Category Archives: Atlas Shrugged

What very few in MSM seem comfortable communicating is that this contemporary culture war, that is supposedly defined by Project 2025 and the Trump candidacy, is in reality an attempt by the ultra-rich that will be ultra-powerful to institutionally throw off, through their bought out proxies, the costs to them and the restraints upon them imposed by constitutional democracy and its peaceful ordering of society through the rule of law that is not only accessible to all but is alsojustly applied to all.

This is why Biden is their enemy. He fully manifests the virtues of democracy. As a result, he represents a cost factor on the personal financial ledgers of the ultra-rich.

Therefore, if there is a suggestion of Biden's slightest misstep (a stutter, a cold, a bad camera angle) it is reported, amplified, even manufactured by the owned MSM as clear evidence of unfitness.

Meanwhile, Biden's opponent is a monster whose slightest actual deed would have ended Joes presidency. Biden's opponent is an endless offense to humanity, democracy and the presidency. Bidens opponent is old, overweight and a painted-coiffed pile of unstable physical-spiritual-mental ill health. In all of these instances, he is given a pass by the owned MSM.

Why? It's transactional. Bidens opponent will give the ultra-rich a huge tax cut, will relieve Big Oil of the financial burden of ceasing its world destroying business, will diminishthe costs of an aging population, will strip bare the aspirationsof new generations, will blunt the threat to the autocratic rule of the hundred-or-so that is posed by humanitarianism (including reproductive rights) and multiculturalism (including BLM), will repurpose the legal apparatus that holds the corrupt accountable, will remove restraints on foreign bad actors that are either of service to billionaire gangsters here or are too costly to stop there, etcetera, etcetera, and so on and so forth for the new fascist state of Amerika.

In brief, democratic civilization costs the ultra-rich more than they care to invest in, now that they are the ultra-rich and now that they have the candidate and the means to become the fascist cloaked ultra-powerful.

The day the CBS newsroom became a commercial zone, and the Fourth Estate started its free fall into the disastrous Murdoch News-Entertainment era, we as a nation started our slide into where we are now: a species seeking information about where itcan find the most efficient routes to self-stimulating their nervous systems via the psychologically hottest click-bait.

By this writing, I also accuse all the ultra-rich that go along to get along within their exclusive club. I also accuse all the advantage seeking, hand wringing, privileged White boys and girls in democratic circles. The Congressional Black Caucus is not going anywhere are they? We know why.

In the final analysis, this whole Atlas Shrugged experiment is a corruption game that our president, Joe Biden, does not play. He and his true allies, that include us the Blue Wave that he keeps riding to victory, will glide over his opponent and all the gangster billionaires and their bought out whores this Fall.

Biden will endure in excellence for democracy and The People for another four years. But let me pose another not so subtle reason why Bidens re-election is being so unjustly opposed by so many that might not even be billionaires, might not even be Republicans; a very bright and capable Non-White woman waits in the wings.

The Non-White male president. The old man president. The Non-White female president. True Blue Democrats. One after the other. Can you imagine?

Yes, I can.

More:

The Atlas Shrugged Experiment: This Culture War is Really About Greed - Daily Kos

The Invincible is the debut title of Starward Industriesa narrative-driven sci-fi adventure based on Stanisaw Lems 1964 novel of the same name. While Starward Industries reveres Lem's source material, they are still taking some liberties from the original novel, introducing a new cast and POV character for players to control. Releasing on November 6, The Invincible tells a mature, hard sci-fi story taking inspiration from games like Firewatch and Road 96.

Game Rant recently spoke with Starward Industries' art director, Wojciech Ostrycharz, about adapting one of Lem's celebrated sci-fi novels into a video game format and why the team ultimately decided to introduce the game's protagonist, Yasna, in favor of the book's main character, Rohan. As a fan of Lem himself, Ostrycharz is keenly aware to readers' attachment to Rohan, and Starward Industries did not make the decision to exclude him lightly. Rather, the hope is to honor its source material by making a game good enough to stand on its own merits.

Ostrycharz explained that Starward Industries wanted to tell Lem's story from a fresh perspective to be as widely accessible as possible. Starting with a different character gives longtime fans of Lem something new to enjoy, while those who have never read Lem's novel do not need to worry about not having read the original book. Even more important, however, was Starward Industries' desire to avoid misrepresenting Rohan:

"We also didn't want to translate Lem's character Rohan directly into the language of the game, precisely because we know how significant the character is to readers, and the gaming medium comes with its own opportunities and limitations."

If Rohan was portrayed faithfully to the book, players might feel like their autonomy in the game would be at odds with the character's authenticity in the book. Deviating from Rohan's actions in the novel might make the game feel like fan fiction. Worse yet, watering down Rohan's personality to make him more broadly accessible as a POV characteror turning him into a silent or semi-silent protagonistwould be a disservice to readers' memories.

The "opportunities and limitations" Ostrycharz refers to the potential benefit of an adaptation, and the distinction between games and novels as storytelling media. For the purposes of portraying philosophical concepts and beliefs, these media can take the same subject and reach very different conclusions, with distinctions as significant as those between Atlas Shrugged and BioShock. Given those stakes, it makes sense that Starward Industries would want a new perspective for a new medium.

