Well said.

When you get down to it, Objectivism is just as much a religion as anything else. It is a way of life, a life philosophy, a religion.

In my view, everyone is seeking something to model themselves after because we innately realize that we are not the epitome of creation - we don't know everything, we can't do anything we want, etc. So we seek for something or someone to emulate. It can be a sports superstar. It can be a movie star. It can be a musician. It can be a tree or a rock. All of these are "gods" in their own spheres. Even philosophers.

To me, however, a philosophy is incomplete if it can not answer the three basic questions revolving around origin, purpose, and destination. Those are the questions atheism can not answer to my satisfaction. I reject the idea that we sprang from nothingness and will return to nothingness, because that thwarts the WHY of life! It renders any adherence to natural law meaningless. If one believes that this life is merely a step towards something greater, however, suddenly the WHY of natural law has real meaning and efficacy.

Welcome home and thank you for your service, Brother, copcfrmr. Those who have been in service are probably the least likely to want war. But, if need be, will serve again. USN '61-'69.

The premise on which the X-Prize works is that it sets conditions that would discourage large entities as well as government programs from participating or benefiting. It is directed toward skunk works and DIY Makers to do things that the government and large corporations are not nimble enough to do. If the prizes that are offered are cobbled together from grant money that's already been committed for wholesome purposes, either from the government or from philanthropic foundations, then so be it!
As a Galt's Gulch "would-be resident," I'm not offended by opportunities to divert public money to the very things that we wish those who run our government or large businesses would do. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water!
Again, without reading the book, you're generalizing and, unfortunately, missing a large body of information that should give us encouragement rather than just sulking because Ayn Rand's prophesies are coming to pass and you get to say, "I told you so!".
The implied purpose of her writing was not so much to broadcast complaints or to condemn our society; it was to wake us up and prod us into finding ways to reverse the trend. I don't think for a minute that her preference would be for America to grind to a halt.

Been where, Nam? No. My overseas duty was Hawaii, but I always welcome home Nam vets because we never heard it.

Thank you, Solver. I was intrigued by your statements, but puzzled by them as well. My personal approach to the same topic is, "Physical reality has an independent existence; it is not consensual." I support this with the philosophical concept of Occam's Razor: If physical reality is derivative of consciousness, then you must explain both the reality and the consciousness; if reality exists independently, then you need only explain it.

Jan

It is a beautiful place. The rockymountainprairie. Just wish for peace in our nation. No one hates war like a warrior, or is quicker to take those out whom threaten his. GOMF OOPS, misread pirate. Oh well, thanks. Have you been there?

I chose atheist in the last few months based on Penn Gillete's definition of his atheism. I care not a great deal of deities. I, too live on this rock and "know" very little. How much more than a best guess is what we know? I did a bit of "praying" in combat but do not know if that is what got me through or not. You see, I do not know.

excuse me, Hiraghm, but the objectivist epistemology
honors natural human rights, by virtue of the
characteristics of humans as humans -- free choice
and self-interest and all of that.

yes? -- j

Lol on the children. This response seems quite a bit more of a rational approach. As to adding to your happiness is not altruistic, only you can answer that.

And I wish you well in your endeavors.

I see that those that accept that existence exists and it has primacy over our consciousness tend to be more rationally individualist. Those who think consciousness, or will, or the state or such has primacy over existence tend to be less. Or they tend more to search for some collective or common consciousness to rule them.
My observation, not a proven fact or anything.

But that's the thing. Even though XPrize does not allow those already on government grants to enter the contests, the prize is backed by at least some government funding and Foundations which cater to government interests. As well, the Prize fact sheet is clearly upfront as describing itself as an "NGO" (I don't know about you, but I only hear about non-profits who receive government monies use that term) and specifically point out that many of the prize winners will in fact contract with the government upon winning! Here is a major contributor to XPrize, featured proudly on their supporters page: The Limbergh Foundation:

"The concept of a technology/nature balance, in which Charles and Anne Lindbergh so firmly believed, is now coming to the forefront as the answer to some of our global problems," said Clare Hallward, Chairman of the Lindbergh Foundation Grants Selection Committee. "The projects of our grant recipients have, since 1978, made significant contributions to such a balance. Because of the standards employed by the Foundation's grants program, it has earned international credibility which enables many Lindbergh Grant recipients to secure additional funding to continue their important work."
The value of the Lindbergh Grants program as a provider of seed money and credibility for pilot projects that subsequently receive larger sums from other sources to continue and expand the work has again been confirmed.
Each year, The Charles A. and Anne Morrow Lindbergh Foundation solicits applications for Lindbergh Grants from the U.S. and abroad. This list includes publications, government agencies, media, universities, and other non-profit organizations."

They are heavily promoting a green agenda. Go look on their website. As well, Elon Musk has a long history of chasing government projects, dollars and grants. This includes colluding with the govt for tax incentives related to cars they build, which picked one industry out, nay, one type of product and affected sales in that sector. I am certainly not against the concept of philanthropy funded Prizes in specific areas such as high technology. Especially space exploration. But to suggest "collaborative entrepreneurship" is completely free market when it clearly isn't, is one of those failed premises to which I am referring.

