Comments (8) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   Jo Jo said, 4 months ago

   So now we finally learn how she REALLY broke her ankle.

2. 

   pschearer said, 4 months ago

   Believing that objectivity is impossible, either in the law or in reality, is just an excuse to indulge in whims, wishes, and prejudices. Then facts and principles go out the window, followed quickly by justice.

   Don’t think that this is a Right or Left issue, because both sides differ only in which prejudices they think should rule.

3. 

   3hourtour said, 4 months ago

   …objectivitity impossible….what kind of crack you smokin’?….

4. 

   Ushindi said, 4 months ago

   Wow! Love and lust in the Supreme Court - I need more, Ruben!

5. 

   Tom Sobieski said, 4 months ago

   The Supremes are gonna fight tonight

6. 

   One Universe said, 4 months ago

   Pschearer is still pushing the Ayn Rand objectivist model of reality. Of course, objectively, science only as a good model for around 10% of the universe, so we can say very little about the 90% dark energy/matter part. Thus, if he really was objective,P wouldn’t be still using that philosophy.

7. 

   fogey said, 4 months ago

   A question that should be asked during confirmation hearings: What amendment(s) to the Constitution would help avoid some 5-4 decisions that re-appear every year and thus depend on one political ‘swing’ vote? (Silly amendments such as flag burning get submittted in Congress all the time.) It is the job of the Congress., NOT the Court, to make laws.

8. 

   pschearer said, 4 months ago

   3hourtour: If you had asked a real question, I’d be happy to explain. If you don’t understand what objectivity is and a dictionary doesn’t help, just ask seriously.

   MatthewJB: See above.

   One Universe: Thank you for remembering that I am indeed an advocate of Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism. “Still pushing” it? Yep, and for the last 45 years. (Don’t let anyone try to tell you Ayn Rand is a phase the young grow out of.) The dark matter and energy concepts you bring up, even if they are valid (which is questionable), are matters of astrophysics which have no bearing on philosophy’s purpose of explaining reality and providing guidance for life’s actions.

   Rand’s reason for the name Objectivism is technical, but this is a simplified explanation dealing with the three most fundamantal branches of philosophy: 1) An objective reality exists independent of our knowledge or emotions; 2) objective knowlege of reality is achievable via our senses and the laws of logic; and 3) objectively provable rules of ethics exist.

   So if someone wishes to disagree with Ayn Rand, try starting with these principles and see how far you get by denying existence, knowledge, and ethics. If you want to know more, go to the source and read Ayn Rand. You can find a reading list at the website of the Ayn Rand Institute www.AynRand.org.