You're Welcome

Being pragmatic isn't being philisophical (philosophy means love of wisdom) or even being theoretical. Being pragmatic is simply deciding that the ends justify the means. This attitude is wrong. The ends don't justify the means. They never do. What amazes me is how many alleged conservatives act pragmatic and unknowingly promote progressive/socialist/post-marxist policies and counter-cultural trends. Merely pointing out how some policy "won't work" simply invites ones opponents to propose "fixes" to the problem. The policy remains but thanks to the policy's critics it has been "improved". The goal should be to make the presumption, not for change, but for the status quo and make changes only when absolutely necessary and proposals for change should be analyzed philosophically (metaphysically, epistemologically, ethically and legally) and should not be analyzed based on the expected outcome or results. Obamacare should be rejected n...

I read an article in The Objective Standard by Ari Armstrong ( www.theobjectivestandard.com ). Mr. Armstrong's article was critiquing an article written by another author. The article that came under Mr. Armstrong's scrutiny declared that the United States' wealth was due to luck. The article collectivised the issue of wealth and poverty and also presumed a malevolent universe where failure is to be expected. Mr. Armstrong's critique failed to address either one of these core issues and was therefore rhetorically ineffective. What Mr. Armstrong should have written was that wealth and poverty are individual issues and that since the universe is benevolent and success is to be expected wealth and poverty are not matters of luck but of diligence. You're welcome

If a reality is not axiomatic, would it then be a conclusion? Would axioms be metaphysical realities and conclusions man-made realities? All of this applies to conversations, arguments, debates, dialectics. The terms of man-made realities must be agreed upon by the parties involved in order for the parties to communicate successfully. You're welcome

Metaphysics is the study of realty. Aristotle wrote that metaphysics is the study of first causes. Isn't a word for "first causes" "axioms"? And if so, isn't metaphysics, therefore, the study of axioms? You're welcome.

Aesthetics is the study of art and axiology is the study of beauty. A while ago I had relized that reality is fundamentally about limits and I wondered if that meant that the universe was therefore unreal. As I was thinking about this I realized that the universe considered as a whole is imaginary/unreal but the objects in the universe (stars, planets etc.)are definitive and real. You're welcome.

The metaphysics of the affordable care act is about choice/choices/free will. The Affordable Care Act holds out the promise that when enacted the act will obviate the need for making tough decisions about one's health care. This would be true if determinism (the fantasy that there is no such thing as free will and that everyone's behavior is determined by forces beyond their control.) were true but determinism is false by the evidence of our senses. Because we have free will we will have to make decisions. Sometimes tough decisions. Since free will is real and reality is omniscent, omnipresent and omnipotent it cannot be wished away by an arbitrary statute. Post-Affordable Care Act one will still have to make tough decisions about one's health care with the only difference being the variables. One cannot have one's cake and eat it too no matter what the idealistic pretend. You're welcome.

At the end of the current issue of The Objective Standard: "The Objective Standard is a quarterly journal of culture and politics written from an objectivist perspective...The journal is based on the idea that for every human concern - from personal matters to foreign policy, from the sciences to the arts, from education to legislation - there are demonstrably objective standards by reference to which we can assess what is true or false, good or bad, right or wrong. The purpose of the journal is to analyze and evaluate ideas, trends, events and policies accordingly." www.theobjectivestandard.com First, the idea that everything can be referenced to objective standards is not an "objectivist perspective" but philosophical truth. Secondly, and therefore, Objectivism is subjective and all of the articles that rely on "objectivist principles" are equally subjective and running counter to the stated basis of the journal. If Mr. Biddle (the editor) and ...

I was listening to one of the hosts of "Red Eye Radio" this morning (Gary McNamara). He was analyzing a story broadcast by NBC 5 Dallas-Ft. Worth that a Western Hills High School parent was filed a bullying complaint against Aledo High School which defeated Western Hills High by a score of 91 - 0. Mr. McNamara was against the law suit saying in essence that losing, even by large margins, builds character. What Mr. McNamara missed is the deeper issue: Privacy. i.e. minding one's own business. Just because something is printed in a news paper or broadcast over the air waves doesn't make the subject matter automatically relevant, material or worthy of discussion. American counter-culture insists that privacy doesn't exist and, for that matter, reality doesn't exist either so everything is a matter of opinion, all opinions are equal and reality is what the majority says it is. Nothing of course could be farther from the truth. If a tree in a for...

One of the tools in the idealistic box is the "what if..." scenario: What if you met the President of the United States? The question makes two erroneous presumptions. The first one is that everything happens at random (malevolent universe premise and deterministic behavior). The second is the presumption that anything is possible. Both presumptions are wrong. People have free will and the universe is orderly and predictable and not just anything is possible. The impossible by definition is not possible. - You're Welcome

The overall weakness of the articles in The Objective Standard stems from a shallow approach. The articles fail to address philosophical and/or psycho-epistemological foundations and so the articles are tautalogical and at the very least rhetorically ineffective. - You're Welcome