Despite the shift to a new medium, Ostrycharz believes Lem's work, and The Invincible's messages are timeless:

"Both the book and the game strongly reference anti-imperialism, anti-colonialism, the limits of human knowledge, and respect for nature, even if it's alien and incomprehensible. Regis III is an alien planet, but it could also be an Earthly jungle inhabited by an unknown species into which we enter with our tanks without a hint of humility."

Ostrycharz's evocative analogy drives home The Invincible's broad appeal to modern audiences. Whereas BioShock and other narrative sci-fi games tell violent horror stories, The Invincible appears to focus on horrors in a more cerebral and less celebratory sense. Ostrycharz also stated the game's tagline, "Not everything everywhere is for us," is a tribute to Lem and his work, and ultimately, that's something worth thinking about.

The Invincible is a story-driven adventure game, adapted from the hard sci-fi works of Stanislaw Lem. Players will explore Regis III as Yasna, use tools to search for her missing crew, and face unforeseen threats.

See the original post:

Why The Invincible Created New Characters Instead of Using Rohan - GameRant

Objectivism is a philosophy of rational individualism that promotes reason as the absolute source of knowledge and the primary moral objective of attaining ones happiness. Russian-born American writer and philosopher Ayn Rand created and established this ideology during the mid-1900s. The system of thought speaks to metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, aesthetics, and politics, resulting in a complete philosophy that is still referenced today. Sectors of business and politics have been highly influenced by her ideas, and she has inspired many. Here is an outline of Objectivism and the core beliefs that make up the philosophy.

Objectivisms name originated from the philosophys foundation in objectivity. Knowledge and values arent developed through thought but already exist and must be discovered by the mind. The creator of this philosophy, Ayn Rand, wouldve preferred a name directly referencing existence, but existentialism was already established by the time Rand was looking for a name.

Instead of questioning what happens beyond humanitys time on earth, Objectivism focuses on reality and the nature of being alive in the here-and-now. It was developed through her well-known novels as well as her periodicals The Objectivist Newsletter, The Objectivist, and The Ayn Rand Letter.

Ayn Rands career was defined by her influential novels and the philosophy she created. Her most well-known novels, The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, both promoted Objectivist ideals. She later dedicated her time to extensively writing about her philosophy through academic works and giving lectures on the topic.

Rand was born in 1905 in St. Petersburg, Russia, and grew up in the turmoil of the Bolshevik Revolution, which naturally informed her morals and perspective about the world around her. She was passionate about political activism and vocal about her support of abortion rights, her opposition to the Vietnam War and the military draft, and had controversial opinions about homosexuality.

Her advocacy for individual rights, limited government, and laissez-faire capitalism aligned with Objectivism and has inspired modern-day right-wing, conservative Republicans. With influence in the political and academic sphere and over 37 million copies of her novels sold, Rands legacy lives on.

The root of the philosophy lies in the acceptance of reality first and foremost, without attempting escape or distraction from the truth. This includes the rejection of a higher power and a spiritual world.

From this mindset, Rand proposes three branches that define Objectivism: existence, consciousness, and identity, which all speak to the metaphysics concept of objective reality. The remainder of ideas within the ideology are based on the unarguable fact that existence exists and is identity. This implies that something lacking a specific nature or something that supposedly can transcend existence cannot exist. In relation to this, consciousness arises only when something exists to be conscious of; consciousness cannot be conscious of itself and create its own reality.

Knowledge can be gained from solely perceiving surroundings, but an in-depth process of proof must be applied. Whats not clearly objective truth must be validated through inductive and deductive reasoning, which relates back to the epistemology of Rands philosophy.

Founding Objectivisms logical methodology in the proposition that consciousness is identification, Rand defines reason as the way in which sensation is identified and integrated into the mind. On the other hand, perception is self-evident and therefore doesnt require fact-checking. Her theory of perception differentiates form and object, stating that form is constituted by the physicality of sensory systems and object is what is perceived and equates to reality.

Concept formation is an integral part of attaining knowledge beyond pure perception and occurs through measurement omission. Rands pupil, philosopher Leonard Peikoff, describes this process as mentally collecting concrete perceptual units and omitting specific measurements of these units that dont advance the concept that is newly forming. These concepts are then organized hierarchically, with concrete knowledge derived from perception integrated with abstract, open-ended classifications developed from available knowledge. This pool of existing knowledge doesnt include emotions and feelings in Objectivism, which Rand believes are necessary, but not adequate tools for understanding reality.

A significant element of Objectivism is questioning the value of values. Due to the reality of existence, values subsequently exist too, and humans face the decision between life and death. Free will equals choice, and this includes the intentional choice to think with a purpose or to live in a semi-conscious state. This leads to the conclusion that values must be chosen and morality defined by the individual. To sustain life, one must sustain thinking.

The virtue that is central to Objectivisms ethics is rationality, which reiterates the importance of reason as the only source of knowledge and values. This is the basis of one of Objectivisms most important elements, the merit of self-interest. If an individual chooses their moral code, then, naturally, their own well-being would be the primary consideration in this decision. This concept of ethical egoism refutes that there is a moral obligation to exist for other people and that one must live altruistically.

This is another reason why there is no place for religion within Objectivism; the idea that one must serve God and ignore personal desires and interests isnt supported by its ethics. Instead, Objectivism promotes rational selfishness and the vital pursuit of ones own happiness.

