On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 00:11:18 -0800, chazwin <chazwyman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>On Nov 12, 3:19 pm, Malrassic Park <male...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 00:54:51 -0800, chazwin <chazwy...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Nov 9, 11:33 pm, Michael Gordge <mikegor...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> On Nov 10, 4:19 am, Scott H <zinites_p...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> >> > In response to determinism, Kant explains how the antinomy of free
>> >> > will arises from a misuse of reason:
>>
>> >> There's your problem there, you believe that Kant was trying to
solve
>> >> a problem, when in reality he was creating one from a faulty
premise.
>>
>> >> There is matter and each entity of matter has a nature, the nature
of
>> >> an entity of matter is included in its identity, each entity of
matter
>> >> acts according to its nature, an entity of matter can not act in
>> >> contradiction of its nature.
>>
>> >This makes you a Kantian. Kant was died in the wool determinist too.
>> >Kant was addressing age old philosophical problems. He was not
>> >inventing them, nor was he trying to ignore them as you seem to love
>> >to do.
>>
>> Randroids use a number of techniques to evade discussing the issues.
>> They blur common philosophical distinctions, for example, the
>> distinction between "meaning" and "referent" (see ITOE). They evade
>> analyzing issues by dismissing off-hand many of them as "sounding
>> like" a "mere variant" on some "evil" Kantian or Platonic theme that
>> Rand already dealt with back in the 1960s.
>>
>> Randroids morally denounce ancient philosophers for not having come up
>> with 20th-century Randian solutions, which is like denouncing Euclid
>> for failing to invent Riemannian geometry. (I realize that's a bad
>> example since Rand never came up with any idea as significant as
>> Riemannian geometry.) Furthermore, Rand took credit for ideas which
>> have been known about for over a thousand years, such as the
>> connection between concepts and referents. I believe this one was
>> invented by Averroes, but Rand speaks as if she were the originator of
>> the idea.
>
>The main trouble with Randroids is that they believe Rand to be a
>philosopher when she was nothing of the kind. She was nothing more
>than a petulant bourgois novel writer full of undigested ideas and
>second hand philosophies which she failed to see the subtleties of.
Ayn Rand is their god, the Platonic philosopher-queen.
--
fantasybedtimehour.com
|
