rohintest

I would recommend the article "Libertarianism: Perversion of Liberty" by Peter Schwartz. It answers similar confusion at a deep level.

On a related note, wrote following comment in recent ARI video on Intellectual Movement - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGoQ52C0PAg "I think it would require a detailed article to review this discussion, which would mostly be a critique. Overall, this discussion illustrates why Objectivism is not able to penetrate culture even at a moderate rate, despite so much effort and good intent. First of all, the title is misleading at many levels. We need to really understand the concept and identity of Movement in this context. Overall, its "Cultural Movement" which moves the civilization. Cultural Movement can further be "primarily divided" into Philosophical Movement, Intellectual Movement, Social Movement, Political Movement, and Industrial or Business Movement respectively. (We can also have pre-philosophical movement where fiction like Iliad leads to Ancient Greek Philosophy. But this is not deeply applicable to Objectivism, considering Rand developed pre-philosophy fiction and also philosophy). Secondarily, we further have important phases like Intellectual Activism, Social Activism, Political Activism, and Business Activism. Since there is no such conceptual clarity, the discussion is all over the place, whether its Abstract timeless ideas or daily journalism. Secondly, the discussion emphasizes ideas like Free Speech, History etc., which are already well established in Objectivist circles. Emphasis should be on ideas of Psychology, Sociology, Pure Economics (outside politics), and Management or Organizational Ethics. Specifically, more Objectivist literature in Sociology can develop focus on Cultural Movements better. Also, here the discussions on Ayn Rand's books' essays and book related to First Amendment were prolonged, and not directly relevant. Thirdly, Objectivism has come out of Philosophical Movement few decades back, but is still struggling to enter Intellectual Movement. We are still in prelude to Intellectual Movement with works of Dr. Smith, Dr. Brook and other Social or Philosophical Movement initiatives. However, without strong Intellectual academic works in Psychology etc., the social and some political initiatives are most likely to remain lacking. True, writing academic works like those by William James or John Locke is hard, but at least we should acknowledge specific gaps and work which needs to be done here. Overall, there should be much greater focus on establishing "Intellectual Movement" as differentiated from Philosophical or Social Movement. True, things have not happened at this speed in history. However, we have intellectual tools like DIM Hypothesis and Understanding of requirements for "The New Intellectuals". I have personally invested two decades of my life in Objectivism, and l am only now discovering the glaring gaps in the movement. Next generation of Objectivists should be more informed and educated to make a tangible difference."

CULTURAL IMPACT OF BAD MONETARY POLICIES Going beyond just inflationary impact of money printing policies INTRODUCTION When discussing monetary policies, the focus typically revolves around their direct impact on material goods and services. We often analyse how money printing and interest rates affect the costs and prices of various products. However, in this article, I aim to delve deeper into the cultural implications of how money is managed, particularly by the US Central Bank. I explore how these monetary policies are reshaping our social environment, going beyond the immediate economic effects to understand the broader societal changes at play. INTRODUCTION TO RELEVANT MONETARY POLICIES The economic landscape has experienced significant transformations due to various monetary policies implemented over the years. A key component of these transformations is the practice of money printing, particularly during crises. Notable instances include the 2008 financial crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the abandonment of the Gold Standard in the US economy. During the 2008 financial crisis, central banks worldwide responded with massive monetary interventions, including large-scale money printing to stabilize financial systems. This practice was repeated during the COVID-19 pandemic to support economies impacted by widespread lockdowns and disruptions. Another pivotal moment in monetary policy history was the removal of the Gold Standard by President Nixon in 1971, which untethered the US dollar from gold and allowed for more flexible adjustments to the money supply. MECHANISM OF DISTRIBUTING PRINTED MONEY Understanding how printed money is distributed is crucial to analyzing its broader impact. During the 2008 financial crisis, central banks injected liquidity into the financial system primarily through low-interest loans to banks. These banks, in turn, extended credit to businesses and individuals to stimulate economic activity. However, this approach had major negative impacts. For instance, some banks were pressured into accepting government funds despite not needing them, under the threat of rigorous Sarbanes-Oxley audits. This coercion was particularly evident with institutions like BB&T, which were strong-armed into participating in bailout programs. (Reasoning being that bailout money should not bring spotlight into badly managed banks). Such measures highlight the complex interplay between government policies and financial institutions in times of economic distress. CORRESPONDING FLOW WHEN GOLD IS BACKED FOR PRINTED CURRENCY Examining the distribution of printed