.
[20:08:44] Kain Scalia: I have asked you a question, Martin, do not evade it.
[20:08:56] Martin Scarborough: I am not :)
[20:09:03] Kain Scalia: And without a self, you have nothing to be aware of. If you are selfless, you have no self to begin with.
[20:09:51] Martin Scarborough: And love is a tricky term as English uses that word for all degrees fo l(ove)
[20:09:56] Kain Scalia: recognizing yourself is neither existence nor survivial. Existence is furthering your own existence by pursuing survival, which can only happen if your egard your own self interest.
[20:10:32] Martin Scarborough: Agape love is, And that is what I believe what we should aspire to, but it is also the most illusive
[20:10:42] Kain Scalia: Martin, answer the question. If you seek to flee into the realm of the non-defined and do not seek to give a definition, I will have to drag you kicking and screaming into the world of definition. Love, Martin, no more, no less.
[20:11:02] Martin Scarborough: I am defiing my terms
[20:11:21] Martin Scarborough: our love is very often selfish or limited
[20:11:24] Kain Scalia: You have only given vague phrases so far. Confine yourself to the description, without the odes.
[20:11:40] Martin Scarborough: Agape is a term
[20:11:55] Kain Scalia: You may coin the term, but you have not defined it, you have merely alluded to it.
[20:12:03] Kain Scalia: How is our love selfish? how is it limited?
[20:12:15] Jack Sondergaard: but at the same time you need to keep in mind that while pursuing your self-interest not to take away the ability of others to also survive, it involves mutual trade of real value between knowledgeable people
[20:12:31] Martin Scarborough: Agape God love altruism love for it's own sake
[20:12:59] Kain Scalia: that is not a definition. that is, at most, a poor aphorism.
[20:13:04] Kain Scalia: Definitions, please.
[20:13:10] Kain Scalia: If you cannot define it, you do not know it, and cannot speak o fit.
[20:13:32] Martin Scarborough: I have always defined selfishness as reaguarding "ME" and no one else, wholly unconcerned for others or the consequnces of my actions to others
[20:13:42] Martin Scarborough: that Is how I define selfisness
[20:13:44] Kain Scalia: But soft: let's take taht last. Love for its own sake. Interesting. This, you believe, is the highest expression of love. Correct?
[20:14:04] Martin Scarborough: yes
[20:14:16] Kain Scalia: Alrihght, let me lay my hypothetical aside, WE WILL come to it after I say this
[20:14:26] Kain Scalia: Martin: If you hurt someone you care for, does that not hurt you as well?
[20:14:36] Martin Scarborough: It does
[20:15:01] Jack Sondergaard: that is one definition of selfishness, but not Rand's, which included trading value for value with others to the benefit of everyone involved in the trade
[20:15:07] Kain Scalia: But if you are selfish, that means that you only regard your own self interest. However, since making that person unhappy makes you unhappy, isn't their happines within your own selfish interest? After all, it gives you pleasure and joy.
[20:16:36] Jack Sondergaard: in Atlas Shrugged, a key element was to neither be a victum or victumize others
[20:16:37] Martin Scarborough: No because it inherently goes beyond me
[20:16:50] Martin Scarborough: okay
[20:17:12] Kain Scalia: But it is selfish. If you did not care for that person, they would not have an effect on you. It is your pleasure and your emotions. But, soft, that comes in the hypothetical.
[20:17:18] Kain Scalia: Let us imagine, Martin, that we have two people hanging from a line.
[20:17:37] Kain Scalia: One of them is the person you love most in this world. Let us say, your mother as hypothetical.
[20:18:04] Kain Scalia: The other one is , shall we say, Charles Manson.
[20:18:12] Martin Scarborough: lol
[20:18:17] Kain Scalia: They are both being held hostage. One move from you may save one, but will kill the other. Whom do you choose?
[20:18:31] Jack Sondergaard: a common straw-man definition of capitalism it that self interest does not take into account the benefit to all involved in a mutually beneficial trade of something of value
[20:18:52] Martin Scarborough: Mother, I believe in the death penalty and he should have gotten it years ago.
[20:19:21] Kain Scalia: But martin, that is not Agape. Love for love's sake. If you really loved for love's sake and love was unconditional... it would not matter which one died, because the one you saved is equally as worthy.
[20:19:30] Kain Scalia: A love that has no conditions...ANYONE can buy it.
[20:19:50] Martin Scarborough: I didn t say that I had Agpe love
[20:20:01] Martin Scarborough: Agope love
[20:20:12] Martin Scarborough: I was simply defining a term as requested
[20:20:18] Kain Scalia: No, but you said it was to be emulated. So, Martin.... does your creator create something that is to be emulated but which is beyond al possible means of getting it?
[20:20:38] Martin Scarborough: In this life yes
[20:20:40] Kain Scalia: Or are you uncomfortable with the fact that to love someone means to find value in them, and to give them your love for what you value, and expect their love in return?
[20:21:03] Martin Scarborough: Not uncomfortable with it no
[20:21:07] Kain Scalia: [21:20] Martin Scarborough: In this life yes [21:20] You: Or are you uncomfortable with the fact that to love someone means to find value in them, and to give them your love for what you value, and expect their love in return?
[20:21:16] Kain Scalia: No, not in this life. This is all you get. This is all you have to talk about. All of us.
[20:21:25] Martin Scarborough: ok
[20:21:25] Kain Scalia: We live here, and you cannot escape that fact.
[20:21:44] Martin Scarborough: Do you believe that agape love is possible?
[20:21:48] Martin Scarborough: lol
[20:21:53] Kain Scalia: So, what you are telling me is that your religion, yor philosophy, is unfit to guarantee your survival on this earth. That it creates pre-existence conditions which makes the attainment of its highest values unattainable.
[20:22:29] Kain Scalia: Philosophically, this is what he's stating: "There is nothing good that can come from me. It must, therefore, come from somewhere/someone else." This whole ideology rests upon the fact that you are broken goods and that nothing you will ever do can compensate for your faults. Improvement, by yourself, is completely impossible: you have to bend down on your knees, fiddle with your rosary, bow your head with great respect and genuflect, genuflect, genuflect! (Sorry... I channeled Tom Lehrer for a second there) This is a typical predestinatory point of view: Because God is holy, just, good, and perfect, and by our very nature (according to religion) we sin against him, then we are unholy, unjust, evil and imperfect. From birth we are flawed beyond all self-redemption, for crimes we did not commit but our (alleged) ancestors did (if God is "just", why is he pinning crimes on the innocent?).
[20:22:33] Martin Scarborough: I recognizes that this iis not all there is
[20:22:50] Kain Scalia: Do you recognize it? How. Can you reproduce it?
[20:23:20] Martin Scarborough: Yes
[20:23:26] Martin Scarborough: that is atleast part of it
[20:23:27] Kain Scalia: Alright. Do so.
[20:23:43] Martin Scarborough: Ansd no I dont genuflect
[20:23:45] Kain Scalia: I want you to create an observable phenomena that will prove beyond all reasonable doubt the existence of an afterligfe and god.
[20:24:05] Kain Scalia: BUT FIRST
[20:24:17] Martin Scarborough: I cant do that
[20:24:27] Kain Scalia: you must define what "God" is in terms that are quanifiable and understandable. The standard definition that he is beyond man's ability to define is not worth anything here.
[20:24:34] Martin Scarborough: I dont believe you can prove God using the Scentific method
[20:24:50] Kain Scalia: So, you cannot prove God through the means that he himself gave man, his reason?
[20:25:13] Martin Scarborough: I hate to do this and Im not funning but I habve to go its 12:30
[20:25:14] Kain Scalia: One question, martin: Is it true that, no matter how much we may be created in his image, we will never be equal to God?
[20:25:23] Martin Scarborough: do you have these meets on a regular basis
[20:25:30] Martin Scarborough: Im telling you that I cnat give a sould bit answer
[20:25:36] Martin Scarborough: bite
[20:25:43] Martin Scarborough: true
[20:26:07] Kain Scalia: A parent who brings up a child that is completely dependant on them, who have inflicted intentional handicaps on them to ascertain that they never leave their side because they can do nothing without help, would be immediately carted away for child abuse. So why is it that when God does it, it is Holy and Just? The whole plan is for us to blindly obey his commandments, and then when we die all that goes on is that we go "to sit at his right side" not as equals, but still as his children, and pay lip service to him for eternity singing Hosannas and whatnot.
[20:26:07] Jack Sondergaard: many theists would say that the existance of anything is the effect of a cause, and they define that cause as God
[20:26:15] Martin Scarborough: we all believe in hierarchy whether we want to or not
[20:26:26] Kain Scalia: Let me put it to you in perspective: Your father sends you to school, then to college, and then when you've graduated he brings you back to His Home so that you can stay by his side forever and tell him how great a guy he is for the rest of eternity. And if you don't do it, You Will Regret It. In short, God seems to be Joan Crawford.
[20:26:38] Kain Scalia: /me nods at Jack
[20:26:43] Martin Scarborough: lol
[20:26:56] Martin Scarborough: that a bit over simplified
[20:27:02] Martin Scarborough: that he is higher I have no problem with
[20:27:15] Kain Scalia: If you have no self-esteem, one does not mind being a slave.
[20:27:18] Martin Scarborough: but God infuses things witn meaning and love
[20:27:30] Martin Scarborough: I have to admite Im not hte best at artuculating this but . ..
[20:27:41] Kain Scalia: Alright. Explain to me the infusion of love and meaning in...hmmm... metastasized cancer?
[20:27:43] Martin Scarborough: Its not about self esteem
[20:28:01] Kain Scalia: Everything is about self-esteem, Matin. If you have no self esteem, you have no means to defend yourself, because you will lack even the will to do so.
[20:28:24] Martin Scarborough: more like the AA member who, only when he admits he has a problem can he really begin to understand freedome
[20:28:45] Kain Scalia: What is the nature of freedom, Martin?
[20:28:50] Martin Scarborough: like in love only when you are conqured by something Higher can you see porpouse and meaning
[20:29:14] Martin Scarborough: nothing but self esteem?
[20:29:16] Kain Scalia: Hm. Therefore the african slaves should have remained in bondage. They were conquered and bound, were they not?
[20:29:20] Kain Scalia: Is that not an expression of love?
[20:29:23] Martin Scarborough: we are very limited creatures then
[20:29:25] Kain Scalia: The expression you have used?
[20:29:37] Martin Scarborough: no
[20:29:42] Martin Scarborough: that is the wrong slavery
[20:29:47] Kain Scalia: So, there is a good slavery?