Three ideas that are explored in Diamandis' Abundance could do the job, and nicely: first, we need to quit grading on a curve or grading in a fashion that embarrasses those who don't do well. And we should definitely not grade simply on a student's ability to spew out facts that have been memorized.
Instead, let's grade simply, according to achievement. Start a kid with a zero grade; and let him or her build it up to an excellent grade as he or she goes along. The more they learn, the higher the grade. No punishment for failure; but no rewards for failing to achieve.
Secondly, let's not focus on memorizing things. That's a throwback to the days of Gutenberg's press. Teach them critical thinking and problem analysis; and then school them in the resources they have at their disposal to come up with the answers. Let them "cheat," by using Google and its competitors in their exams with whatever devices they may be able to muster up. [Imagine what that can do for employment. Credentials will fall away as the goal of education, and new employer will simply say, "Here's one of our big problems, how would you go about solving it?" As an employer, I'll give the response to that kind of a question for more creds than some certificate that everyone had to cheat to earn because everyone else was doing it.]
Thirdly, we should focus on video games for teaching. Millennials love competition and hate tedium or being judged. But they pursue their video games relentlessly, being constantly judged and found wanting; but going back for more until they reach the next level. And they happily compete and accept the notion that others are doing better; but they can still beat them if they try. That's the nature of video games. And they can be used very effectively in teaching everything from the likes of history to biotechnology! They win by learning stuff. That's real education.
I'm nearly finished working on the specs for a financial literacy game that I plan to crowdsource and crowdfund when I'm ready. That could kill several birds with a single rock! It starts with a magic lamp and a genie that can grant all of their wishes.

I've got three grandkids that are Millennials; and I had pretty much given up on them. But I've recently concluded that they are as they are because of my generation. It's our fault!

My generation (I'm an octogenarian) didn't give our kids an adequate education in everything from financial literacy to the true meaning of selfishness (which does not rule out thinking of others) and the compassionate exercise of self interest. The often-heard quote "I don't want my kids to have to go through what I had to go through." is the biggest ticket to disaster that we ever bought for our progeny.

So, for that reason (as an ardent Ayn Rand enthusiast whose life Atlas Shrugged changed when I was around 20), I deem it our responsibility to friggin' DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT instead of just wringing our hands and shrugging off that responsibility.

If the Millennials' attention span is about as long as spit, then WE need to build an education system that will entertain them and be addictive! And there are plenty of guidelines, if we can mobilize to do it. We still have time; but not much.

Imagine what a change we could precipitate if we could just get them to embrace one, simple concept across to them: money is a redeemable token one receives for providing a product or service that's of value to others. Just filling in the right side of that equation could change our world, IMO. And, if we don't participate actively in finding the way to correct this fault, WE are the ones who will have destroyed our planet; and not our kids and their kids! We'll just be continuing to do the things that we've done wrong.

I would eagerly refer you to Peter Diamandis' Singularity University to find the closest thing to Galt"s Gulch on this planet. The folks that are there have already done their part toward changing humanity for the better; and they're still at it. The only thing that keeps the "economic infidels" out is what it costs to participate. Those bucks provide a similar remoteness as that of Galt's Gulch.

You wouldn't make such a comment had you read the book. It allows for your so-called failed premises; holds our feet to the fire; but provides some pretty solid evidence that there's reason to keep on truckin' and not rely on the government or even big business to solve our problems.

It takes a lot of faith to be an atheist.

I am searching for land in South Texas to build a Solar farm of "Combined Heat and Power Concentrating Photovoltaic collectors".
The Bradford Collector utilizes 75% of available solar energy converting 32% to electricity and using 43% to produce steam.
The steam may be used to desalinate seawater or brackish ground water.
It may also be used to provide absorption refrigeration or air conditioning.
I will build a manufacturing facility central to the solar farm. The manufacture, installation, operation and maintenance of this solar farm will create many jobs for an off-grid self sufficient community. If interested, connect with me on LinkIn. Producers only please.

No. I hope this conversation doesn't turn religious. That would involve far too many irrational presuppositions which add no value. I prefer thought to conversations ending in "I just believe". Thanks anyway. :-)

I like the fact that you broke it down to analyze. Here's the thing...
The world has 6 billion people, but the people you live, work and interact with are your world. It's all that really matters. I think that can be created. If illogical mystics can persuade others to live in a monastery or in a commune which is irrational beyond description, I'm sure people of reasoning mind can find, train and associate with others on a similar journey. I'm still working on the "how". If it adds to my happiness to aid others in their development how exactly does that qualify as altruism. I do it for me and the person I work with benefits. That's simple trade. I trade my experience, knowledge and effort in exchange for their desire to learn and the effort to apply it. I've had some success with that in the past, but want to challenge myself beyond what I've done. I desire to experience as much of my life as possible with people that share a similar approach to theirs. Simply accepting the notion that people are irrational and living among the rational is an impossibility ignores reality. We are objectivists and we're not the only ones. I wasn't always one. It took time,education and development to unlearn the irrationality I was trained with as a child. I would suggest it is possible for others too. If 1, why not 10. If 10, why not 10,000?
In regards to your assertion that all think, achieve and exist; they all exist is true. I should have been more specific. Objective thinkers should have been in place of just thinkers. All achieve? If walking upright and surving til Friday is an achievement, then we agree. I should have been more precise there too. People whose achievements are measured by their chosen purpose and progress in pursuit thereof. Most people never define a purpose for themselves and just meander through life til it is done.
As for children... No thank you.