money under a gold-backed system provides a contrasting perspective. When currency is backed by gold, the ability to print money is inherently constrained by the amount of gold reserves. This limitation necessitates more prudent and measured monetary policies. Distribution of Printed Money Under the Gold Standard Under the Gold Standard, the distribution of money involves a more stringent and controlled process. Banks could only issue loans and expand credit based on the gold reserves they held. This system ensures that the money supply grows at a more sustainable rate, reducing the risk of inflation and promoting financial stability. The Gold Standard enforces fiscal discipline on governments and financial institutions alike. The need to maintain sufficient gold reserves prevents excessive borrowing and spending, fostering a more stable and predictable economic environment. This stability, in turn, has cultural implications, promoting a work ethic centered around productivity and value creation rather than speculative financial maneuvers.(As I discuss in the end, other factors are also involved in promoting good work ethic. Focus here however is on monetary policy.) INSTITUTIONAL CORRUPTION IN COMPANIES RECEIVING LOW-INTEREST LOANS When monetary policies lead to unrestrained money printing and the subsequent distribution of low-interest loans, it often fosters an environment ripe for institutional corruption. Companies that receive these loans, especially during times of economic distress, are frequently incentivized to engage in behaviours that undermine long-term economic health and organizational integrity. This section explores the dynamics of such corruption and its cultural implications. a) Lack of sufficient Incentive to Earn Profits One of the primary issues with easy access to low-interest loans is that it diminishes the imperative for companies to generate sufficient profits through genuine value creation. When financial support is readily available, firms may prioritize maintaining operational continuity over pursuing profitable ventures. This shift in focus can lead to a complacent corporate culture where the goal is merely to sustain operations rather than innovate or improve efficiency. (At a top-level Company might still value profit to some extent, but like Alphabet, many ventures which are not profitable or even potentially profitable come up at the level of Business Unit or Teams within Business Unit. Plus, imperative to optimize is much less as compared to environment of Gold Standard based policies.) For example, during the 2008 financial crisis, many financial institutions received significant bailouts. The money was further lent to various businesses. While these businesses were not directly the cause of this, many of their inefficiencies became visible in the time of major crises. However, this bailout money kept many inefficient people in the system, instead of letting them go or even correctly counselling them. (Though there were significant layoffs, but many bad decision makers or their practices continued). This lack of pressure to be profitable resulted in a stagnant corporate environment where the bare minimum is done to stay afloat. b) No Monetary Incentive to Clean Up Dysfunctional Systems Without the financial imperative to perform, there is little motivation for companies to rectify internal issues or optimize their operations. When the primary incentive becomes merely securing and retaining access to cheap capital, the focus shifts away from internal accountability and efficiency improvements. This environment can lead to a culture where mediocrity is tolerated, and excellence is not sufficiently rewarded. Additionally, when companies are not driven by the need to generate profits, they may neglect essential aspects of their business, such as relevant innovation, customer service, and ethical practices. The absence of monetary pressure can lead to a complacent attitude toward addressing systemic problems, further entrenching inefficiencies and fostering a toxic work culture. c) Personal Incentives Versus Organizational Health In environments where low-interest loans and unrestrained money printing are prevalent, the incentives for individual performance and productivity often become misaligned with the health of the organization. Employees may be motivated by narrow personal gains — such as bonuses tied to superficial targets or the pursuit of job security through compliance with inefficient practices — rather than wider gains by contributing to the overall success and sustainability of the company. This misalignment can create a work culture where individuals prioritize their narrow misaligned goals over the organization’s long-term requirements. The result is a fragmented corporate environment where true productivity and value creation take a backseat to maintaining the status quo and ensuring misaligned personal gains. Talented individuals, who could drive innovation and efficiency, may find such environments stifling and uninspiring. Consequently, they may choose to leave the company or engage in “quiet quitting,” where they fulfill only the bare minimum requirements of their roles while diverting their energies to more fulfilling pursuits. A notable trend among these disillusioned employees is the shift towards working on open-source projects. This exodus of talent not only diminishes the quality and competitiveness of the company’s products but also destabilizes the market. Companies lose their best minds to more innovative and collaborative endeavors, which in turn accelerates the devaluation of their products and undermines their market position. (I think open source project