אבי אהרן

I’m using the decline of gloabal warming theories to kick-start the translation of my Metaphysics of Purpose into English. I know that it is “unobjectivist” to hold this metaphysics for four years. I have a bunch of excuses to share (I had four years to develop them

I’m starting in the middle. That’s foundational apporach to philosophy for you. I’ll fill in the gaps later on.

The theorem of collectivist science (link to my hebrew blog) says:

A science that calls for a collectivist conclutions is wrong.

As you can see on the image, Metaphysics of Purpose starts with axioms (to be discussed later on, here’s something to taste), from which I prove:

The theorem of foundation

Man has the capability to know all there is to know, to set his purpose in life and to achieve it, all by himself. Epistemology starts here and is not axiomatic but based on solid ground.
(this part is not proved, of course, in this post.)

The theorem of philosophy

All philosophical questions are of the form of “what so I want” and ‘how do I achieve it”. They are not in the form of “I don’t know what I want” or “I have no idea of how to get what I want”.

Next, A “no can do” approach is always wrong.

Scientific theories like “we need to revert to the middle ages in order to stop glabal warming”, or “we can win terror” are always wrong. We identify they’re by phrases like “we need to revert to the middle ages” as accurately as we prove they’re wrong by revieling the fact the they deliver fault temperature measurements. 

A ‘no can do’ argument contradicts the theorem that says that reality is ours to conquer. In addition to state something that is wrong (that reality is not for man to conquer), this argument insults man, as it takes the form of “in order to handle reality, you have to sacrifice”. In the case of the collectivist political science of ‘we can’t win terror” what needs to be sacrificed is your life. Ask the kids who live in Shderot; ask the US soldiers in Iraq.

The call for a collectivist action (”let’s pay more taxes” in the science of “we can’t eliminate misery”) is – in itself – a mark for a wrong science. We knew the global warming is wrong way before we discovered that fraudulent scientists cooked the numbers.

I planned to explain why this post is written differently than the hebrew source. Let’s just say the older post was a draft. Philosophy doesn’t change, but my ability to capture it clearly does

More to come.

There’s a new store in Neve Tzedek, Tel Aviv, that sells old American posters and magazines. No Ayn Rand materials, though. The prices are… let’s put it this way… if you plan to have a poster on the wall, you’ll have to rearrange the room around it.

I’m bringing a picture of the poster that brought me into the store in the first place. More Neve Tzedek images -later on.

מדענית ישראלית מועמדת לפרס נובל בכימיה. מבין גדול בכימיה אני לא ואין לי מושג מה בדיוק היא גילתה, פיתחה או המציאה (אני מסתפק בכך שאני לא צריך לגגל “ריבוזום” אבל אני שמח בשמחתה ושמח על התקדמות המדע ועל היקר שמדענים זוכים לו.

עיתון הארץ, המדווח על המועמדות, מספק פרשנות לפיה לדמדענית סיכויים טובים לזכות בפרס, משום שבארבעים השנים האחרונות לא זכתה בו אשה ומשום שהשנה היא המדענית היחידה המועמדת לפרס. בואו נעזוב את זה שהסטטיסטיקה מרעה שהיות המדענית אשה היא ככל הנראה בעוכריה… מה שעיתון אומר זה שאת הפרס הנכסף, המדענית לא תקבל על שום איכות המחקר שלה, או הישגיה המדעיים. לפי העיתון, אם היא תקבל את הפרס, היא תקבל אותו משום שהיא אשה. ההישג המדעי הכביר של המדענית, לפי “הארץ”, הוא היוולדה למין המועדף.

על פרס נובל עצמו אין צורך להרחיב את הדיבור. בואו נגיד שמאז שהוא ניתן לרוצח ערפאת, צריך להחרים את המוסד הזה כליל.

עדכון: החוקרת אכן זכתה בפרס. כל הכבוד לה. זה הזמן להתחיל לקרוא עלה ריבוזום.

Uriel Lynn is a prominent Israeli capitalist. He is the presidents of The federation of Israeli chambers of commerce, had been a member of the Knesset for decades and an enthusiast defender of capitalism (he’s an hebrew article defending the rise of the Shekel and calling to abolish protectionism).

In a recent article, however, Lynn complains about the rich who don’t pay enough taxes. Not the most capitalistic opinion you’ve ever heard from Lynn. What could cause a capitalist to call for increased income tax?

Well, it is the government, of course, who had managed to trick the Israeli capitalist one more time.

As in most of the western world, the Israeli income tax is “progressive”. That is, the tax percentage increases with your income. for the first few Shekels you pay 10%, for the next few Shekels, you pay 20%, up to 58% of direct taxes (income tax, social security and mandatory health insurance combined).

Last year, the ‘capitalistic” goverment of Netanyahu has decreased taxes for one of the taxation levels, cuasing a little anomality (see the linked article for the exact numbers). Mr. Lynn, instead of calling for the abolition of direct taxes altogether, would settle for a little justice. “Justice”, when it comes to your relationship with your goverment, could be simply a cancellation of this tax cut. It’s a love-hate sort of relationship, and in case you didn’t know, you’re the one that finds himself eye folded and tightened to a low bench.

Defenders of capitalism in Israel – and Lynn is a respected leader of this crowd – have to avoid pitfalls of that kind. It is much simpler to call for the abolition of direct taxes altogether. The goal is to keep the taxpayer’s money where it belongs. Why settle for less?