I finished the first volume of Atlas Shrugged last night, and checked out the complete book from the library tonight, on my way home from work. Then I transcribed the quotes I had scribbled down on the bookmark into my “quotes” file. Then I read the Wikipedia article on Ayn Rand, since I didn’t yet know anything about her. Her first name rhymes with “lane.” This led me to a description of Hume’s is-ought problem, which is cool. The articles on Wikipedia are very approachable in my experience. Don’t forget to donate if you use Wikipedia regularly.
Hume notices that all the books on philosophy that he has found start with the descriptive (This is so, that is so) and somewhere cut over to the prescriptive (this should be so, that should be so) as if the prescriptive naturally followed from the descriptive. Does it follow? How so?
I think the physical world is completely uninteresting except where it is (or its consequences are) perceived in some way by the thinking mind. I think the nature of truth is the same as the act of understanding. The only useful philosophy is in pursuit of a stated, tangible goal. It does no good to say “people should believe or act like so”. A philosophical thought should start with: “In order to achieve X,” (for example social harmony, or individual excellence, or whatever) “the rational way to proceed is to pursue Y and Z”. (for example, individual non-violence, communist ideals, or whatever)
Oh well, back to my computer games. See you all next time the TV goes off for a bit.
Update: This seems like a good place to link to another post with a funny quote about Rand.