participation is not a problem, if main projects of the corresponding developers are well aligned.) In this environment, there is no monetary incentive to clean up dysfunctional systems. The only motivation to address inefficiencies and improve processes is a personal desire to be productive and work in a clean, efficient system. This desire often stems from a preference for a professional environment that attracts and retains high-quality talent. However, without financial incentives to support these efforts, systemic issues persist, and the cycle of mediocrity continues. This dynamic not only hinders individual potential but also undermines the organization’s ability to achieve sustainable growth and long-term success. Overall, the unchecked printing of money and the distribution of low-interest loans can significantly impact institutional behaviour and corporate culture. By reducing the imperative to earn profits and clean up dysfunctional systems, these policies can foster an environment where mediocrity is tolerated, and individual incentives are misaligned with organizational health. The long-term cultural and economic ramifications of such policies highlight the need for more disciplined and responsible monetary practices that promote genuine value creation and sustainable growth. CASCADING EFFECT OF A SLOWLY DETERIORATING SYSTEM When unrestrained money printing and the distribution of low-interest loans become commonplace, the resulting institutional corruption can have far-reaching effects on the corporate culture. Over time, these practices can lead to a slow but pervasive deterioration of systems and standards, creating a cascade of negative impacts that ripple through various sectors and industries. This section examines how these effects manifest, particularly focusing on the tech industry, the erosion of innovation and quality, and the consequences of prioritizing short-term gains over long-term value. a) The Erosion of Culture in the Tech Industry The tech industry, known for its rapid innovation and dynamic work culture, is not immune to the adverse effects of bad monetary policies. When companies in this sector have access to easy money, they may become complacent, prioritizing growth through acquisitions and market expansion over genuine technological innovation and quality of service.(Organic and fully thought through mergers and acquisitions are not a problem.) In a scenario where low-interest loans are readily available, tech companies might focus on buying out competitors or entering new markets without a solid strategy for integration and value creation. This approach can dilute the company’s core competencies and erode its innovative culture. The pressure to meet short-term financial targets can overshadow the commitment to research and development, leading to stagnation and a decline in the quality of products and services. b) Innovation and Quality of Service Becoming Secondary As companies become more reliant on easy money, the emphasis on innovation and quality of service diminishes. The pursuit of short-term financial performance, driven by the availability of low-interest loans, often takes precedence over long-term value creation. This shift in priorities can lead to a decline in the overall quality of products and services offered to consumers. For example, tech companies might cut corners in product development, release unfinished or subpar products, or neglect customer service to save costs and meet financial targets. The focus shifts from creating groundbreaking but aligned technologies and delivering exceptional service to maintaining financial stability through superficial measures. This degradation in quality can erode consumer trust and loyalty, ultimately harming the company’s reputation and long-term success. This not only harms the industry but also undermines societal trust in businesses and their ability to deliver meaningful products and services, affecting society as a whole. Additionally, the emphasis on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives, and other similar programs can also contribute to the diversion of resources and attention away from core business functions. Employees and executives may become preoccupied with meeting CSR targets or promoting diversity metrics, potentially at the expense of innovation and service quality. This focus on superficial measures of success can further detract from the company’s ability to deliver exceptional products and services. As a result, the company may lose its competitive edge and struggle to maintain customer satisfaction in the long run. (Agreed, impact of monetary policies is not the only cause here. The decline in major academic institutions like Howard and Columbia is also to blame. However, monetary policy and access to easy money defers the harm of such bad initiatives, until it is too late.) In conclusion, the combination of easy money, short-term financial goals, and the diversion of attention towards peripheral initiatives can lead to a decline in innovation and service quality. Companies must strike a balance between meeting financial targets and prioritizing long-term value creation to ensure sustainable growth and success. c) Passionate Individuals Bringing Good Work Culture as Dispensable In an environment where this misaligned financial stability is prioritized over innovation and quality, passionate individuals who contribute to a positive work culture may be seen as dispensable. Managers focused on maintaining run rates and meeting financial targets may overlook the value of employees who drive innovation, creativity, and a positive organizational culture. This dynamic is evident in the