These beliefs of self-interest translate to the political sphere when considering individual liberty. As stated earlier, human knowledge is gained through reason and leads to the development of values and, consequently, survival. When a person encounters a threat, their capability of utilizing reason is taken away, which is why the assailer acts immorally. Using physical force against someones will is unethical, which means that voluntary cooperation or defensive force are the only acceptable methods of changing human behavior. Therefore, each individual must be aware of the potential to violate the rights of others in addition to protecting their own rights.

Positive rights, collective rights, and animal rights are not considered valid within Objectivism. The individual rights of Objectivism are only fully acknowledged in laissez-faire capitalism. Although the ideology recognizes the advantage it provides to society, the main reason this social system is praised is because of its morality.

Self-determination should only be granted to societies striving for freedom. Anarchism isnt recognized as a moral political philosophy because the government has the ability to objectively control the use of physical force and, in turn, has the responsibility to protect individual rights.

The objectivist perspective of art is that it serves the purpose of facilitating the understanding of concepts through perception. Its viewed as an artists re-creation of their version of reality, representing what they hold as true. The abstractions that are conceived into concrete, logical thoughts can be physically manifested to be perceived. Art has the potential to be a channel for easily consumable communication and thinking about an individuals value judgments, morals, and ethics. It is not believed to be a conduit for propaganda or a means of education, since often the creation is executed in an emotional state.

Rands own creative endeavors were showcased through her literary works. In The Fountainhead, her aim was to depict the ideal individual and portray traits that display the best of humanity. Her definition of great art was an expression that amplified the highest status of humanity.

Romanticism was the art movement that Rand believed encompassed this purpose the most successfully. Although romanticism is typically correlated to emotionalism, most creations out of this school of art were philosophically subjectivist and fall under romantic realism, which is not inherently emotional.

Rand expressed her philosophy of Objectivism through the art form of writing, and therefore believed in arts merit. Aesthetics is just one of the many facets of this ideology that promotes rationality and the driving force of reason of human knowledge. The three axioms stated earlierexistence, consciousness, and identityall serve as the base of the philosophy as true and unavoidable facts of reality. Rand developed Objectivism by relying on these three ideals, and this resulted in a comprehensive philosophy that continues to influence the fields of academics, philosophy, economics, business, and politics.

See the article here:

What is Objectivism? Ayn Rand's Philosophy - The Collector

A key feature of a political movements health is its ability to self-police against ideological excesses or reactionary forms of politics. Its not easy to do. There are powerful incentives that tilt against it, including the risk of alienating prospective supporters, harming personal relationships, and granting political ammunition to ones opponents. There are also practical limits in a distributive democracy where there are rarely points of authority that can plausibly claim to speak for a political movement as a whole.

Yet just because its hard doesnt mean that there isnt some onusparticularly among elite actorsto call out and, where necessary, isolate radicalism within their ranks.

At its apogee in the second half of the twentieth century, National Review magazine played this role on the American Right. Its founder, William F. Buckley Jr., famously wrote the John Birch Society out of the mainstream conservative movement that he was assiduously building. He similarly published a scathing review of Ayn Rands book, Atlas Shrugged, by one of the magazines editors, Whittaker Chambers, that signaled to the world that Rands objectivism didnt have a home in it either.

In the ensuing decades, the American Right has ceased to self-police. At this point, not only are its political leaders merely trying to stay ahead of their most radical voices, but within the adjacent world of conservative ideas and thought, it can at times be hard to distinguish between the elites and the fringe.

Canadian conservatism has generally had less of a reactionary problem. There are doubtless various factors including the Westminster models emphasis on top-down leadership and party discipline, the countrys more moderate political culture, and its lower racial salience.

The Hub has nevertheless, in the two-and-a-half-years since its launch, taken seriously a sense of responsibility for calling out conservative excesses including the reactionary parts of the movement that disposed Jason Kenney as Albertas United Conservative Party leader, the conspiratorial impulses behind some of the conservative criticism of the World Economic Forum, and the growing trend of online ideas and voices radicalizing young men.

We know that these instances have antagonized some conservatives who believe that its a tactical mistake to cede any ground to the Left. Theyve probably cost us some number of donors and subscribers. We also recognize that there are inherent limits to our ability to neutralize some of these excesses. No one is asking our permission before tweeting or driving their transport truck onto Parliament Hill for that matter. But we still think its ultimately healthy for The Hub as an institution and conservatism as a whole to speak out when we feel its called for.

This notion of self-policing is something that Ive thought a lot about in recent years. I wonder what I would have done if I had been a Republican in 2015 and 2016. I dont know. Its easy to look the other way or rationalize bad ideas on ones own side.

But the lesson of the past several years in the United States is that even if there are downsides for those who are prepared to be self-critical, theres not a lot of upside for those who arent. Ask Republican congressional leaders like Kevin McCarthy or Jim Jordan. Do their choices in hindsight look better or shrewder than Liz Cheneys? The answer is self-evidently no.

I share this context because the reaction of the Canadian Left to Hamass terrorist attacks against Israel has revealed a self-policing problem. Its become clear that the movements intellectual and political leaders have permitted radical ideas and voices to occupy an outsized place in todays progressivism. The consequences have alarmingly played themselves out in recent weeks on university campuses, the streets of the countrys major cities, and even inside our mainstream politics. Put bluntly: the Left has an antisemitism problem.