[20:29:53] Martin Scarborough: but I musrt cintinue later
[20:29:57] Martin Scarborough: maybe dunno
[20:30:14] Kain Scalia: Go before you get in trouble, I don't want to hold you :)
[20:31:29] Kain Scalia: Ina told me she often eats while watching the discussions. I think she's had enough time to eat a turkey ;)
[20:32:00] [SLDonate] DarkGlass Tip Bin: Thank you for your donation, Kain Scalia!
[20:32:31] Martin Scarborough: Well I will end with this we all like to think of our selves as original but we are undubetedly influnece but those we reguared as higher or better in some way
[20:32:45] Martin Scarborough: can I give a web addy to one person who has influecne me?
[20:33:00] Jack Sondergaard: go ahead
[20:33:03] Kain Scalia: go ahead.
[20:33:18] Martin Scarborough: http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio/08_arguments-for-god.htm
[20:33:54] Martin Scarborough: http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio/23_desire.htm
[20:34:00] Kain Scalia: Apologetics. I remember that from my first week of rhetoric.
[20:34:05] Martin Scarborough: THere are mnay othre but those are two that stand out
[20:34:24] Martin Scarborough: I have your name registerd Kain so Ill get back with you tiomorrow night
[20:34:40] Kain Scalia: If I am here, I have to sing at an opera gala tomorrow night.
[20:35:07] Martin Scarborough: you sing opera?
[20:35:10] Ina Centaur: (thanks kain)
[20:35:47] Kain Scalia: Yes.
[20:35:58] Kain Scalia: That's my career, hehe.
[20:36:17] Martin Scarborough: WOW cool
[20:36:46] Ina Centaur: yay, there is an opera gala tomorrow?
[20:36:54] Kain Scalia: Not here, Alas.
[20:36:57] Kain Scalia: At the theater IRL :)
[20:38:23] Ina Centaur: ah ;-)
[20:38:24] Kain Scalia: ..... jumping garbanzo beans... I forgot to get my tux out of the cleaners >_< I'm going to have to race tomorrow, i see.
[20:38:38] Jack Sondergaard: I'm going to take a 5 minute break and take a shower, still sweaty from work
[20:38:52] Kain Scalia: What do you do, Jack? :)
[20:39:21] Jack Sondergaard: manual labor at a retail store
[20:39:45] Kain Scalia: I hope it's not too hard on your back. My best friend worked at wal-mart for a while and she was careless enough to not wear the harness.
[20:39:54] Ina Centaur: kain, what do you think of the hero's withdrawal from the world when outside of the Gulch --- by reverting to petty jobs?
[20:40:06] Kain Scalia: I do not think there are petty jobs, Ina.
[20:40:11] Jack Sondergaard: I had a back injury this year, but I'm over it now
[20:40:49] Kain Scalia: Now, concerning why they do it in the novel.. well, Galt says that they refuse to work in their respective fields because they are on strike.
[20:41:01] Ina Centaur: well, petty is perhaps too vague. i mean: lesser jobs than their brilliance might be able to handle.
[20:41:11] Kain Scalia: Essentially, they are saying that they will not give the fruits of their work to the world because the world does not recognize where the fruit comes from or what makes it possible.
[20:41:20] Kain Scalia: And thus that is why they engage in lesser jobs.
[20:41:40] Ina Centaur: exactly. but, what of applying this to RL?
[20:41:55] Kain Scalia: Well... interestingly enough I may be a case of that, in a sense.
[20:42:20] Kain Scalia: Though not a voluntary one. I cannot work on my own field-- -the singing I do, I do it gratis because I am not allowed to do it for money by certain laws of which Ina already knows about.
[20:43:18] Kain Scalia: And, when you come to think about it, it is a very effective form of strike. If all those who are capable refuse to work on that field and choose more menial, less exacting work (in proportion to their brilliance)... who gets promoted to do those jobs?
[20:43:30] Kain Scalia: Not certainly those who are qualified. But those who can fill the spots, whether they do a good job or not.
[20:43:52] Kain Scalia: And the results of mediocrity are painfully evident in that case. Just look at Ecuador, the country I came from.
[20:44:04] Kain Scalia: Reading through Atlas Shrugged was like watching a very painful biography of my country.
[20:44:45] Kain Scalia: It isn't to marvel that the common phrase in Ecuador nowadays is "There isn't anyone fit to do this- or that"
[20:44:48] Jack Sondergaard: I'm back
[20:44:51] Ina Centaur: welll, in a country like the USA, applying that sort of withdrawal may be hazardous
[20:45:16] Ina Centaur: i often see these hobo-type characters lounging about college towns. they're profound, and they all call themselves john galt
[20:45:18] Kain Scalia: Well, could it be more hazardous int he long run than feeding a system that destroys you?
[20:45:49] Ina Centaur: do you think Galt's plan was realistic -- could it be implemented in RL?
[20:46:40] Kain Scalia: If you are the producers and from which everything else depends, you can maintain yourself and be resourceful no matter where you are.
[20:47:02] Kain Scalia: Galt's plan was to withdraw and allow the process the looters had set in motion to accelerate to breakneck speed.
[20:47:18] Kain Scalia: Incompetence, when unchecked, will gleefully run itself into hell. Again, just look at *sigh* ecuador
[20:47:37] Jack Sondergaard: I don't think it could be fully implemented in RL, but in smaller ways, yes
[20:48:46] Ina Centaur: hmm kain, galt's plan also involved a bit of force
[20:48:50] Kain Scalia: As far as 100% accuracy? not likely. But remenber, it is fiction- technologies like Galt's generator, which can make that plan a 100% success, are light years away, if ever possible at all. But the philosophical principle is the same.
[20:49:04] Ina Centaur: a master planning of sorts -- removing the right hero exactly when the weight of the world bears heaviest on his back
[20:49:05] Cera Jenkins: hey guys
[20:49:13] Kain Scalia: Hello Cera.
[20:49:14] Ina Centaur: thus, letting the world topple, "hero by hero"
[20:49:22] Ina Centaur: hi cera, we are talking about the feasibility of Galt's plan in RL
[20:49:29] Ina Centaur: RL=Real Life
[20:49:40] Jack Sondergaard: hi Cera
[20:49:50] Kain Scalia: Well, Ina, considering that the looters sought to use force to subjugate the heroes... remember that the moment force is applied, the choice of a moral election is immediately discarded because what primes is survival.
[20:49:51] Cera Jenkins: plan of removing all the productive minds and leaving the world to collapse?
[20:50:17] Kain Scalia: If it involved force, it didn't involve gal't sforce. It was merely stepping aside and letting the force that was enacted against him exhaust itself.
[20:50:34] Kain Scalia: A judo step, so to speak.
[20:51:11] Kain Scalia: The force that the looters wrought was coercion. Galt ,a nd the others, refused to be coerced.
[20:52:06] Cera Jenkins: They refused to give sanction to the looters.
[20:52:07] Kain Scalia: If someone attacks you and your means to prevent that attack end up with the attacker injuring himself, are you the respondant for that force, or is the attacker who initiated that is responsible for the consequences of his actions?
[20:52:11] Kain Scalia: Precisely, cera :)
[20:52:55] Kain Scalia: And also consider it isn't immoral to take back what was stolen from you, because it is still yours.
[20:53:42] Ina Centaur: lol, on the flip side, you are belittling the work done by the looter in stealing your work by taking it back ;-)
[20:54:14] Kain Scalia: Well, by the sanction of the victim, it is the looters who are dependent on the goodwill of their victims. They COUNT on them not taking action, and take what is theirs.
[20:54:42] Kain Scalia: No-one can take what is yours unless you let them have it by default.
[20:54:50] Jack Sondergaard: in RL, I've quit several jobs after realizing I was expected to deceive people, and it cost the company thousands to train a new employee, so I have gone on "strike" in a sense
[20:55:03] Kain Scalia: Good for you, Jack!
[20:55:32] Kain Scalia: You shrugged :P
[20:55:50] Jack Sondergaard: yes, by saying "I quit"
[20:57:08] Kain Scalia: I have yet to quit a job, when I could work, becuase of deception or things like that. And although in the field of opera there is space for intrigue that is nearly legendary, I don't participate in it. I am rather bluntly honest---- which does not make me popular with people who like to hide behind "Well, thigns are MUCH more complicated that THAT..."
[20:57:53] Cera Jenkins: Okay, I've got a 'what if' question. What if the looters in the book had been content with just taking a small portion of the wealth of the great minds and inventors in the book? Their system wouldn't have collapsed, because the great minds wouldn't have been pushed past the edge, where they had to strike. It's kind of like taxes today--more so if you live in Canada than the US--where a large portion of one's income is given to the gorvernment.
[20:58:15] Kain Scalia: You've noticed.. interesting, isn't it ? :)
[20:58:18] Cera Jenkins: But it's not so bad; no one goes on strike for it.
[20:58:22] Cera Jenkins: Is that right?
[20:58:30] Kain Scalia: Well, if you do, you get jailed for tax evasion.
[20:58:44] Ina Centaur: well, there are the hobos who hang in university towns calling themselves John Galt
[20:58:53] Kain Scalia: Ina... really??
[20:58:57] Cera Jenkins: haha I haven't met any of those.
[20:59:18] Ina Centaur: oh yes... public transportation - busses, metros, that's where you meet them.
[20:59:19] Jack Sondergaard: I plan to be more blunt in the future, I am learning a bit about how to respond to parasites from this book
[20:59:49] Ina Centaur: the easiest way... if you accidentally forget to put a cover on your a.r. book.
[20:59:53] Cera Jenkins: I somehow don't think Ayn Rand would have wanted her readers to end up as hobos.
[21:00:23] Kain Scalia: Well... I am very blunt, always have been, and being honest makes it even blunter. But there is something to be said for being honest with grace... which I do not master, but which my aunt does exceedingly well.
[21:00:42] Ina Centaur: well, it's that whole idea of withdrawal -- how do you apply it to our current society?
[21:00:55] Kain Scalia: /me ponders this.
[21:01:21] Kain Scalia: Well, there are certainoptions. If you have a certain income, there are countries that recognize your right to property and to your own income...such as Monaco, for example.
[21:01:24] Jack Sondergaard: in the book it is a bit black and white, easy to tell who is a looter and who is a hero, in RL some people are some of both
[21:02:05] Ina Centaur: yes, in RL things are not so clear cut
[21:02:15] Ina Centaur: take... Bill Gates for instance ^.~ (details you provide)
[21:02:18] Kain Scalia: Well, the book is Romantic Realism so a lot of things are very heavily underlined... but I have met James Taggarts. Trust me. His name was Roustam and he was from Russia, and he todl me openly to my face that some people had to be sacrificed for the Common Good.
