Comments for Sandeepinlife's Weblog

Comment on :) by Feizerl

Feizerl — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:13:07 +0000

specify which kansal. might be confusing for the readers.

Comment on CS Group .. by Feizerl

Feizerl — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:02:15 +0000

actually, what i just said is bull. ignore it.

Comment on CS Group .. by Feizerl

Feizerl — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:56:57 +0000

there is no such thing as a collective brain, but there is certainly such a thing as a collective product derived from individual brains. you dont have to have separate sub projects to be merged later on to have your individuality intact. when you discuss something with someone who is an equal, you explore your mind better. you discuss and analyse ideas with someone, and if both of you act like logical people, you may often agree. certainly, at a few points, you may have to compromise, but you do not have to agree. and the benefits you derive from discussing with an equal may be worth the compromise.

what roark was referring to was, defining one’s opinions based on the society standard. we should not attempt to think in some way just in order to conform to a ‘collective thought’. we should learn to agree to disagree.

Comment on Updates2.. by sandeepinlife

sandeepinlife — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:56:21 +0000

Nopes, left it in the 8th standard ..:)

Comment on Updates2.. by Feizerl

Feizerl — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:57:28 +0000

@ank and sandeep: same ques as ank’s.

Comment on Updates2.. by Ank

Ank — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 08:51:05 +0000

did you decide against bursting crackers?

Comment on Fountain Head … by Feizerl

Feizerl — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 20:21:21 +0000

ok… i hadn’t read your question properly. here’s the new answer, assuming the highly improbable situation that there is a peter keating whose ultimate source of pleasure is copying. ethically, perfectly no difference… peter is as consistent and as less in a dilemma as roark. so no problem there. BUT, peter still has practised his intellect less than roark has… so he’ll probably be intellectually inferior, even though not ethically. but thats not the kind of peter, ayn rand is talking of… her focus is not on intellectual superiority but on ethical superiority. and roark is ethically superior because peter is not i-love-copying peter. he’s i-am-scared peter.

Comment on Fountain Head … by sandeepinlife

sandeepinlife — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:38:31 +0000

This question came to my mind when I was reading Republic in wich Polymarchus ask Socrates about the definition of ethics and ask him why should a dictator be considered morally bad and flana flana …
Your arguements all involve that “peter is scared..” , “peter doesnt love copying” , “peter is always in dilemena” …All this are quite apparent in the novel and that what makes Roark a better person than Peter. All I am saying is what if there all were seen in an opposite way, that’s why in the question I said , “if there was a peter keating”..that would have made both of them equal..

Comment on Updates … by sandeepinlife

sandeepinlife — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:31:54 +0000

@Ankur: Well, In my routine if i am reading a novel that means I am really making an effort to read it.(I am not like you who REALLY enjoys reading novels..) In a way, there are so many other options like gaming, browsing and the infinite LAN ..
BUT, more importantly, I might be preparing for CAT next year for which it actually becomes a part of preparation..So if i am reading them, I am actually studying
Yes, I liked Fountain Head even on purely *entertainment* basis. But I would not recommend it to someone who just want to read a simple novel for entertainment …Anomaly ??:)

Comment on Fountain Head … by Feizerl

Feizerl — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 23:57:40 +0000

in doing something good and original, you have a greater sense of power, and therefore satisfaction… because by doing something original you prove to yourself and others that you are capable of finding creative solutions to problems when nothing else is working, which obviously is going to make you powerful. original is hard though, because you have to think more, and peter is scared of getting it wrong, because he does not think much of himself deep down… so he wants to be on the safer side, and copies. peter doesnt love copying, no one does, as compared to being original and good. but he chooses security over intellectual and creative satisfaction… roark is not scared of being wrong, he is original and satisfied… and so roark is never at moral crossroads or in a dilemma… when you are not in a dilemma, you are happy, because there is no other option to make you unhappy. peter is always in dilemma, and he always chooses the less satisfying easier way out… so he is unhappy.

ethics are defined as a set of protocols that enable you to function to your max in the society. roark has a very consistent, simple and powerful code of ethics… and so he’s much more satisfied.