Even that however doesnt seem to fully capture the magnitude and nature of the problem. Its not merely the fringe expressions of outright Jew-hatred that weve witnessed. Its actually something far deeper and more mainstream that may be the bigger cause for concern.

The Lefts strong attachment to radical ideas such as decolonisation, oppressor versus oppressed frameworks, and the so-called right to resist has created an intellectual context in which acts of terrorism and violence can find affirmation and support.

There are different factors that have contributed to the problem. One is that progressives have so convinced themselves that the rise of the so-called far right represents an existential threat that theyve been prepared to make alliances with radical political figures and organizations (no enemies to the Left) or opted to overlook the rise of radicalism within their movement. To the extent that they may acknowledge it, theres been a tendency to minimize these intellectual trends as merely a form of campus politics or faculty lounge theorizing.

Another is that the problem on the Left is essentially the opposite of the one on the Right. For conservatives, self-policing is mainly about conservative elites trying to constrain the excesses of the right-wing masses. For progressives, the excesses are among left-wing elites themselves. Radicalism finds its strongest expression among university faculty, law school students, and the panoply of non-profit organizations that comprise the modern Left. Its not obvious therefore whos supposed to be doing the policing.

But it needs to happen. North American scenes of anti-Jewish rallies and full-throated defences of Hamass horrific terrorist attacks rooted in left-wing theories of anti-colonialism and anti-settler resistance are signs that radicalism has spilled out from university seminar rooms into the streets.

These protests and ralliesincluding ones that have targeted Jewish restaurants and cultural centreshave exposed these problems for everyone to see. Theyve forced us to confront the interrelationship between these Manichean ideas about identity and power promulgated by left-wing voices and antisemitism. This should lead to a reassessment of the public good case for subsidizing various forms of critical theory education and scholarship which often seem like a thin veneer of academic rigour for what is otherwise a set of retrograde intellectual propositions about race, gender, sexuality, and society.

But thats probably a necessary yet insufficient response to what has played out in recent weeks. This is in large part a progressivism problem that progressives themselves must address. Progressive elites who lament the rise of the far right need to reckon with the rise of the far left and their own role in galvanizing it. Self-policing is hardespecially when it requires serious introspectionbut its necessary. Its time for the Left to police its own side.

More here:

Sean Speer: The Left has a self-policing problem - The Hub

What is included in my trial?

During your trial you will have complete digital access to FT.com with everything in both of our Standard Digital and Premium Digital packages.

Standard Digital includes access to a wealth of global news, analysis and expert opinion. Premium Digital includes access to our premier business column, Lex, as well as 15 curated newsletters covering key business themes with original, in-depth reporting. For a full comparison of Standard and Premium Digital, click here.

Change the plan you will roll onto at any time during your trial by visiting the Settings & Account section.

If you do nothing, you will be auto-enrolled in our premium digital monthly subscription plan and retain complete access for $69 per month.

For cost savings, you can change your plan at any time online in the Settings & Account section. If youd like to retain your premium access and save 20%, you can opt to pay annually at the end of the trial.

You may also opt to downgrade to Standard Digital, a robust journalistic offering that fulfils many users needs. Compare Standard and Premium Digital here.

Any changes made can be done at any time and will become effective at the end of the trial period, allowing you to retain full access for 4 weeks, even if you downgrade or cancel.

You may change or cancel your subscription or trial at any time online. Simply log into Settings & Account and select "Cancel" on the right-hand side.

You can still enjoy your subscription until the end of your current billing period.

We support credit card, debit card and PayPal payments.

Read this article:

It's 'Atlas Shrugged' and we're watching it live - Financial Times

If youve ever wondered what youd get if terrorist propaganda had sex with an Oceans 11 ripoff, the new movie How to Blow Up a Pipeline provides the answer.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Malms arguments are expounded by the characters, all of whom have been hurt by climate change or the oil industry in some way. The eco-terrorist ringleader, Xochitl (played by Ariela Barer), is mourning the death of her mother, who perished in a freak heat wave. Her friend, Theo (Sasha Lane), has advanced leukemia from living near a refinery.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The others, all typical left-wing university-age youth, are alarmed about climate change and eager to join the cause. The one exception is Dwayne (Jake Weary), a pickup-driving, gun-toting redneck whos recruited by Xochitls friend Shawn (Marcus Scribner) because he knows the area thats being targeted and lost his house fighting to stop a pipeline from being built through his property.

As is typical in Hollywood these days, the group is incredibly diverse a Latina, a Native-American man, a pair of Black lesbians, a privileged white boy, etc. though the forced diversity feels less out of place in a film that wears its progressive values on its sleeve.

Malms case about the uselessness of non-violent protest is given voice by Xochitl, who, following her mothers funeral, becomes disillusioned while planning a campus divestment protest. Im having trouble feeling like any of this matters, she tells Shawn. By the time any market solution does shit, billions of people will be dead.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Later on, we meet Michael (Forrest Goodluck), who picks a fight with an oil worker before returning home to lecture his mother about the futility of her conservationist efforts. In both cases, the message is clear: only through violence and vandalism can meaningful change be achieved.

Xochitl comes up with the idea of attacking the things that are killing us like actual sabotage, property destruction, at her divestment campaign meeting. In another part of the country, Michael, battered and bruised from his recent street fight, takes a job at a supermarket, where he uses his employee discount to buy bomb-making materials and teaches himself how to build improvised explosive devices.

