Oat oh. Gary just made another biggee
discovery:
Or, that is, here is where another of Ayn Rand's
observations/assertions should be considered.
That observation/assertion is: The truth or falsehood
of all ... [your] ... conclusions, inferences, thought and
knowledge rests on the truth or falsehood of ... [your] ...
definitions ... that is, definitions are at the
base of
all (your) knowledge.
Hope, as I define the term to match the reality
of my
experience, is the state of being one enters into when
one is convinced that his or her goals are
in fact
achievable. When one can, "see the light at the end of
the tunnel", one feels hopeful.
When a man is adrift in an endless ocean of water
and then spots land off in the distance, the thing that
wells up inside of him and overtakes his psyche is,
hope .
However, it doesn't follow that "Hope springs eternal".
If it did there could be and would be no: "loss of hope".
As the feeling of hope is positive, so too, is the, "loss
of hope" negative.
I personally have felt both so I know that both exist.
Hope is good.
But.
Recall our definition: Hope is the state of
being one
enters into when one is convinced that his or
her
goals are in fact achievable.
And.
Notice, this definition does not say--as it is not
obligated to say-- what the person's GOALS
are.
My goal is for a 100% ofc
( objectivism-fair-capitalistic)
society. When I feel this is actually
achievable in the
not too impossibly distant future I feel "hopeful".
President Obama as the current leader of the
Democratic Party is feeling very hopeful (that is, hope
exists in degrees) so that, "they"--the current
President and his party and "their" sympathizers--are
feeling very very hopeful that their goals for the society
that they live in are in fact achievable.
And since I am personally convinced that the best,
broadest based description of their "goals" is
captured by the word, by the
concept "socialism",
which as described/defined by Ayn
Rand (and with which I
agree because it makes eminent sense) is as follows
(in black;
red is my comments),
The essential characteristic of socialism is the
denial
of individual property rights; under socialism, the right
to ... the use and disposal of property ... is vested
{not where it should be: in the
individual, but rather it is vested where it should
NOT be}
in "society as a whole,"
{see Environmentalism laws; see
some Christian's views of "stewardship" }
... with
production and distribution controlled {not by whom it should be: by the
individual, but rather it is controlled by whom it
should
NOT be, that is ... } by
the state {see anti-trust
laws and see your own soul's sense of freedom or
lack thereof when it comes time for you to consider
acting on your own human action impulses for
you
producing and distributing the products of your
dreams and aspirations--that is, are your first
thoughts, "what would I have to do to make this work
in reality" or are they "what government licenses
and/or
environmental approvals et. al "permissions" from
others do I have to get before I even begin"} ... .
The red, {bracketed}
comments are my for-me
comments that permit me to conclude:
I do not have to endlessly keep proving to
myself that
professional Democrats are more
socialistic then they
are capitalistic. (And, the fact that, the professional
Republicans, are against "separation of
economics
and state" is a little bit of a different issue, that is, it is
beyond the SCOPE of this current thinking so we can't
pursue it right now.)
Rather, "we" repeat: "I do not have to endlessly
keep
proving to myself that professional Democrats
are
more socialistic then they are capitalistic."
But what I am obligated to do, and will do, is
to look for
some evidence--even one piece would
be good--that
suggests I am wrong in my assessment (remember,
Einstein said it takes only ONE experiment to prove
his theory ... wrong).
So this I plan to do and would even like to solicit your
help. If you see any factual evidence that President
Obama and Party and Friends are leaning towards a
100% ofc society please leave word at my blog:
here (I will post this PR there for you to have
a place to attach the evidence to, which of course I am
very very skeptical in that I do not believe there will be
any evidence so that the comments to this blog entry
will forever be, 0). However, if you do find evidence
and don't mind please also leave either a link to that
evidence and/or directions on how to get to it so that I
can read/see it with my own two eyes.
Thanks ahead.
Regards,
Gary Deering .... etc
PS
If you need some insight into what I think
100%
ofc
means go
here =
my initial thoughts on the subject written back in the
late 1990's.
PPS
While we're at it, if you, qua reader of my webstuff want
a free copy of my book Yes. (Is
BiO
Spiritualism the answer?) [a $29.95 + free
shipping and handling value] register your name and
mailing address here
www.raIseBooks.com before the ides of April
(4/13/2009)
and I will send you one. But hurry because I only have
9 left and so the first 6 people to register will get
them. I'm keeping 3 for myself to write notes in as I
am still prepping the manuscript for the Volume
II follow on book. (The 3rd copy I just keep around and
periodically reread it as I just love to read my own
writing.)
The 2nd of these softcover easy to write-in-the-margin
aBooks I
keep to write/record any new introspective thoughts I
have about a topic that has really really high up there
priority
meaning to me and that "pops" up as I reread the
book.
That is, since even I find my writing (a little bit)
pedantic when I--(only a little? ... Yes.) ...
when I--
reread it there are all kinds of opportunities for me to
do margin-writing from which I can then later study
and think about its meaning to me and how good I am
in area x, or y, or z, (e.g., an unblocked consciousness
of high degree) and/or "bad" in area z, or y, or x, (e.g.
lazy researcher and not good enough giver of
examples in my
writing) and so then what (good) needs to be
owned
by me and/or what bad changed.
Remember, Man is a being of
self-made soul.
Improve yourself, improve society.
Gary Deering
PsycHHology Engineer
(helping phhilosophhy
build better humans)
03/16/09