[21:02:42] Ina Centaur: i thought it was Larkin who said that he was a student of history
[21:03:05] Ina Centaur: back in the phoenix-durango/ore-embargo deal in the beginning of the novel
[21:03:28] Kain Scalia: If you loot, you are a looter. A hero shuns himself for being a looter, and hates it if he 'has to be'. There are things in the system that are inescapable right now. They are always clear cut. Each situation has a right and wrong . People just choose which to act on in every decision.
[21:04:15] Cera Jenkins: Okay I have a story: the other night I was at a dinner for the college honor society, and I was talking to a girl from Vancouver. She said her father owns a company and actually gives over 50% of what he earns to the government. And it was so crazy because I was reading A.S. and she said the exact thing the looters said in the book that "he has enough. He ought to give it to other people. I mean he doesn't need all that." I didn't want to pick a fight, so I just changed the subject. I'd never encountered anyone with the view that people aren't entitled to the wealth they earn.
[21:05:06] Jack Sondergaard: I've heard that very thing on tv often
[21:05:08] Kain Scalia: You would be surprised how many people like that there are around. People have criticized Rand's cahracterization for being flat.... but trust me... it is a LOT less two dimensional than they're comfortable admitting.
[21:05:24] Kain Scalia: I know Galts, and goodness spare me I have lived among the looters.
[21:05:36] Cera Jenkins: What would you have said? How do you counter people who think that way?
[21:05:45] Kain Scalia: Jack?
[21:05:54] Kain Scalia: or me? :P
[21:06:00] Cera Jenkins: I mean the girl who I talked to
[21:06:08] Ina Centaur: yes, how would you counter them w/o appearing the misunderstood?
[21:06:11] Kain Scalia: Oh, I mean who was the question directed to :P
[21:06:19] Cera Jenkins: oh everyone :)
[21:06:23] Kain Scalia: Oh, hehe :)
[21:06:28] Kain Scalia: You answer first, I need to get my tea!
[21:06:33] Jack Sondergaard: when Barbara Walters interviewed Bill Gates, she tried to make him feel guilty for having money, she really thought it belonged to the whole world, except Gates of course
[21:06:52] Kain Scalia: afk
[21:07:20] Cera Jenkins: Doesn't Gates give a lot to charity?
[21:07:44] Sharchi Qinan: AIDS related charities mostly iirc
[21:07:54] Jack Sondergaard: yes, Billions
[21:08:36] Kain Scalia: Concerning those people...my boyfriend usually asks them, "Who says what IS enough?"
[21:08:50] Cera Jenkins: Why do you think he does it? I think if I had that much money I would give some away, too, just because I wouldn't know what else to do with it.
[21:08:55] Kain Scalia: Then follows up with, "Think of the most amazing things accomplished with the largest amounts in the world. Dreams that were pursued by the singular vision of one man. What is enough?"
[21:09:02] Kain Scalia: And end with, "Are you willing to sacrifice the possibilities of great minds, for just enough?"
[21:09:18] Sharchi Qinan: maybe he owns stocks in AIDS related pharmaceuticals
[21:09:36] Cera Jenkins: haha that would be twisted
[21:09:43] Sharchi Qinan: its a twisted world
[21:09:43] Jack Sondergaard: I'm not against giving money away, but it's the earner's decision to make
[21:09:58] Kain Scalia: Why would that be? If he invests in a technology he feels will be successful and will be necessary, it is perfectly moral and justifiable.
[21:10:19] Sharchi Qinan: Bill Gates?
[21:10:43] Kain Scalia: I would own stocks. What is so twisted about that?
[21:11:05] Sharchi Qinan: i didnt say owning stocks was twisted
[21:11:12] Ina Centaur: yes, and moreover, if he makes sure that it's invested in something that would show results -- the money is well used... rather than say, channeled over to another charity that would just waste it in bureaucratical inefficiency
[21:11:27] Cera Jenkins: Oh, I guess I should clarify that I meant twisted.. in the eyes of the public... another thing to make a movie about, maybe?
[21:11:48] Kain Scalia: Oh, I see, you were talking about twisted according to vox populi.
[21:11:53] Jack Sondergaard: I've come to think that the greatest philanthropy is to create jobs that make money for the business, the owner, the employers, suppliers, customers, and even a pittance for the government :)
[21:12:03] Sharchi Qinan: well regarding AIDS, i think a lot of assumptions are made
[21:12:16] Ina Centaur: twisted that gates invests in AIDS when he has shares of stock for AIDS pharms?
[21:12:42] Kain Scalia: Yes, jack. That IS the most compassionate. You get it. :)
[21:13:32] Ina Centaur: yes, so Franklin D. Rosevelt's creating the New Deal and causing nationwide inflation by giving everyone jobs -- even useless ones like watching the sun move across the sky -- was philantrophy.
[21:13:59] Ina Centaur: lol. create jobs -- create jobs with roles that are actually useful, you mean?
[21:14:36] Kain Scalia: Aaah, very good, Ina, you re correct, we have to define that these jobs must occur naturally in a free market, not regulated by politicians who have no idea how the market works and who wish to twist things around and magically expect reality to readjust to their whims.
[21:15:14] Sharchi Qinan: what ehtical checks
[21:15:19] Kain Scalia: And, furthermore, hardly anyome made money with them :p
[21:15:28] Kain Scalia: Sharchi: Value given for value traded.
[21:15:47] Ina Centaur: value is relative
[21:15:52] Kain Scalia: The rest is the realm of morality, which is ruled by philosophy... another discussion altogether
[21:16:02] Kain Scalia: Well, not antoher discussion. Just a lot longer.
[21:16:02] Jack Sondergaard: I used to think I could save the world by giving my money away to any needy person who asked for it, so I worked in the oil field, risked my life every day to earn money, and gave thousands of dollars to lazy people
[21:16:35] Sharchi Qinan: so you think ethics are irrelevant to a free market?
[21:17:02] Kain Scalia: Sharchi, I think the subject of ethics applies to things much greater than the free market. Existence and how we interact with it, for example.
[21:17:20] Kain Scalia: To act as if there is one type of ethics for the free market and another one for something else... misses the point.
[21:17:25] Ina Centaur: value can be fair on only one side even in the most absurd situations: say a fan is in love with a piece of lint from some celebrity's cuffs, and pays a dealer some immense sum of money for it. the placebo effect is in action: there is a high chance that that lint isn't from said celebrity, and yet the fan would rather not admit this fact and would just spend the money to receive his own form of amusement
[21:17:28] Kain Scalia: And Ina: Value is agent-relative :)
[21:17:42] Ina Centaur: so, say, in reality, the lint is not from the celeb. the fan's been jacked, but both parties are happy.
[21:17:45] Ina Centaur: is that a fair trade?
[21:17:51] Ina Centaur: *gyped
[21:18:03] Cera Jenkins: yes, I think so
[21:18:04] Kain Scalia: .... ... ... I think I need you to ask to use less slang :P
[21:18:17] Kain Scalia: I'm sorry, I don't think I understood the sentence :P *blushes*
[21:18:25] Kain Scalia: remembe, English is not my first language :P
[21:18:44] Ina Centaur: so, the truth: the lint is not from the celebrity, but the fan does not know this and is happy and loves the expensive lint, and the dealer is happy for the money
[21:19:02] Cera Jenkins: Value for value... that seems fair to me.
[21:19:03] Ina Centaur: the fan paid for a piece of lint from a celebrity. he did not get what he purchased
[21:19:11] Ina Centaur: however, he got what he believed he purchased.
[21:19:18] Kain Scalia: Oh. Well, no, that is violating the virtue of honesty. Which is one of the virtues of ethics, which is created through the process of creating a rational, logical morality.
[21:19:22] Sharchi Qinan: caveat emptor
[21:19:26] Ina Centaur: lol
[21:19:43] Kain Scalia: It behooves the trader to be honest about what he trades. It is in his own self interest. Nobody buys frmo someone who is exposed as a cheater.
[21:19:59] Ina Centaur: now, here's the other case: if the dealer were to say to the fan, "i cannot sell this to you until i have verified that it is 100% really from said celebrity"
[21:20:07] Ina Centaur: the fan would have reacted negatively demanding that it be sold.
[21:20:26] Jack Sondergaard: yes, there is always the danger of exposure, and in the future disillusioning all the lint buyers
[21:20:30] Kain Scalia: Is the dealer selling it under the pretense that is authentic?
[21:20:33] Sharchi Qinan: you think so? nobody likes being taken for a sucker, so most would appreciate the honesty
[21:20:56] Ina Centaur: well, what i'm trying to say is that... this whole lint business is absurd
[21:21:09] Ina Centaur: the origins of the lint -- could really be anywhere
[21:21:21] Sharchi Qinan: you have aroused my desire for celebrity lint
[21:21:24] Ina Centaur: if it's authentic, then that's just great. but, if it's not, and as long as the fan believes it is, he's happy
[21:21:25] Cera Jenkins: Hah, imagine the lint market.
[21:21:31] Kain Scalia: But what the dealer is selling is not lint, but the particular origin of that lint.
[21:21:53] Ina Centaur: no, the dealer is selling a piece of a hero, which the fan desires.
[21:22:13] Jack Sondergaard: just look at the tabloids, what they sell isn't much better than celebrity lint
[21:22:28] Ina Centaur: it is an abstract piece... meaning, it could be a sliver of a nail (assume DNA detection is not in play) or a piece of old skin
[21:22:39] Kain Scalia: If he is selling it and it is true that it is, then he is being an honest tradesman. If it isn't, he is being a dishonest tradesman, giving something under the pretense of another thing to earn something honest is not trading, it is merely a more sophisticated looting: looting through deception.
[21:22:43] Ina Centaur: but, the value does not exist in the physical object
[21:22:47] Ina Centaur: and not even in its origin, really
[21:22:53] Ina Centaur: it exists in the possessor's belief.
[21:23:03] Kain Scalia: If the value doesn't exist int he physical object, why can't sellers sell disembodied celebrity?
[21:23:24] Ina Centaur: the moment that the possessor realizes that it's not that prized lint or whatever -- then we have grief.
[21:23:42] Kain Scalia: That is because there can NEVER be any value on that which is predicated on a lie.
[21:23:47] Kain Scalia: [22:23] Ina Centaur: the moment that the possessor realizes that it's not that prized lint or whatever -- then we have grief.