Daniel Goldhaber, who directed the film and co-wrote the script, intended to make a heist movie, figuring that if he could make the characters seem cool, it would shift the cultural narrative around climate tactics, and give people hope that something can be done. That something, of course, being terrorism.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Ive never seen heist movies as ringing endorsements of bank robbery or Robin Hood-style wealth redistribution, but I guess art really is in the eye of the beholder. At the very least, How to Blow Up a Pipeline offers a unique take on the genre by forgoing the classic trope of a ringleader setting out to find accomplices that have the unique skills necessary to pull off a given job.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Instead, the movie begins with the characters converging on a cabin in rural Texas, where they start making explosives and digging up a section of the pipeline. That most of them make their way to the Lone Star State in pickup trucks and older-model gas-powered vehicles may seem hypocritical at first, but speaks to the movies main point: that individual measures are meaningless, as global warming can only be solved through drastic collective action.

The audience is introduced to the characters through flashbacks detailing how each one has been aggrieved by the oil industry or the effects of climate change and how they managed to find each other. The majority of the films tension comes not from disagreements among the characters or the threat of getting caught, but from watching this group of amateur saboteurs almost blow themselves up time and again.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The movie doesnt ignore questions about the morality of eco-terrorism, but as in Malms book, in which he asserts that saving millions of people from climate change justifies violence, arguments to the contrary are dismissed out of hand.

When the plot is originally conceived, Shawn expresses concern that, We could end up killing somebody or creating an ecological disaster. To which Xochitl responds: Sabotage is messy. Later, the group wrestles with whether theyre terrorists, but concludes that the Boston Tea Party, MLK and Jesus were also terrorists, and that revolution has collateral damage.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Despite the eco-terrorists in the movie taking pains to ensure their vandalism doesnt result in the loss of life, which Islamists certainly do not do, the analogy is not so far off, as both groups think they have good reason to justify their use of force. And sometimes they have common cause: in his book, Malm praises a 2019 attack on Saudi refineries launched by Houthi rebels, saying that, No single action in the history of sabotage and guerrilla war had achieved a commensurate break on the pumping of oil.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Which brings me to the main issue with How to Blow Up a Pipeline. As a piece of pure entertainment, it is actually quite enjoyable. The plot moves along briskly and the tension is palpable as the amateur bombers try to evade getting caught and risk life and limb attempting to rig explosives and attach them to sections of the pipeline.

Yet despite Goldhabers claim that he didnt want to over-editorialize the subject matter, the film is constantly hitting viewers over the head with its environmental propaganda everything from the dialogue, to the characters backstories, to the ambient audio and backdrops of smog-spewing factories is designed to paint a picture of ecological disaster. And the movies overarching message that vigilante violence and the destruction of private property for the collective good is justified is morally reprehensible.

How to Blow Up a Pipeline can be streamed on video-on-demand platforms starting at $4.99, but capitalist viewers who have qualms about supporting a piece of eco-Marxist propaganda would be better served by finding a copy of Paul Johanssons 2011 adaptation of Atlas Shrugged.

National Postjkline@postmedia.comTwitter.com/accessd

Read the original here:

Jesse Kline: 'How to Blow Up a Pipeline' film's reprehensible attempt to mainstream terrorism - National Post

Deity in Greek mythology who held up the door or sky

In Greek mythology, Atlas (; Greek: , tlas) is a Titan condemned to hold up the heavens or sky for eternity after the Titanomachy. Atlas also plays a role in the myths of two of the greatest Greek heroes: Heracles (Hercules in Roman mythology) and Perseus. According to the ancient Greek poet Hesiod, Atlas stood at the ends of the earth in extreme west.[2] Later, he became commonly identified with the Atlas Mountains in northwest Africa and was said to be the first King of Mauretania (modern-day Morocco, not to be confused with the modern-day country of Mauritania).[3] Atlas was said to have been skilled in philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy. In antiquity, he was credited with inventing the first celestial sphere. In some texts, he is even credited with the invention of astronomy itself.[4]

Atlas was the son of the Titan Iapetus and the Oceanid Asia[5] or Clymene.[6] He was a brother of Epimetheus and Prometheus.[7] He had many children, mostly daughters, the Hesperides, the Hyades, the Pleiades, and the nymph Calypso who lived on the island Ogygia.[8]

The term Atlas has been used to describe a collection of maps since the 16th century when Flemish geographer Gerardus Mercator published his work in honour of the mythological Titan.

The "Atlantic Ocean" is derived from "Sea of Atlas". The name of Atlantis mentioned in Plato's Timaeus' dialogue derives from "Atlantis nesos" (Ancient Greek: ), literally meaning "Atlas's Island".[9]

The etymology of the name Atlas is uncertain. Virgil took pleasure in translating etymologies of Greek names by combining them with adjectives that explained them: for Atlas his adjective is durus, "hard, enduring",[10] which suggested to George Doig[11] that Virgil was aware of the Greek "to endure"; Doig offers the further possibility that Virgil was aware of Strabo's remark that the native North African name for this mountain was Douris. Since the Atlas mountains rise in the region inhabited by Berbers, it has been suggested that the name might be taken from one of the Berber languages, specifically from the word drr "mountain".[12]

