"... find this very useful! I may be alone in this approach,.." - BB
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_socratic_method On Aug 28, 2:40 pm, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote: > I think you need to understand my “modus operandi” here. I see ideas > as having a box around them. The lines of the box may be blurry or > sharp, but they “contain” the idea. Outside of the box the idea > breaks down or is no longer useful. When I hear an idea, let’s take > socialism or communism, I don’t approach the analysis of that idea > like most people it appears. Instead of staying in the center of that > idea “on face value” I immediately run off to the edges of the idea > to find its “limits.” I will ask questions from way over on the edge > of the idea, and you think “what is he doing way over there?” Well, I > am finding the edges of the idea. I am yelling back to you “is this > where the line is? I need to know where that idea might go if it was > not examined and was allowed to travel to its extreme limits of its > value. I am testing it by asking questions. That is how I find the > limits. I find this very useful! I may be alone in this approach, > but if you look at anything I have ever said in here, you can see this > modus operandi at work. > > On Aug 28, 2:39 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Patience sir, as you can see by the words that I used, this is indeed > > my first instinct and mentioned to 'get the ball' rolling, plenty of > > time to discect it huh. > > > On 27 Aug, 19:57, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Aug 27, 8:29 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > Umm yeah good one Chris. > > > > > My first instinct is that communist philosphy on paper says the right > > > > things, whilst of course Rand does not. > > > > Thank you for the opening thoughts, will there be a more thorough > > > analysis forthcoming? Will there be any rational debate or more in > > > depth discussion or even semi-rational exchanges on such a wonderful > > > topic? > > > > > On 27 Aug, 16:12, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > From > > > > > here:http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/08/24/what-we-are-not-emb... > > > > > > " > > > > > > Here is a good debate proposition: It ought to be less embarrassing > > > > > to have > > > > > been influenced by Ayn Rand than by Karl Marx. > > > > > > The most powerful way to argue the affirmative is to compare the > > > > > number of > > > > > human beings murdered by the devotees of each. That line of attack > > > > > ought to > > > > > be decisive, but I’m afraid it won’t get you far with the multitude of > > > > > highly-self-regarded thinkers influenced by Karl Marx. Fact is, > > > > > commitment > > > > > to some kind of socialism and fluency in the jargon of Marxism used > > > > > to be > > > > > mandatory for serious intellectuals. And there’s something glamorous > > > > > in the > > > > > very idea of the intellectual. Even for those of us who came of age > > > > > after > > > > > 1989, Marxism, like cigarettes, remains linked by association to the > > > > > idea of > > > > > the intellectual, and so, like cigarettes, shares in the > > > > > intellectual’s > > > > > glamour. I don’t know if cigarettes or Marxism have killed more > > > > > people, but > > > > > it’s pretty clear cigarettes are more actively stigmatized. Marxists, > > > > > neo-Marxists, crypto-Marxists, post-Marxists, etc. have an enduring > > > > > influence on intellectual fashion. So it is not only possible proudly > > > > > to > > > > > confess Marx’s influence on one’s thought, but it remains possible in > > > > > some > > > > > quarters to impress by doing so. It ought to be embarrassing, but it > > > > > isn’t. > > > > > Being a bit of a Marxist is like having a closet full of pirate > > > > > blouses but > > > > > never having to worry." > > > > > > This gave me pause for consideration. Rand's philosophies have been > > > > > much > > > > > maligned as "uncompassionate", while certain "socialist" (Marxist > > > > > Communist) > > > > > policies have been held up as an ideal, and yet, how many people have > > > > > been > > > > > killed in the name of Randian philosophy, and how many have been > > > > > killed in > > > > > the name of Marxist philosophy? > > > > > > What do YOU think? ;)- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