[21:23:52] Kain Scalia: You can't TRADE if you're LOOTING with deception.
[21:24:11] Sharchi Qinan: i runa popular counselling service specialising in lint grief, business is good
[21:24:21] Ina Centaur: /me smacks sharchi
[21:24:29] Ina Centaur: basically, i'm saying this..
[21:24:34] Ina Centaur: lint's origin really can't be traced
[21:24:44] Ina Centaur: the point is moot verifying whether it *really* came from said celeb
[21:25:06] Kain Scalia: Then there is no logical point in selling it as such. Merely sell it as 'probably from so and so, but not verifiably so'
[21:25:29] Kain Scalia: If you yourself don't know the origins.
[21:25:31] Ina Centaur: for something like this, would placating the certain emptiness in fans, that voracious need to possess a part of the celeb... by claiming said lint really belongs to said celeb... be bad?
[21:25:42] Kain Scalia: but quite honestly? no self-respecting trader would sell something whose origins and veracity he is not certain of.
[21:25:45] Sharchi Qinan: the worlds power structure is based on such activity
[21:25:46] Kain Scalia: Looters will. Traders won't.
[21:26:12] Ina Centaur: all right, here's a similar case, different context.
[21:26:14] Sharchi Qinan: artificial value stemming from false promises
[21:26:18] Ina Centaur: suppose you encounter a dying man
[21:26:21] Ina Centaur: he tells you his dying wish
[21:26:27] Ina Centaur: that he wishes to touch the shoelaces of Elvis
[21:26:33] Ina Centaur: you happen to have a piece of old shoelace in your pocket
[21:26:40] Kain Scalia: IT is bad. Placating on falsehoods is always bad. No matter what case it is.
[21:26:52] Kain Scalia: You are giving people nothing for something.
[21:27:08] Ina Centaur: Rand would say that it's BAD to just take that out of your pocket to give the man his dying wish by conjuring the story that you somehow have elvis' shoelace in your pocket
[21:27:15] Ina Centaur: yet, what about for the dying man?
[21:27:20] Kain Scalia: Yes, because you are counterfeting reality.
[21:27:28] Kain Scalia: Why does the dying man deserve something other than reality?
[21:27:34] Kain Scalia: Telling him it is Elvis' shoelace is robbing him of the truth.
[21:27:42] Sharchi Qinan: agreed
[21:27:55] Jack Sondergaard: we are all dying, just some of us sooner than others
[21:28:02] Ina Centaur: so, you would say to the dying man, "I am sorry I cannot help you; you will die without the one thing you desire; reality is my God."
[21:28:23] Cera Jenkins: That seems harsh.
[21:28:24] Kain Scalia: I will say to the man: "I do not have that which you desire."
[21:28:33] Ina Centaur: "and, there is no afterlife. so... so long... you had a good life; could have found it for yourself; why me to have to change your reality for you?"
[21:28:56] Sharchi Qinan: i would say you may get to meet elvis in about 20 mintues
[21:28:59] Ina Centaur: now, here is the thing
[21:29:01] Ina Centaur: it turns out
[21:29:01] Cera Jenkins: haha
[21:29:08] Ina Centaur: that you purchased the shoelace from a garage sale
[21:29:11] Ina Centaur: accidentally
[21:29:12] Kain Scalia: There is no god. Reality is not a god. Reality simply is what it is.
[21:29:18] Ina Centaur: it actually came in the guise of a bookmark of atlas shrugged
[21:29:30] Ina Centaur: and now, if you were to travel back thru time with this piece of shoelace and venture to all the places it's been to
[21:29:38] Ina Centaur: you'd arrive somewhere in time... on Elvis' shoe
[21:29:44] Ina Centaur: suppose that is reality
[21:29:45] Ina Centaur: BUT
[21:29:47] Ina Centaur: you do not know this.
[21:29:51] Ina Centaur: you = shoelace possesor
[21:29:59] Kain Scalia: Truth is the truth, when you stop recognizing it to alleviate suffering you're no better than Christianity, Islam or any other mysticism.
[21:30:47] Ina Centaur: kain, what of the real *potentially* possible truth?
[21:30:51] Kain Scalia: But the thing remains: At the moment of that man's death, you did not know that those shoelaces were Elvis'. You do not countefeit.
[21:30:52] Sharchi Qinan: or objectivism
[21:31:12] Kain Scalia: Ina: Probability is not truth, merely a potential outcome.
[21:31:31] Ina Centaur: this is what i'd say to the man: "you know what; sometimes, i believe in fate... this is just gotta be more than wicked randomness that your dying wish is to touch a shoelace and that i just happen to have this old shoelace that someone used as a bookmark in my pockets!"
[21:31:46] Ina Centaur: "now, i dunno its origins.. but it sure does look old enough... and who knows... maybe... jsut maybe... it might have been on Elvis' shoe"
[21:31:52] Kain Scalia: I will not tell someone I have the cure for AIDS because there the potential that I might find it. Sure, one to a billion chances, but hey, it's a potential outcome!
[21:32:18] Kain Scalia: So I'll go and make myself rich by selling random collections of chemicals. Who knows, maybe one of thsoe mixtures will contain the cure. It is a potential outcome.
[21:32:29] Ina Centaur: kain, we're not talking about selling right now.
[21:32:37] Ina Centaur: we're talking about a piece of shoelace, and a dying man's last wish.
[21:32:48] Jack Sondergaard: If you deal in lies, people learn to not believe in anything you say
[21:33:06] Kain Scalia: The man wants the shoelace. it is a value he is after. You are giving it to him. You are giving him something which he considers valuable, and you get the 'good feeling' of having helped him. It is a trade. It IS a sale.
[21:33:16] Kain Scalia: You are selling him peace. At waht cost? A lie.
[21:33:30] Ina Centaur: please read what i have said from 22:31 forward
[21:33:54] Ina Centaur: emphasis: "now, i dunno its origins.. but..."
[21:34:10] Kain Scalia: Yes, and even then it makes no sense. I will simpy say "Here, this is an old sholenace. This is all I have, and I cannot tell you anything more than how I came upon it."
[21:34:13] Ina Centaur: is there actually a lie?
[21:34:31] Kain Scalia: Yes. You are forfeiting and creating false expectations.
[21:34:44] Kain Scalia: Believe in my worldview, my mysticism, and you'll be happy. MAYBE it's Elvis' shoe, and if you look at it this way, you will be happy.
[21:34:46] Jack Sondergaard: why is a dying man less deserving of truth than anyone else?
[21:34:48] Ina Centaur: no, i am simply not eliminating things that could have been
[21:34:55] Kain Scalia: How is that any different than saying, Believe in my holy book, and MAYBE you'll die and go to heaven?
[21:35:12] Ina Centaur: ok, anyway, let's go back to A.S.
[21:35:15] Ina Centaur: wet nurse's death
[21:35:23] Ina Centaur: remember the episode?
[21:35:35] Kain Scalia: Vividly.
[21:35:40] Cera Jenkins: yes
[21:35:42] Jack Sondergaard: that depends on whether you really believe in heaven, if you don't then don't promise it
[21:35:47] Ina Centaur: what do you think of Rearden's reaction?
[21:35:59] Ina Centaur: that he kept on telling/believing that the wet nurse would survive?
[21:36:27] Ina Centaur: he tells the wetnurse to fight on -- even though the physical damage should have made it clear that whatever fight would have been as futile as believing that lint came from Elvis
[21:36:29] Jack Sondergaard: he was telling the man to strive to live
[21:36:58] Ina Centaur: the man was shot in the chest or something. bleeding wound. left in a slag pit. crawled all the way up to the top
[21:37:03] Ina Centaur: suffered major blood loss (etc)
[21:37:08] Cera Jenkins: Also, telling the w.n. that he, Rearden, valued the w.n.'s life.
[21:37:26] Ina Centaur: yes, Rearden does give him his ultimate sanction -- that the w.n. learns what an absolute is
[21:37:29] Ina Centaur: but, his reaction, however
[21:37:38] Ina Centaur: he keeps on telling him to fight -- when it's as futile as getting lace from mel gibson
[21:37:40] Kain Scalia: He was giving him something to focus him onto the rpesent, even if it was to end up reassuring Rearden that he was dying. It's not a very good analogy in this case. For Rearden, even one more minute of prolongued existence through clinging is worth more than a thousand promiceses.
[21:38:54] Ina Centaur: hmm, actually, the question is -- did Rearden realize that reality would not allow the w.n. to survive his wounds?
[21:39:23] Ina Centaur: the w.n. was saying he'd die; rearden was attempting to go against that absolute
[21:39:24] Jack Sondergaard: hi gugu
[21:39:27] Kain Scalia: Do you mean, did he realize the full extent of the wounds? He may have had an inkling, but who knows? He isn't a doctor.
[21:39:58] Kain Scalia: Rearden, not being a doctor, can't really tell except that he's badly wounded. However, I can only tell that the shoelace came in a book, and that is ALL i can tell.
[21:40:08] Kain Scalia: Rearden said it because no one can predict the future
[21:40:13] Ina Centaur: ok, so here we go -- rearden does not know for sure that the w.n. would die
[21:40:18] Ina Centaur: it's the uncertainty
[21:40:26] Ina Centaur: every case can be broken down into 2 possibilities
[21:40:41] Ina Centaur: lace came from elvis ; lace came from nougert
[21:40:49] Ina Centaur: w.n. is going to die ; w.n. is not going to die.
[21:41:01] Ina Centaur: Rearden believed in the more positive of the 2 either-or's
[21:41:11] Jack Sondergaard: if I remember correctly, when I listened to it, I thought he might survive up until he actually died
[21:41:21] Ina Centaur: he believed in it because the situation prompted for it
[21:41:30] Kain Scalia: rearden's statement to him essentially boils down to this: "I value you, I love you as a human being, be with me, you are not alone, fight to hold on to these last few moments of love, of value, of respect so you can go in kindness, in virtue, in beauty, I'm here with you until the end."
[21:42:18] Jack Sondergaard: yes, he was saying "value life, no matter how long or short it may be"
[21:42:20] Ina Centaur: ok, yes, i suppose that's also a minor echo of the struggle he and Dagny were going through
[21:42:35] Ina Centaur: (and other remaining heroes)
[21:42:53] Ina Centaur: (not said in context of their romance, but rather the world's last hold on heroes)
[21:43:05] Kain Scalia: He cast off no one who believed in life.