Traditionally historical linguists etymologize the Ancient Greek word (genitive: ) as comprised from copulative - and the Proto-Indo-European root *telh- 'to uphold, support' (whence also ), and which was later reshaped to an nt-stem.[13] However, Robert S. P. Beekes argues that it cannot be expected that this ancient Titan carries an Indo-European name, and he suggests instead that the word is of Pre-Greek origin, as such words often end in -ant.[13]

Atlas and his brother Menoetius sided with the Titans in their war against the Olympians, the Titanomachy. When the Titans were defeated, many of them (including Menoetius) were confined to Tartarus, but Zeus condemned Atlas to stand at the western edge of the earth and hold up the sky on his shoulders. Atlas did not want to do this resulting in him being sent to hell.[14] Thus, he was Atlas Telamon, "enduring Atlas," and became a doublet of Coeus, the embodiment of the celestial axis around which the heavens revolve.[15]

A common misconception today is that Atlas was forced to hold the Earth on his shoulders, but Classical art shows Atlas holding the celestial spheres, not the terrestrial globe; the solidity of the marble globe borne by the renowned Farnese Atlas may have aided the conflation, reinforced in the 16th century by the developing usage of atlas to describe a corpus of terrestrial maps.

The Greek poet Polyidus c. 398 BC[16] tells a tale of Atlas, then a shepherd, encountering Perseus who turned him to stone. Ovid later gives a more detailed account of the incident, combining it with the myth of Heracles. In this account Atlas is not a shepherd, but a king.[17] According to Ovid, Perseus arrives in Atlas's Kingdom and asks for shelter, declaring he is a son of Zeus. Atlas, fearful of a prophecy that warned of a son of Zeus stealing his golden apples from his orchard, refuses Perseus hospitality.[18] In this account, Atlas is turned not just into stone by Perseus, but an entire mountain range: Atlas's head the peak, his shoulders ridges and his hair woods. The prophecy did not relate to Perseus stealing the golden apples but to Heracles, another son of Zeus, and Perseus's great-grandson.[19]

One of the Twelve Labours of the hero Heracles was to fetch some of the golden apples that grow in Hera's garden, tended by Atlas's reputed daughters, the Hesperides (which were also called the Atlantides), and guarded by the dragon Ladon. Heracles went to Atlas and offered to hold up the heavens while Atlas got the apples from his daughters.[20]

Upon his return with the apples, however, Atlas attempted to trick Heracles into carrying the sky permanently by offering to deliver the apples himself, as anyone who purposely took the burden must carry it forever, or until someone else took it away. Heracles, suspecting Atlas did not intend to return, pretended to agree to Atlas's offer, asking only that Atlas take the sky again for a few minutes so Heracles could rearrange his cloak as padding on his shoulders. When Atlas set down the apples and took the heavens upon his shoulders again, Heracles took the apples and ran away.

In some versions,[21] Heracles instead built the two great Pillars of Hercules to hold the sky away from the earth, liberating Atlas much as he liberated Prometheus.

According to Plato, the first king of Atlantis was also named Atlas, but that Atlas was a son of Poseidon and the mortal woman Cleito.[22] The works of Eusebius[23] and Diodorus[4] also give an Atlantean account of Atlas. In these accounts, Atlas' father was Uranus and his mother was Gaia. His grandfather was Elium "King of Phoenicia" who lived in Byblos with his wife Beruth. Atlas was raised by his sister, Basilia.[24][25][26]

Atlas was also a legendary king of Mauretania, the land of the Mauri in antiquity roughly corresponding with modern Northern Morocco and western Algeria. In the 16th century, Gerardus Mercator put together the first collection of maps to be called an "Atlas" and devoted his book to the "King of Mauretania".[25][27]

Atlas became associated with Northwest Africa over time. He had been connected with the Hesperides, or "Nymphs", which guarded the golden apples, and Gorgons both of which were said to live beyond Ocean in the extreme west of the world since Hesiod's Theogony.[28] Diodorus and Palaephatus mention that the Gorgons lived in the Gorgades, islands in the Aethiopian Sea. The main island was called Cerna, and modern-day arguments have been advanced that these islands may correspond to Cape Verde due to Phoenician exploration.[29] The Northwest Africa region emerged as the canonical home of the King via separate sources. In particular, according to Ovid, after Perseus turns Atlas into a mountain range, he flies over Aethiopia, the blood of Medusa's head giving rise to Libyan snakes. By the time of the Roman Empire, the habit of associating Atlas's home to a chain of mountains, the Atlas Mountains, which were near Mauretania and Numidia, was firmly entrenched.[30]

The identifying name Aril is inscribed on two 5th-century BC Etruscan bronze items: a mirror from Vulci and a ring from an unknown site.[31] Both objects depict the encounter with Atlas of Herclethe Etruscan Heraclesidentified by the inscription; they represent rare instances where a figure from Greek mythology was imported into Etruscan mythology, but the name was not. The Etruscan name Aril is etymologically independent.

Sources describe Atlas as the father, by different goddesses, of numerous children, mostly daughters. Some of these are assigned conflicting or overlapping identities or parentage in different sources.