series of acquisitions seen in the tech industry. Each acquisition often brings a new set of priorities and management styles, which may not always align with fostering a culture of innovation and excellence. The emphasis on financial performance through easy money, over cultural and intellectual contributions through genuine profit motive, can lead to the marginalization of talented and passionate individuals, stifling the company’s potential for innovation and growth. Acquisitions driven by cheap loans from printed money exacerbate this issue. When the primary goal is financial consolidation rather than strategic enhancement(though publicly given reasoning is still strategic enhancement, even when not thought through), the resulting organizational changes may not necessarily lead to better management or operational practices. Instead, the focus remains on maintaining financial stability and satisfying short-term objectives, further eroding the company’s ability to innovate and thrive. Overall, the cascading effect of a slowly deteriorating system, driven by bad monetary policies, is profound and far-reaching. In the tech industry, this manifests as an erosion of innovative culture, a decline in the quality of products and services, and the marginalization of passionate individuals who contribute to a positive work environment. The emphasis on short-term financial stability over long-term value creation can stifle innovation, reduce consumer trust, and ultimately harm the company’s, industry’s and society’s prospects for sustainable growth. Addressing these issues requires a re-evaluation of monetary policies and a commitment to fostering a culture of genuine value creation and innovation. THE CULTURAL IMPACT DUE TO BAD MONETARY POLICIES TAKES TIME The cultural impact of bad monetary policies manifests gradually. In countries like Venezuela or Zimbabwe, the immediate effect is runaway inflation, which overshadows any long-term cultural consequences. However, in the US, with its significant global influence and tightly knit corporate network, the adverse cultural impacts are exported far and wide, also affecting practices by collaborating companies globally. a) Managers and Aligned Innovators Managers often listen only to innovators, collaborators, and thinkers who align with their narrow worldview, even if it means sacrificing skills and competencies that would have been non-negotiable in a more disciplined monetary system. This selective attention reinforces existing biases and stifles genuine innovation and diverse thinking, which are critical for sustainable growth and success. b) Reinforcement of Mainstream Ideas The emphasis on aligning with narrow managerial worldviews reinforces mainstream ideas that are more communist in essence, where “ welfare of favoured employees as primary and production as secondary” becomes the norm. This ideology resists any organizational change that contradicts these ethos, even when such changes are necessary for improving efficiency and productivity. c) Companies as Partial Money Laundering Systems Essentially, many companies are becoming partial money laundering systems. With financial performance decoupled from actual productivity and value creation, companies may engage in practices that prioritize financial manipulation over genuine business activities. This behavior erodes the integrity of the corporate sector and fosters a culture of deceit and short-termism. d) Hedonistic Consumer Culture Further, the prevalence of bad monetary policies and the resulting corporate behaviors lead to a hedonistic consumer culture. There is little emphasis on a broad vision aligned with the company’s long-term goals. Instead, the focus shifts to immediate gratification and superficial success measures. This consumer culture, driven by easy access to credit and constant marketing, prioritizes short-term desires over long-term planning and responsibility, ultimately undermining the company’s sustainability and market stability. CONCLUSION The impact of bad monetary policies extends far beyond the immediate economic ramifications, permeating into the very fabric of corporate culture and customer service. The gradual degradation of service quality, driven by a focus on short-term financial performance rather than long-term value creation, is a direct consequence of unrestrained money printing and the availability of low-interest loans. This emphasis on immediate gains leads to a fragmented corporate environment where true productivity and customer satisfaction are sidelined. Moreover, the ripple effects of these policies influence society and culture as a whole, fostering a hedonistic consumer culture and undermining the values of innovation and quality. As companies prioritize superficial financial stability over genuine value creation, they erode not only their own long-term success but also the trust and loyalty of consumers, ultimately damaging societal trust and cultural integrity. However, it is important to recognize that bad monetary policies are not the sole contributors to these issues. Other significant factors, such as flawed ideas in academia and their influence on social environments and management practices, also play a crucial role. The propagation of ideologies that prioritize welfare of favoured employees over production and resist necessary organizational changes exacerbates the situation. While transitioning to more disciplined monetary policies, including a potential return to the gold standard, is a challenging but necessary step, it is not a panacea. These monetary reforms, while difficult, are likely to take much less time than addressing the deeper, more ingrained issues