[21:43:12] Jack Sondergaard: life was his highest value
[21:43:16] Ina Centaur: ok, i think that is correct
[21:43:36] Ina Centaur: Rearden's overall point was: Value life, persist no matter how futile it may be
[21:43:50] Kain Scalia: wait, Ina, I had a bit of a memory flash.
[21:44:04] Kain Scalia: Think about your example with the shoelace...
[21:44:24] Kain Scalia: Isn't what you are asking to do witht he shoelace what Lilly Rearden is asking people to do with the concept of beauty?
[21:45:01] Ina Centaur: that the fat woman should be told that, no, she is really beautiful, etc.
[21:45:11] Ina Centaur: no, not quite
[21:45:12] Kain Scalia: Yes, counterfeit reality for their favour.
[21:45:17] Ina Centaur: the fat woman has eyes, and can see for herself
[21:45:27] Ina Centaur: in the cases i mentioned, there is uncertainty in the commodity of trade
[21:45:48] Kain Scalia: So you as long as no-one is certain or uncertain of anything, it's ok?
[21:45:57] Ina Centaur: the uncertainty is what i find similar between the 3 cases, the lint, shoelace, and Rearden/w.n.
[21:46:27] Ina Centaur: well, that's the case with reality. there is always this uncertainty.
[21:46:46] Kain Scalia: The potential is there, so why not lie first, and make up for it later with possibilities?
[21:47:02] Ina Centaur: and, you can also say that Rearden had multiple goals in telling the w.n. that he'd live if he fights
[21:47:11] Jack Sondergaard: but the w.n. still had life, that was certain, just not clear how long
[21:47:21] Ina Centaur: yes, you've mentioned -- struggle to take that last gulp of life for the sake of life itself.. but also:
[21:47:21] Kain Scalia: Well observed, Jack.
[21:47:38] Ina Centaur: Rearden wanted to believe that reality were not so cruel
[21:47:46] Ina Centaur: that it would not kill a boy who had finally learned how to see
[21:47:48] Kain Scalia: Where does he state that?
[21:47:59] Ina Centaur: it's implied
[21:48:10] Kain Scalia: To believe that would be to subscribe to a malevolent universe viewpoint.
[21:48:15] Kain Scalia: It is something that Rand's characters lack.
[21:48:16] Ina Centaur: given his wounds; given the fact that Rearden is no moron (even if not medically educated)
[21:48:26] Ina Centaur: given his grief, his push, etc
[21:49:40] Kain Scalia: Oh dear goodness, two hours. *laughs*
[21:49:41] Ina Centaur: to believe in something that facts prove to be impossible
[21:49:43] Kain Scalia: /me just noticed.
[21:49:45] Jack Sondergaard: keep it simple, tell the truth
[21:50:02] Kain Scalia: Rearden doesn't believe in something that is impossible, Ina. If he did, he wouldn't make steel.
[21:50:05] Kain Scalia: :)
[21:50:11] Kain Scalia: He'd be a teleevangelist.
[21:50:23] Ina Centaur: he wanted to believe the w.n. would live
[21:50:37] Kain Scalia: Just because you want something to happen, it doesn't mean it is going to happen.
[21:50:49] Ina Centaur: and, as he was struggling to save the w.n.... risking his own life... he believed in it
[21:50:58] Jack Sondergaard: did he promise the man he would live and get well, or did he just say "fight to live"?
[21:50:59] Kain Scalia: Rearden never mentions, at any time, that he doesn't want to believe that reality is so cruel.
[21:51:16] Ina Centaur: would it be worthwhile to save the life of a dying man at the cause of yours?
[21:51:22] Kain Scalia: Rearden is shocked that these looters, these thugs, have killed and sacrificed a young man who was finally starting to become a moral person.
[21:51:41] Kain Scalia: He never mentions Fatalism- which is what you are implying- at all. It isn't The Unfortunate Tale of Young Werther.
[21:51:57] Jack Sondergaard: it depends on how much you value the other person's life
[21:52:25] Ina Centaur: ok, so what about Rearden's risking his own life to save the w.n.?
[21:52:45] Blvd Ochs: What is WN short for?
[21:52:52] Ina Centaur: hi blvd, wn = wet nures
[21:52:54] Ina Centaur: *nurse
[21:53:05] Blvd Ochs: Ah, the leaky boy.
[21:53:19] Kain Scalia: Rearden valued the wet nurse, he had seen him grow from a leech into a man who had started his journey into morality. He was trying to save also what the wet nurse represented: The fact that no matter how hard you crush it, there is always a chance for the human spirit to rectify itself .
[21:54:01] Blvd Ochs: I dunno. I think saving someone is a knee jerk reaction.
[21:54:18] Kain Scalia: Blvd, would you save Charles Manson's life? :)
[21:54:20] Blvd Ochs: Especially someone who just saved your ass.
[21:54:27] Jack Sondergaard: I used to be a security guard, it was written in my job description that I was expected to risk my life, if need be, to protect the life and property of my client, I accepted that contract as my value, and would have given my life, if the need arose, to keep my word
[21:54:40] Blvd Ochs: Without prior thinking yes.
[21:55:03] Kain Scalia: Then I guess that could tell about your subconscious values.
[21:55:19] Blvd Ochs: If you have a jerk neighbor that plays music too loud, and then they wipe out in front ofg your house on a bike, would you help?
[21:55:43] Ina Centaur: well, i think in the slag heap, it was dangerous enough that Rearden risked his own life for that of a dying man
[21:55:45] Kain Scalia: I believe that being a public nuisance is hardly comparable with being a depraved psychopath and murderer.
[21:55:53] Blvd Ochs: I don't see how you can compare a young boy still growing with Charlie Manson
[21:56:30] Kain Scalia: I didn't. I asked you if you would save charles manson. And the wet nurse is hardly a 'young boy'. He is a man after college.
[21:56:50] Jack Sondergaard: loud music has tempted me to become a psychopath and a murderer more than once
[21:57:08] SignpostMarv has a tendancy to multi-task: SignpostMarv Martin's dspeak v2.6 booting up.
[21:57:18] Blvd Ochs: What does my saving Charles Manson have anything to do with it? I don't know him. Readon knew this kid.
[21:57:39] Blvd Ochs: He wasn't a stranger he read about in a book. He was part of his everyday life.
[21:57:59] Jack Sondergaard: he had a degree in metalurgy
[21:58:12] Ina Centaur: yes, and a string of degrees and recommendations from all the top officials
[21:58:16] Ina Centaur: (ahem of what standard?)
[21:58:30] Kain Scalia: You said saving someone is a knee jerk reaction. And you are to make us believe you would definitely save Charles Manson or someone similar?
[21:58:49] Kain Scalia: I am merely taking your statement and applying it to a logical event. If you had to save a deranged killer, would you?
[21:58:57] SignpostMarv Martin: /me wonders what Ina dragged him into
[21:59:16] Blvd Ochs: If i was driving down the road, and saw Charles Mason ihanging off a cliff I would try to help him.
[21:59:17] Blvd Ochs: Yes.
[21:59:17] Ina Centaur: /me pokes marv back
[21:59:19] Jack Sondergaard: I can think of a case in which I might
[21:59:40] Ina Centaur: yes, we are essentially back to the old parable
[21:59:44] Blvd Ochs: You would be the one who wanted to watch him die?
[21:59:45] Kain Scalia: And who will help you when he tries to slice your neck? :)
[21:59:57] Ina Centaur: suppose a mother has 2 sons. one younger, one older. both are drowning.
[22:00:04] Kain Scalia: I would not lift a finger to help him.
[22:00:05] Jack Sondergaard: suppose it was my job to gaurd the lives of prisoners, and I had agreed to risk my life to do so and given my word
[22:00:12] Ina Centaur: who would she save in:
[22:00:13] Ina Centaur: case 1. suppose the words above summarize the situation completely.
[22:00:22] Kain Scalia: Ah, kjack, there you have a pre-established agreement :)
[22:00:26] Ina Centaur: case 2. suppose her younger son has a terminal illness, and she knows he wouldn't survive another year
[22:00:36] Kain Scalia: In which case the observance to it is a duty you have voluntarily accepted.
[22:00:44] Blvd Ochs: Save the good save the well.
[22:01:27] SignpostMarv Martin: Ina: you'd save whichever one had the highest success rate for being saved within the given time period
[22:01:40] Ina Centaur: both sons are equally far away from you
[22:01:40] Blvd Ochs: I should get them both, since I saved Charles Manson :)
[22:01:43] Ina Centaur: (etc)
[22:02:01] SignpostMarv Martin: equidistance does not equate to equal success rate
[22:02:01] Ina Centaur: well, you don't have time to save both. reality's stilted.
[22:02:10] Ina Centaur: note the (etc)
[22:02:13] Kain Scalia: Does saving a deranged murderous psychopath make you 'good'?
[22:02:22] Kain Scalia: I shudder to think who is bad, then :)
[22:02:23] SignpostMarv Martin: atheltic performance of myself vs weight of son
[22:02:27] Blvd Ochs: How does killing someone make you good?
[22:02:38] SignpostMarv Martin: Blvd: context
[22:02:59] SignpostMarv Martin: if the majority defines you as "good" then killing someone they define as "evil" makes you "good"
[22:03:05] Kain Scalia: A man is about to strangle an elderly woman. You cannot stop him from whree you are. You have a gun. You can only see his head. What do you do.
[22:03:11] Kain Scalia: Be good, and spare the killer the bullet?
[22:03:25] SignpostMarv Martin: to the minority who define the "evil" person as "good" would then define you as "evil"
[22:03:36] Kain Scalia: My cousin had to deal with this. And she shot the man through the temple.
[22:03:43] SignpostMarv Martin: there is never a single side to a good vs evil argument
[22:03:54] Kain Scalia: Yes there is, Signpost. There is right, and there is wrong, no in betweens.
[22:03:59] Ina Centaur: you'd wonder why he was strangling the old woman
[22:04:09] Ina Centaur: why do you always assume that it's the damsel in distress.. when it could be the other case?
[22:04:15] Kain Scalia: Ina: He was a burglar. The woman had run out to call for help and he caught her in the door.
[22:04:27] Ina Centaur: stilted reality again
[22:04:38] SignpostMarv Martin: Kain: right and wrong is a matter of perspective
[22:04:43] Ina Centaur: so anyway, as you can see, i'm not through with my point of uncertainty
[22:04:51] Kain Scalia: No, Signpost. Right and wrong exist, whether you are incapable of perceive them or not.
[22:04:54] Ina Centaur: what do you think of the mother and her two sons?