According to Hyginus, in his Fabulae, Atlas is the son of Aether and Gaia.[39]

Atlas' best-known cultural association is in cartography. The first publisher to associate the Titan Atlas with a group of maps was the print-seller Antonio Lafreri, on the engraved title-page he applied to his ad hoc assemblages of maps, Tavole Moderne Di Geografia De La Maggior Parte Del Mondo Di Diversi Autori (1572);[40] however, he did not use the word "Atlas" in the title of his work, an innovation of Gerardus Mercator, who dedicated his "atlas" specifically to honour the Titan, Atlas, King of Mauretania, a learned philosopher, mathematician, and astronomer. In psychology, Atlas is used metaphorically to describe the personality of someone whose childhood was characterized by excessive responsibilities.[41] Ayn Rand's political dystopian novel Atlas Shrugged (1957) references the popular misconception of Atlas holding up the entire world on his back by comparing the capitalist and intellectual class as being "modern Atlases" which hold the modern world up at great expense to themselves.[citation needed]

Nautilus Cup. This drinking vessel, for court feasts, depicts Atlas holding the shell on his back.[42] The Walters Art Museum

More here:

Atlas (mythology) - Wikipedia

Controversy King Aaron Rodgers Once Willingly F*cked Around With Everyone By Bragging About Owning Atlas Shrugged  The Sportsrush

Continue reading here:

Controversy King Aaron Rodgers Once Willingly F*cked Around With Everyone By Bragging About Owning Atlas Shrugged - The Sportsrush

If you have watched Scarface or the original Batman Return, you might have come across actress Michelle Pfeiffer. She played Elvira Hancock in Scarface (1983) and Selina Kyle/Catwoman in Batman Returns (1992). The actress was and still is a superstar for those that watched her in her prime. Michelle is currently in her sixties, but her fame hasn't dwindled. As a result, fans are interested in her personal life, with many inquiring about her children. How many kids does she have? And who is John Henry Kelley II to her?

PAY ATTENTION: heck out news that is picked exactly for YOU find Recommended for you block on the home page and enjoy!

John Henry Kelley II is a celebrity child. But despite his celebrity status, John lives a private life, and little is known about him. As a result, much speculation has risen about him, with many inquiring about his whereabouts.

Who is John Henry Kelley II? He is the son of David E. Kelley, an American television writer, producer, and former attorney, and Michelle Marie Pfeiffer, an American actress. But, aside from his celebrity parents, what else do you know about him? Here are five interesting facts about him.

PAY ATTENTION: Enjoy reading our stories? Join YEN.com.gh's Telegram channel for more!

How old is John Henry Kelley II? He is 28 years old in 2022, having been born on 5 August 1994 in the United States. John's zodiac sign is Leo. He is an American citizen and is of white ethnicity.

John Henry Kelley II has an older sister known as Claudia Rose Pfeiffer. She was born on 9 February 1993, making her 29 years old in 2022. Is Claudia Pfeiffer adopted? Yes, she is. Michelle Pfeiffer adopted Claudia back in 1993 before getting married to David Kelley.

What is Michelle Pfeiffer's daughter's ethnicity? According to People, Claudia Rose Pfeiffer is of mixed ethnicity.

John Henry Kelley II's parents are famous people in the Hollywood scene. His father, David Edward Kelley, is an American television writer, producer, and former attorney. David is one of the few screenwriters whose work has been broadcast on all four major commercial television networks in the United States.

John's mother, Michelle Marie Pfeiffer, is an American actress. She is regarded as one of the 1980s and 1990s most successful actresses. According to IMDb, Michelle has won a Golden Globe and a British Academy Film award and has been nominated for three Academy Awards and a Primetime Emmy.

How did John Henry Kelley's parents meet? According to Pop Sugar, in January 1993, actress Michelle Pfeiffer met on a blind date with Kelley. The following week, Kelley took her to see Bram Stoker's Dracula at the movies, and they began dating officially, eventually marrying on 13 November 1993.

John Henry Kelley II was named after his famous grandfather, John Henry "Jack" Kelley. Jack Kelley was an ice hockey coach from the United States who was inducted into the US Hockey Hall of Fame in 1993.

According to the Boston University Alumni Magazine, Kelley was the first general manager and head coach of the World Hockey Association's New England Whalers (WHA). In 1972-73, he won the Howard Baldwin Trophy as WHA coach of the year and led the Whalers to the Avco World Trophy.

John Henry Kelley II's parents are among the wealthiest in Hollywood. According to Celebrity Net Worth, John Henry's parents have a combined net worth of $250 million. Her mother's fortune results from a long and successful career in the acting industry.

David's fortune stems from his long and successful careers in film and law, according to The Richest. David is currently a script consultant on the Atlas Shrugged film adaptation.

On the other hand, John Henry Kelley's net worth is unknown. No one knows what he is into because he has kept almost everything about him under wraps.

John Henry Kelley II is the son of renowned American actress Michelle Marie Pfeiffer and former attorney David E. Kelley. He has an older sister, Claudia, who John's mother adopted before her marriage to David E. Kelley. Unfortunately, John leads a private life, and little is known about him.

Yen.com.gh shared an article about Robert Plant's daughter, Carmen Jane Planet. Unfortunately, Carmen did not follow in her father's footsteps, despite making early appearances in some Led Zeppelin feature songs and performances. Instead, she followed a different path. Carmen is a ballet dancer and dance instructor.

Carmen Jane Planet's most recent production, The Serpent Slayer, premiered at the Exeter Corn Exchange. Discover everything you need to know about Robert Plant's daughter.

