Figured this should suprise and frighten most of you (that remember me of course). I've gotten accepted to Penn State and will be going for Computer Networking (not that much of a suprise) and...philosphy!(gasp). After reading many books (God and the State by Michael Baukin is probably my favorite, followed by Socrates,Plateo(Republic), Marx(various),etc) and constantly trying to find some sort of path in life, I will probably be going for a PhD in philosphy.Suprising how things turn out, isn't it?
-Traus, Crimson Knight
Good job. I feel bad since I recently reread all of Dr. Seuss' works.
'grats to you; hope you have a blast at Penn State, just be careful that it's a healthy blast. ;_)
Enjoy Penn State and your pursuit of knowledge! I came to college expecting to major in Computer Science and deciding to double in CMSC and Philosophy instead. Gotta say, though, that Plato and Marx rank right up there on the top of my most hated philosophers list. Aristotle and Rand, is more like it :-)
Torlax
Well, in Plato's Republic I wasn't very thrilled about his views on creating a perfect city,he supports stronger censorship then Communism, however the argument on justice was interesting. As for Marx he did inspire many revolutions (despite how Lenin knew little of him when he came into power) and in my opinion Communism is the perfect form of government on paper, just nearly impossible for humans to follow it word for word. Based on the fact we are imperfect it would never be possible for us to create a perfect government. Personally I have more anarchistic views and read anything I can find by Baukin. Well that's enough of my ramblings. =)
Traus
One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish.
Traus: You've got your head in the right place :-)
Go read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. See what you think.
Torlax
Haven't read Atlas Shrugged yet. I read the Fountainhead, and some other various lit bits about Objectivism (mostly because of the ARI scholarship I am almost finished applying for).
Generally, the famous philosophers tend to piss me off when I read their works:
a) because they tend to take a rather narrow focus and deny things not in that focus which would otherwise contradict things they say.
and
b) because they tend to lack pragmatism
Rand, however, does manage to raise several good points, though I think she fails to cover several other rather important ones.