[22:05:14] Ina Centaur: marv, you must note that Kain is our dearest Randian evangelist.
[22:05:14] SignpostMarv Martin: you kill a murderer. you do something you believe is right
[22:05:18] Kain Scalia: whether I am incapable of percieving them, or not, theya re there.
[22:05:18] Ina Centaur: for him, there are only absolutes
[22:05:18] SignpostMarv Martin: their family disagree
[22:05:25] Ina Centaur: and for absolutes, there is nothing else.
[22:05:43] Kain Scalia: Too bad for their family. Maybe next time they will teach someone that initiating force against someone with intent to kill is not exactly going to get you far.
[22:05:43] SignpostMarv Martin: G.W. Bush decides to invade Iraq. He believes he is right.
[22:05:48] SignpostMarv Martin: Lots of people disagree
[22:05:50] SignpostMarv Martin: :-P
[22:05:58] SignpostMarv Martin: MUHAHAHAA
[22:06:27] SignpostMarv Martin: morals are a quantum state. an event can exist in both poles
[22:06:33] SignpostMarv Martin: /ethics
[22:06:33] Kain Scalia: Ina, if you believe you cannot be certain of anything, then why do you get out of bed every morning? After all, your getting up might just cause the universe to implode. it might not be certain, but it just might.
[22:06:49] SignpostMarv Martin: Kain: uncertainty. it might not :-P
[22:07:05] SignpostMarv Martin: Also,
[22:07:10] Kain Scalia: Hm, i seem to have two Kantians in this group.
[22:07:11] Ina Centaur: kain, note that there are various "breeds" of uncertainty
[22:07:14] SignpostMarv Martin: according to the paralel worlds theory, I've done both
[22:07:22] Ina Centaur: there's positive uncertainty -- why not; things could have been that way
[22:07:24] Blvd Ochs: Ugh.
[22:07:26] Kain Scalia: Yes, and you also haven't been born.
[22:07:43] Ina Centaur: and negative uncertainty -- why do this; why do that; there's no way to know whether the world would blow up an hour later!
[22:07:46] SignpostMarv Martin: so if "I" to choose to take the left fork, "I" also chose to take the right fork
[22:07:47] Kain Scalia: Certainty is the acceptance of a fact without doubt. It is a level of confidence attributed to particular knowledge. We are certain when we know something is true, and have no doubts. The term "degrees of certainty" is used to describe how close we are to being certain. Certainty, though, is the upper limit. It is the state where no more doubts exist.
[22:08:06] Kain Scalia: When all knowledge supports the conclusion, and none denies it. If one has a valid reason for doubting something, one should not be certain. If one, for instance, knows there are facts that are unknown, and important in validating the knowledge, one should not be certain. If, however, one believes that all of the relevant information is known, and it all points to the knowledge being true, one should be certain. Certainty is contextual.
[22:08:23] Kain Scalia: It is based on one's current knowledge. It is possible to be certain, and still be wrong. Human beings are not omniscient. They can form conclusions, but there is the possibility of error. Humans need knowledge, though, and need a basis for accepting knowledge as true. They cannot live constantly doubting every piece of knowledge. To survive, they must be able to accept knowledge as true, and act accordingly.
[22:08:41] Kain Scalia: The term certainty is often used to describe knowledge without the possibility of doubt. This is omniscience. It is an improper use of the term. Certainty could have no meaning when applied to an omniscient being, since it wouldn't have the capacity for doubt. It only has meaning when applied to human beings. Its meaning allows the possibility of error, but the contextual lack of doubt.
[22:09:15] Blvd Ochs: My favorite character is Dagny Taggert.
[22:09:42] Blvd Ochs: Even though she knew she was doomed, she kept fighting for what she believed in.
[22:09:47] Blvd Ochs: I don't think I could do that.
[22:10:03] SignpostMarv Martin: Kain: the scale of certainty would probably be similar to moving towards a wall at half the distance between yourself and the wall
[22:10:09] Kain Scalia: Are you certain of that, Marv?
[22:10:16] SignpostMarv Martin: you'll get closer and closer each time, but never reach the wall
[22:10:34] Kain Scalia: Unfortunately, Zeno's paradox is completely unrelated to this.
[22:10:38] SignpostMarv Martin: putting aside the maths of if the half step is lower than your minimum scale of measurement, you are effectively there
[22:11:00] SignpostMarv Martin: although that would mean you are 100% certain Kain :-P
[22:11:01] Kain Scalia: You will never be omniscient, if that is what you mean.
[22:11:20] SignpostMarv Martin: you would never be omniscient, but you can be close enough
[22:11:25] Kain Scalia: The wall is omniscience. you will never reach it. But that doesn't eliminate the facts, as you wish to do .
[22:12:22] SignpostMarv Martin: i can reach out with my hand and touch the wall before my feet reach the wall. A small part of me grasps a small part of omniscience sufficient enough to gain a sufficient degree of certainty
[22:12:51] SignpostMarv Martin: btw, as you may have guessed, I'm one of those annoying dickwads that has an answer for everything :-P
[22:12:57] SignpostMarv Martin: MUHAHAHAA
[22:13:01] Kain Scalia: Yes, you can touch the wall like that. Too bad that physical phenomena doesn't work the same way for allegories and similes and so on and so forth. IT is rather vague, nebulous pseudo-intellectualism.
[22:13:09] SignpostMarv Martin: Kain, it does
[22:13:17] SignpostMarv Martin: when people say they are certain of something,
[22:13:18] Jack Sondergaard: some decisions are neither right or wrong, like what color of shirt to wear today. Others are both good and bad, like saving one child and letting the other drown, but it's clear that good and bad will happen in that case, and clear that shirt color in not a moral decision
[22:13:19] Kain Scalia: I don't think you have an answer for everything as much as you think you sound smart about everything.
[22:13:22] SignpostMarv Martin: they are reaching out and touching the wall
[22:13:50] Kain Scalia: If you are always getting half way there, you are always getting half way there, that's it. Sorry, Curly, no can do :)
[22:14:15] Kain Scalia: [23:13] You: If you are always getting half way there, you are always getting half way there, that's it. Sorry, Curly, no can do :)
[22:14:21] Kain Scalia: You CAN'T touch the wall and be consistent with the analogy.
[22:14:40] Kain Scalia: And that's the point. But that doesn't eliminate the distance. the facts are still the facts.
[22:14:41] SignpostMarv Martin: if my arm is longer than the half step, i can touch the wall without being right next to it
[22:14:57] Kain Scalia: Then you would be an orangutang, and wouldn't be capable of thinking it. So much for your excercise.
[22:15:22] Kain Scalia: I can play at twisting analogies too.
[22:15:38] SignpostMarv Martin: whether i can comprehend touching ominiscience and whether i can touch omniscience are two different things
[22:15:58] SignpostMarv Martin: I regularly fix things without realising it
[22:16:06] Kain Scalia: Why use an analogy and then not use it? It sounds to me that you aren't aware of the point you are trying to make.
[22:16:16] SignpostMarv Martin: probably
[22:16:20] Cera Jenkins: I am not aware of the point, for sure.
[22:16:42] Kain Scalia: But I assure you, you are wasting time if you think you can distract us. I am Jesuit-trained and logic-bound. Let us resume the conversation unless Signpost has any more formless abstractios he wishes to throw out?
[22:17:03] SignpostMarv Martin: "what is the sound of one hand clapping"
[22:17:04] Kain Scalia: And if you do it again, I'll simply ignore you. One cannot build anything with things that lack substance.
[22:17:04] SignpostMarv Martin: :-P
[22:17:09] Kain Scalia: This one.
[22:17:14] Kain Scalia: /me slaps Sign accross the face (just kidding)
[22:17:17] SignpostMarv Martin: lol
[22:17:30] Ina Centaur: o.O
[22:17:37] Cera Jenkins: haha
[22:17:39] Ina Centaur: lol you two are a cute couple
[22:17:40] Kain Scalia: Well, he *did* ask. :)
[22:17:41] SignpostMarv Martin: my intelligence and my sense of humour cross paths when I'm sleep deprived :-P
[22:17:49] Jack Sondergaard: OK, here goes
[22:17:56] Ina Centaur: /me drumrolls
[22:18:09] Ina Centaur: jack?
[22:18:22] Ina Centaur: o.O
[22:18:37] Kain Scalia: He is dancing the Second Life Lag Mambo. We all do at one point or another.
[22:18:43] Ina Centaur: lol
[22:18:46] Ina Centaur: so anyway
[22:18:52] Ina Centaur: positive vs negative uncertainty
[22:18:55] Jack Sondergaard: no, just walking into walls
[22:19:09] Ina Centaur: let's go back to what Blvd mentioned right before she left
[22:19:10] Ina Centaur: Dagny
[22:19:24] Ina Centaur: she fought on not knowing the situation, etc.
[22:19:33] Ina Centaur: *sorry mis-stated
[22:19:49] Cera Jenkins: I admire Dagny for her fight, but in the end she realizes she was fighting for the wrong side.
[22:19:58] Ina Centaur: she fought on not knowing what the future would bring -- what sort of new bills Taggart would enact; what sort of new scheme the State Science Institute would unfold etc
[22:20:03] Ina Centaur: it's... hrm
[22:20:04] Ina Centaur: what was it?
[22:20:08] Ina Centaur: positive uncertainty.
[22:21:27] Cera Jenkins: my favorite character was Hank Rearden--and how he develops over the course of the book
[22:21:55] Ina Centaur: yes, so ultimately dagny's position was proven wrong -- nevertheless, it's what drives you on
[22:21:56] Kain Scalia: /me ponders.
[22:21:58] Ina Centaur: positive uncertainty
[22:22:04] Ina Centaur: Rearden's belief that the w.n. might survive
[22:22:13] Ina Centaur: your belief that the piece of shoelace in your pocket might be Elvis'
[22:22:17] Kain Scalia: I would say my faovrite character is Dangy. She is the kind of woman I have always wanted to befriend or meet. Though in my life I have only met two like her.
[22:22:25] Ina Centaur: the lint might be mel gibson's so that maybe you did earn that cool million honestly
[22:22:59] Ina Centaur: dagny's driven by positive uncertainty
[22:23:37] Cera Jenkins: Would you say she's an optimist?
[22:23:45] Kain Scalia: No, Dagny is driven in the optimism of her own competence.
[22:24:08] Kain Scalia: Her mistake is one of ignorance: She has never really consider the power that the looters have when victims fgive them sanctins.