New feature: heck out news that is picked for YOU find Recommended for you block on the home page and enjoy!

Source: YEN.com.gh

Read the original here:

John Henry Kelley II: Everything you need to know about Michelle Pfeiffer's son - Yen.com.gh

Ayn Rand (1905-1982) was a Russian-American novelist, playwright, and philosopher who has a lasting legacy as one of the foremost thinkers of the twentieth century. Her philosophy of Objectivism, presented throughout both her works of fiction and nonfiction, is groundbreaking and unique.

Objectivism is consistently mischaracterized and stereotyped in popular media, and is blamed as responsible for any right-leaning political development. Here are five common myths that you may have heard about Ayn Rand.

A cornerstone of Ayn Rands philosophy was her opposition to altruism and her support of selfishness. Naturally, in common language this would imply she was fundamentally opposed to any and all forms of charity.

Charitable giving under the guise of altruism is contrary to the principles of Objectivism. However, giving can be fully consistent with rational self-interest. Giving money to specific individuals or causes actually has an important role to play in a nightwatchman state.

Rand held that some individuals are unable as opposed to unwilling to provide for themselves, and thus voluntary charity would be the only legitimate means of survival for some. However, it is of crucial importance that such giving remains motivated by reason rather than a sense of altruism.

In her article The Ethics of Emergencies, Rand stated:

By elevating the issue of helping others into the central and primary issue of ethics, altruism has destroyed the concept of any authentic benevolence or good will among men.

Objectivism holds that government should not be in the business of redistributing money. Critics of Ayn Rand would point to her eventual collecting of Social Security money as a point of hypocrisy.

In Letters of Ayn Rand (letter 524, to Mrs. Milton W. Broberg), she addressed a fan whose husband had become unemployed and was receiving money from the government. Rand asserted that the man should not be ashamed to receive this assistance.

This was on the grounds that he had earned money that the state had plundered from him while he was working, and that he was merely getting back some of what was already his. It is precisely because Rand opposed collectivist wealth redistribution that she viewed collecting Social Security as restitution for what had been taken.

Furthermore, one of the characters in Atlas Shrugged, Ragnar Danneskjld, would rob US merchant ships, convert the loot into gold, and return it to the people in Galts Gulch whose earnings had been taken by the state.

Objectivism is a philosophy fundamentally at odds with religion, where there is no room for metaphysical mysticism. This does not mean, however, that Ayn Rand was intolerant of religious people. On the contrary, Ayn Rand is known to have held certain religious people in high regard and, while disagreeing, would gladly listen to their ideas and engage in debate.

Thomas Aquinas, a 13th-century priest, was one of two philosophers that Rand drew significant influence from, alongside Aristotle. Rands appreciation of Aquinas stems from the latters attempts to apply Aristotelian logic to his own beliefs. Reason was important to Aquinas, even though he ultimately did not reach the same conclusion as Rand.

Moreover, when writing her magnum opus, Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand had initially intended to include a priest in the story, a character who would be a most glamorized projection of a Thomist philosopher, of a man who thought he could combine reason with religion.

Objectivism does not condemn the pursuit of money something that makes it stand out from other philosophies. However, money is not one of the cardinal values of Objectivism.

Instead, these are reason, purpose, and self-esteem. The means of reaching these values are rationality, productivity, and pride. As such, money is not a goal in and of itself but is rather the outcome (in a capitalist society) of productivity, which is the central purpose of a rational mans life.

In Atlas Shrugged, Rand presents heroes and villains at both ends of the wealth spectrum. Indeed, many antagonists in the story, such as James Taggart and Orren Boyle, are wealthy characters, while Galts Gulch has a place for productive people in all lines of work.

Due to a number of conservative figures crediting Ayn Rand as an influence, a pervasive myth has arisen, claiming her as a conservative. Rand, however, would have categorically rejected this idea. Indeed, she was known to be fiercely critical of conservatives, disliking conservative figures such as Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.

Ayn Rand disagreed with conservatives on religion and religious morality. She also disagreed with them on policy. But, importantly, she also staunchly disagreed with the conservative approach to defending capitalism.

When conservatives defend capitalism, it is usually approached from an altruistic or utilitarian angle, i.e. it produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Conservatives may also defend capitalism on the grounds of tradition, rejecting the disruption of socialism. However, conservatism does not defend capitalism for the sake of capitalism.

In her essay Conservatism: An Obituary, Ayn Rand characterizes conservatives as follows, They declare that we must defend the American political system not because it is right, but because our ancestors chose it, not because it is good, but because it is old.

If you would like to receive a free copy of thirteen previously unpublished letters by Ayn Rand, be sure click on the button below.

Rand, Ayn. The Ethics of Emergencies. The Virtue of Selfishness: A New Concept of Egoism. Fiftieth anniversary edition. New York: Signet, 1964, 49.

Rand, Ayn. The Journals of Ayn Rand. Ed. David Harriman. New York: Plume, [1997] 1999. 540-541.

Rand, Ayn. Conservatism: An Obituary. Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. 2nd ed. New York: Signet, [1966] 1967, 221.

This piece solely expresses the opinion of the author and not necessarily the organization as a whole. Students For Liberty is committed to facilitating a broad dialogue for liberty, representing a variety of opinions.

Read the rest here:

Five myths about Ayn Rand and Objectivism - Learn Liberty