[22:24:54] Kain Scalia: She believes that through hre competence she can outstrip their mistakes and pull everything by her own self. Unfortunately she has not considered what happens when all the other competent men are willing victims: They work against her competence, even without wanting to do so, because those they sanction make it their priority.
[22:24:59] Ina Centaur: right, that's the orthodox POV
[22:25:15] Ina Centaur: dagny is "self sacrificing" in a positive way...
[22:25:26] Ina Centaur: she fights for the world she believes in, and would risk her life doing so
[22:25:36] Kain Scalia: It isn't a sacrifice if you are working to gain a higher goal, Ina.
[22:25:40] Kain Scalia: It is an investment.
[22:25:47] Ina Centaur: but what if your POV is wrong?
[22:25:49] Kain Scalia: It is only a sacrifice if you give up a high value for a low value or no value.
[22:26:11] Kain Scalia: If you have not correctly interpreted reality, then you have made a mistake and must check your premises.
[22:26:14] Ina Centaur: yes. a penny for a dollar is a sacrifice. a mother selling her hat so that her son would starve and the orphans won't is a sacrifice.
[22:26:16] Kain Scalia: Hugh Akston told her precisely that.
[22:26:49] Cera Jenkins: And yet she left the valley...
[22:26:54] Ina Centaur: well, if your POV is stilted, then you could be doing something you think is an investment, but is really a sacrifice.
[22:27:37] Kain Scalia: Because she was steadfast in believing in her own capacity, perhaps optimistically beyond its real scope. Sure, she was amazingly capable, but she needed to consider the point that she had no control to change those who willingly laid down to die.
[22:28:06] Cera Jenkins: afk
[22:28:24] Kain Scalia: Correct.
[22:29:41] Ina Centaur: yes, that's basically the orthodox analysis of dagny
[22:29:43] Jack Sondergaard: In a battle, always take into account that the opponent will modify their attack against to in response to your attack.
[22:29:44] Kain Scalia: Goodness gracious, three hours?
[22:29:51] Kain Scalia: Sun Tzu.
[22:29:52] Ina Centaur: so, would you say Dagny thought the whole time she could change James?
[22:30:00] Jack Sondergaard: 3 1/2 hours
[22:30:02] Ina Centaur: oh lol.. sometimes these discussions go on till like 3 am
[22:30:14] Kain Scalia: Not as much as she thought she could have led TT without James being too much of a drag.
[22:30:45] Kain Scalia: I do apologize for monopolizing at times. I guess I tend to suffer from verborrhea
[22:30:52] Ina Centaur: i don't think dagny ever thought she could change people, per se
[22:30:59] Ina Centaur: perhaps change their POV, but not their nature
[22:31:17] Jack Sondergaard: no problem, it was entertaining
[22:31:17] Kain Scalia: I think she thought she could, perhaps, energize those that were disheartened- nto incompetent, but disheartened.
[22:32:25] Ina Centaur: yes
[22:32:38] Kain Scalia: Goodness knows I would give my right arm to have Dagney as a co-worker or a superior.
[22:32:42] Kain Scalia: -e
[22:32:54] Ina Centaur: meh, then you'd be that much more useless to her ^.~
[22:33:03] Kain Scalia: I am left handed ;)
[22:33:13] Kain Scalia: You'd think I'd give up the GOOD one? ;D
[22:33:25] Ina Centaur: ^.~
[22:33:58] Kain Scalia: By the by.. if you're familiar with Terry Pratchett's Granny Weatherwax? People often say I am very much like her. That'll give you an idea >_>
[22:35:27] Ina Centaur: lol
[22:35:29] Ina Centaur: curious..
[22:35:40] Ina Centaur: why does Dagny assume that there's enough disheartened to fight for?
[22:36:10] Kain Scalia: Well, at the beginning of the novel she hasn't lost ALL of her good people, but she sees them slowly dropping out, becoming more apathetic.
[22:36:18] Ina Centaur: /me whispers loudly POSITIVE UNCERTAINTY o.O
[22:37:27] Ina Centaur: yes, but as the novel progressed, it became obvious where they were going?
[22:37:33] SignpostMarv Martin: I'm going to go rest my weary bones in my nice comfy bed, blame Ina for tping me into an intellectual discussion without giving me the opportunity to fire up my mind first :-P
[22:37:36] Ina Centaur: oh, and also, after she escaped Galt's Gulch...
[22:37:38] SignpostMarv Martin: toodles peeps
[22:37:44] SignpostMarv Martin: /me poofs
[22:37:46] Ina Centaur: she still struggles
[22:37:54] Ina Centaur: *pseudointellectual
[22:37:57] Ina Centaur: this is Rand btw
[22:38:00] Jack Sondergaard: she wants to stop the destroyer
[22:38:33] Ina Centaur: after Galt flies her out of the Gulch, she knows the destroyer
[22:38:57] Jack Sondergaard: yes, but she still wants to save the railroad
[22:38:58] Ina Centaur: she flew the plane pursuing Quentin/Galt... knew that Galt took Quentin, as he took everyone else from her
[22:39:02] Kain Scalia: Yes, she has deduced the existence of John Galt. But seeing only the symptoms--- AND her perception of reality not being fully accurately realized (that is: it is missing some of the key philosophical elements to discern what is going on), she sees the effects of what he is doing as those of a destroyer, a vampire.
[22:39:45] Kain Scalia: But she never questions whether what she is fighting for is still worth defending, at least outside of Galt's Gulch while the looters are in control.
[22:39:51] Jack Sondergaard: she didn't yet buy into the strike
[22:39:57] Kain Scalia: /me nods.
[22:40:26] Kain Scalia: She felt so much reverence for the memory of Nat Taggart that she felt it would be to betray it to abandon it without trying to fight to its final conclusion.
[22:40:55] Kain Scalia: As one would encourage a dying person to live up to the very last moments possible.
[22:41:49] Jack Sondergaard: yes, she wouldn't give up until every possible thing had been done to save it
[22:42:22] Kain Scalia: I fsomething is precious and valuable enough, sometimes you have to exhaust every possibility until you know you did everything that was possible to save it.
[22:42:32] Ina Centaur: yes, back to the w.n. again
[22:42:51] Jack Sondergaard: same thing with Hank and his steel
[22:43:02] Kain Scalia: It is not as much a sense of positive uncertainty as an unwillingness to abandon a fight.
[22:43:04] Ina Centaur: similarly, i guess you can say you wouldn't care much about that random dying man with the random wish of touching elvis' shoelace
[22:43:47] Jack Sondergaard: sorry, I'm not into shoelace fetishes
[22:43:56] Kain Scalia: I would comfrot the man and tell him that unlikely things may happen in the last housr of his life, but I will not guarantee it and I will not forge reality to him.
[22:43:58] Kain Scalia: /me laughs!!!
[22:44:11] Ina Centaur: well, the fact that she never questions the validity of what she's fighting for -- it's assuming that the uncertain must be positive!
[22:44:39] Kain Scalia: No. She knows the validity of Nat Taggart's work, his struggle and his dream, and his legacy.
[22:45:00] Kain Scalia: It is that for what she is fighting for. For the Nat Taggarts of the world. She does not realize that the BEST way to fight for them is to shrug. Not yet.
[22:45:11] Kain Scalia: She must be completely convinced that this is indeed the best way.
[22:45:13] Kain Scalia: That is why she comes back.
[22:45:23] Kain Scalia: because if she fails, at least then she would KNOW
[22:45:32] Ina Centaur: she sees too much of the world that's still good
[22:45:42] Kain Scalia: No. She sees what is good in herself.
[22:45:51] Ina Centaur: she sees that if the world were to be abandoned, it would be like a waste of nat's work
[22:46:00] Kain Scalia: And she knows that men are capable of this. That at one point they were, and that there may still be others out there who can.
[22:46:04] Ina Centaur: the world they'd fought to create
[22:46:31] Ina Centaur: hmm, assuming that there may be others out there who can --- positive uncertainty again
[22:46:35] Kain Scalia: She later realizes it's not a world they created for others, but for themselves. When she realizes this, she realizes she can create it no matter where she is, because she is herself.
[22:47:08] Kain Scalia: It isn't positive uncertainty because she is not doing any of this for anyone else but herself.
[22:47:13] Kain Scalia: And her love of what Taggart Transcontinental is.
[22:47:22] Kain Scalia: And if Dagny is not uncertain about one thing, it is herself.
[22:47:35] Ina Centaur: well, anyway, Dagny in her fallacious state was working on the premise of a positive uncertainty. she doesn't know for sure who's out there, but she's positive enough that there are others out there like her whom she's helping
[22:47:49] Ina Centaur: contrast the strikers, who'd just leave even those that they miss
[22:48:03] Ina Centaur: --- oh btw, what about Dan Conway? poor guy. no one told him about the Gulch
[22:48:34] Jack Sondergaard: when I'm in a job, I consider whether I can have a positive influence by staying and trying to make things better, or whether things are so out of sorts with my own values that to keep them I must work elsewhere
[22:50:40] Kain Scalia: Well, if I recall correctly Dan went into retirement by himself. We don't know what coul dhave happened afterwards since it's never mentioned. Did Francisco approach him? and did he refuse?
[22:51:09] Kain Scalia: To quote.. "he loses the will to fight, and resigns himself to a quiet life of books and fishing. He claims that somebody had to be sacrificed, it turned out to be him, and he has no right to complain, bowing to the will of the majority."
[22:51:21] Kain Scalia: so, maybe by the time they get to him... there really isn't much of a fire to spark anymore.
[22:52:44] Ina Centaur: i think dagny reminisces conway somewhere later on after she finds out about the gulch
[22:52:45] Kain Scalia: I got the impression that he was kjust...broken after the fact.
[22:54:17] Ina Centaur: btw, kain, what is the condition required for a man to turn over to the Gulch once they get to him?
[22:54:39] Kain Scalia: Well, for one, aren't they required to make the oath?
[22:54:50] Kain Scalia: Oh, turn over, not be allowed in, hehe.
[22:54:54] Kain Scalia: /me sleep deprivation, yay.
[22:55:42] Jack Sondergaard: I vow never to deprive myself of sleep or to make someone deprive themselves of sleep for me
[22:56:09] Jack Sondergaard: I never took that oath
[22:56:21] Ina Centaur: me either
[22:56:28] Ina Centaur: /me runs 72 hour days typically ^.~
[22:56:45] Jack Sondergaard: what planet are your from?
[22:56:58] Ina Centaur: but anyway though... if a man's spark runs out, and the strikers reach him... the man's exempt from the Gulch?
[22:57:18] Ina Centaur: from planet Inafinity of course
[22:57:23] Jack Sondergaard: I don't think so
[22:57:29] Kain Scalia: Ina, you don't get forced into the Gulch. You have to accept to go there.
[22:57:41] Kain Scalia: If his spark runs out, I imagine Dan just ..wouldn't really care what happened to him.
[22:57:50] Kain Scalia: remember, he is described as looking thoroughly defeated.
[22:57:51] Ina Centaur: nah. the strikers come at you. give you an offer you can't refuse
[22:57:59] Ina Centaur: your mind or come with us.
[22:58:01] Ina Centaur: ^.~
[22:58:08] Jack Sondergaard: it's only when they can no longer keep going that they are ready for the Gulch
[22:58:13] Ina Centaur: btw, have you read the Godfather?
[22:58:22] Kain Scalia: /me has a mental image of Francisco breaking into your office and going "BRAAAAAAAAAIIIINZ"
[22:58:34] Ina Centaur: hahahahha
[22:58:40] Kain Scalia: No. I don't find treating the mafia as a glorified subject interesting :)
[22:58:45] Ina Centaur: you know what -- that's the most accurate caricature of the strikers possible!
[22:59:23] Jack Sondergaard: yes, the mafia is nothing but looters
[22:59:25] Ina Centaur: kain, that's the klitsch interpretation of the godfather
[22:59:44] Ina Centaur: it's similar to belittling rand as glorifying all businesses (even the looter moocher ones)
[23:00:00] Kain Scalia: AAAAAAAAAAAAAH
[23:00:02] Kain Scalia: .....
[23:00:03] Ina Centaur: you know what?
[23:00:10] Ina Centaur: i'm interested in starting a discussion series on...
[23:00:10] Kain Scalia: for a second my Avatar became...horribly disfigured O_O
[23:00:12] Ina Centaur: capitalism
[23:00:20] Ina Centaur: a novel relating to capitalism a month
[23:00:29] Ina Centaur: so august was atlas shrugged...
[23:00:34] Ina Centaur: next... Godfather
[23:00:37] Ina Centaur: ^.~
[23:00:43] Jack Sondergaard: how many good capitalism novels are there?
[23:00:59] Ina Centaur: Godfather is actually a capitalist novel
[23:01:10] Kain Scalia: I can'[t join you for that next one, I have to memorize Tamino in a month :P
[23:01:20] Kain Scalia: My reading material is going to consist on german dialogue :P (Ungh)
[23:01:48] Ina Centaur: yes, your saving your mind from a book that might turn out different from your preconception ^.~
[23:01:49] Kain Scalia: And to cnsider how I can run away from the dragon and faint in the first act....and still look heroic.
[23:02:05] Kain Scalia: Not in the list, ina. Have you ever had to sing an opera? :)
[23:02:27] Kain Scalia: For the next month and a half I am not going to read anything but my school textbooks and Mozart, Mozart, Mozart :)
[23:02:31] Ina Centaur: nope. i'm an instrument player :-)
[23:02:33] Kain Scalia: After that, though, I promise you'll pick it up :)
[23:02:38] Ina Centaur: and voice is not one of my instruments :-\
[23:02:42] Kain Scalia: But for a month and a half, I HAVE to BE Tamino :)
[23:03:13] Ina Centaur: it would be interesting to see your POV on the Godfather after you've read it ^.~
[23:03:13] Jack Sondergaard: do you sing opera, Kain?
[23:03:23] Ina Centaur: Kain, can you sing a bit for us?
[23:03:24] Kain Scalia: Yes I do.
[23:03:31] Kain Scalia: Alright, turn your voice on.
[23:03:42] Kain Scalia: I can only sing a little because it's 1 Am and my neighbors will crucify me.
[23:03:50] Ina Centaur: lol
[23:03:51] Ina Centaur: 1 sec
[23:03:55] Kain Scalia: And I'll be singing sotto voce, so it won't be very powerful.
[23:04:04] Jack Sondergaard: OK, I'm ready
[23:04:10] Ina Centaur: i can hear you
[23:04:15] Ina Centaur: but it looks like cera and jack can't
[23:04:32] Kain Scalia: jack, you need to activate voice :)
[23:04:46] Ina Centaur: kain..
[23:04:50] Ina Centaur: you're sitting on my lap
[23:04:51] Ina Centaur: lmfao..
[23:04:57] Jack Sondergaard: I did, let me check my voice level
[23:05:09] Kain Scalia: I don't see the little bubble floating over your head.
[23:05:12] Ina Centaur: squooshing my leg-.-
[23:05:20] Ina Centaur: harman!
[23:05:23] Ina Centaur: you got in here too late
[23:05:30] Ina Centaur: you missed the interesting stuff
[23:05:35] Ina Centaur: yes i can hear you.
[23:05:46] Ina Centaur: jack's name is not showing on the list
[23:05:57] Kain Scalia: You may have tor elog, jack. I can wait for you :)
[23:06:13] Ina Centaur: harman; you're totally ruthed
[23:06:26] Ina Centaur: lol
[23:06:38] Jack Sondergaard: OK, brb
[23:06:38] Ina Centaur: not normally.. iirc o.O
[23:07:06] Harman Mayo: yikes - and lagged too
[23:07:11] Ina Centaur: lol
[23:07:26] Ina Centaur: lol now that's mean
[23:07:32] Ina Centaur: ruth is kinda like nat taggart's statue
[23:07:45] Ina Centaur: no... in stance
[23:07:50] Ina Centaur: she's the ancestor of all avatars
[23:08:02] Ina Centaur: great enterprise of LL
[23:08:08] Ina Centaur: lol
[23:08:31] Harman Mayo: ywp famn ugly, ruth was
[23:08:42] Harman Mayo: ow
[23:09:03] Ina Centaur: the notecard summarizes some of my personal alternative to ruth ^.~
[23:09:12] Harman Mayo: never type with brake fluid n your eye
[23:09:22] Jack Sondergaard: OK, I hear now
[23:09:52] Ina Centaur: sure
[23:09:59] Ina Centaur: jack..
[23:10:04] Ina Centaur: feedback?
[23:10:47] Ina Centaur: testing testing
[23:10:59] Jack Sondergaard: OK, I unplugged my mike
[23:10:59] Ina Centaur: ^.~
[23:11:16] Ina Centaur: jack, it looks like you're off voice
[23:13:13] Ina Centaur: your voice died
[23:13:48] Jack Sondergaard: I am on headphones now, so feedback shouldn't be a problem
[23:14:13] Jack Sondergaard: OK, I hear you
[23:15:18] Ina Centaur: /me claps! :-D
[23:15:23] Kain Scalia: :P
[23:15:27] Jack Sondergaard: awsome
[23:15:32] Kain Scalia: Thanks :)
[23:16:06] Ina Centaur: lol
[23:16:08] Ina Centaur: ^.~
[23:16:19] Ina Centaur: not bad
[23:16:25] Ina Centaur: btw, harman, you missed the fun earlier
[23:16:49] Ina Centaur: had a totally lovely discussion going on about everything from rand to bush to elvis' shoelaces
[23:16:55] Harman Mayo: was having my own fun
[23:17:07] Ina Centaur: ;-P
[23:17:11] Harman Mayo: wotking on my !@$$# car
[23:17:16] Ina Centaur: chat is recorded btw in the same place ^.~
[23:17:42] Harman Mayo: drat - i wish i'd been here for that
[23:18:02] Harman Mayo: was lovely, Kain
[23:18:05] Harman Mayo: thank you
[23:18:16] Ina Centaur: oh, i was just kidding about the godfather btw
[23:18:22] Ina Centaur: and we are moving to a new sim
[23:18:33] Ina Centaur: ohh lol. it's a lovely song actually ;-)
[23:18:54] Ina Centaur: new sim... more details announced to sLiterary group
[23:19:06] Jack Sondergaard: yes, I wish my audio didn't skip, but I can tell you can really sing well
[23:19:07] Ina Centaur: ^.~
[23:19:15] Ina Centaur: actually, has to do with LL being slow in filling sim orders
[23:20:29] Ina Centaur: yes. there's actually also an english version
[23:20:36] Ina Centaur: (and a lyrics-less one as well)
[23:20:39] Harman Mayo: yep
[23:20:47] Jack Sondergaard: it that what you will be singing?
[23:20:59] Jack Sondergaard: it sounds like Edith Pia
[23:21:00] Ina Centaur: no he's sing tomino
[23:21:02] Ina Centaur: omzart
[23:21:04] Ina Centaur: *mozart
[23:22:20] Ina Centaur: ^.~
[23:22:41] Ina Centaur: /me really only knows English :-\
[23:23:05] Ina Centaur: lol
[23:23:14] Ina Centaur: c was my second language
[23:23:28] Ina Centaur: HTML/CSS my "third"
[23:23:34] Ina Centaur: javascript php
[23:23:42] Ina Centaur: ^.~
[23:24:08] Ina Centaur: yes, once you know one language, the rest is easy to grasp
[23:24:13] Ina Centaur: yes, thank you
[23:24:16] Ina Centaur: totally
[23:24:18] Ina Centaur: you too ;-)
[23:24:31] Jack Sondergaard: it was fun
[23:24:34] Harman Mayo: ttfn - and thank you
[23:24:42] Ina Centaur: tc
[23:24:49] Jack Sondergaard: I need to get some sleep, got to work in the morning
[23:25:07] Ina Centaur: sure
[23:25:09] Ina Centaur: tc
[23:25:10] Jack Sondergaard: good night everyone
[23:25:16] Ina Centaur: nite
[23:27:28] Cera Jenkins: I'm going to bed! Sorry I missed the last part of the discussion. Do you have any further plans, Ina?
[23:27:42] Harman Mayo: she left
[23:27:54] Cera Jenkins: Oops
[23:28:08] Harman Mayo: it happens - night
[23:28:15] Cera Jenkins: I still don't have this virtual reality figured out!
[23:28:19] Cera Jenkins: See you later!
[23:28:27] Harman Mayo: ttfn
[11:37:24] Rumour Mills: O for a Muse of fire, that would ascend The brightest heaven of invention, A kingdom for a stage, princes to act And monarchs to behold the swelling scene!
[11:41:53] Multi Gadget v1.52.0: /me by Timeless Prototype
[11:41:53] SignpostMarv has a tendancy to multi-task: SignpostMarv Martin's dspeak v2.6 booting up.
[11:50:59] Code Tracer: yes
[11:51:00] Jilly Kidd: sorry
[11:51:06] Jilly Kidd: i get stuck in the buildings here |
|
|