within academia and corporate management. Broader cultural and institutional changes will require sustained and concerted effort over a much longer period. Therefore, moving towards sound monetary practices is a vital and achievable first step that can be implemented relatively quickly, but it must be accompanied by broader systemic reforms to ensure sustainable growth and improved customer service in the long run. This comprehensive approach will help restore integrity and trust within both corporate and societal frameworks, promoting a more robust and resilient economy, society, and world. REFERENCES [1] MONETARY POLICY POST 2008 ECONOMIC CRISIS https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357083832_POLICY_EVALUATION_THE_EMERGENCY_ECONOMIC_STABILIZATION_ACT_OF_2008 [2] MONETARY POLICY POST COVID CRISIS https://mises.org/mises-wire/never-ending-story-bailouts-moral-hazard-and-low-economic-growth [3] TERMINATION OF GOLD STANDARD https://mises.org/mises-wire/end-gold-standard-fifty-years-monetary-insanity [4] ECONOMIC COERSION TO BB&T https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2306404/posts [5] GOLD STANDARD EXPLANATION https://money.com/what-is-the-gold-standard/ [6] IMPACT OF BAD MONETARY POLICIES ON CORPORATE CULTURE https://econpapers.repec.org/article/kaprevaec/v_3a26_3ay_3a2013_3ai_3a3_3ad_3a10.1007_5fs11138-013-0233-9.htm [7] ANALYSIS OF RECENT BAILOUT PROGRAMS https://prospect.org/economy/repeating-the-mistakes-of-the-2008-bailout/

Hello Objectivists! I've recently written an article exploring the often overlooked cultural impacts of bad monetary policies. While the immediate effects, like inflation, are well-documented, the long-term cultural consequences are equally significant and concerning. In this article, I delve into how unrestrained money printing and low-interest loans distort corporate culture, stifle innovation, and degrade customer service quality. The piece also examines the broader societal implications, highlighting how these economic practices erode trust and integrity not just within companies but across society as a whole. Moreover, I discuss the role of flawed academic ideas and their influence on social environments and management practices. While transitioning to sound monetary policies, such as a return to the gold standard, is challenging, it is a crucial and relatively quicker step compared to the deeper cultural and institutional reforms required. I believe this discussion is particularly relevant to our community's values of rational self-interest, productivity, and genuine value creation. I'd love to hear your thoughts and engage in a discussion on how we can advocate for these necessary changes. Full Article in next post Looking forward to your insights! Stay rational and productive!

I have been a major advocate of Central Purpose of Life (CPL). You can check "Study Group for Objectivists" in "The Laboratory" from my other id. As can be seen in one of the Study Group, one of my core purpose was to promote thoughts behind innovations like iPhone, and adopt them for future innovation. However, I have come to realize that we are slowly entering a stage where lack of intellectual foundation will become bottleneck in most of our CPLs, and sooner or later we might have to shift our CPL, so that later generation is in the position to execute original CPL, while we build intellectual foundation for it. I think equivalent example can be Benjamin Franklin and others reducing their time for science, and giving more and more of it to Politics. While crucial at a macro level, political bottlenecks will be least of our worries. It will be lack of proper psychological foundations for self-improvement(check my other forum post here), micro-aggressions as in Big Tech in the lines of pre-Musk twitter and so on, rational principles from enlightenment like principles of management being misinterpreted etc. Just to clarify, collective thought was not my term, it came from ChatGPT during proof reading. However, I let it be because I thought context will clarify that I am not promoting radically opposing ideas. Example of "collective thought" I have in mind is not same idea in multiple individuals... Instead, it is more like one individual developing principle, few individuals articulating same principle through various forums as activists, and one more individual applying that principle in a more specific case after absorbing it from the activists. Example can be Haley using Newtonian principles to predict the path of comet for 76 year timeframe. Finally, I think heart of the disagreement here is the idea that we can directly apply philosophical principles day to day consistently. However, as I state in the post-script of the first post, we need intermediate principles from intellectuals in addition to already established philosophical principles. Same has been articulated in your prior post here. Further however, I think this type of application is absolutely necessary and relatively urgent (in medium term).

I see it differently. There are often communities in free markets or partly free markets where producers like farmers, scientists, engineers, businessmen, intellectuals, and lawmakers share their ideas. These communities discuss what's happening in their respective fields, improvements in seeds and fertilizers, wage trends, new technologies, and more. This forum, being a realm of ideas, serves a similar purpose. We are exchanging our experiences and interpretations—what's working in the marketplace of ideas, what has worked in the past, and brainstorming how our available skills and resources can be best utilized. Based on my personal experience over the past 20 years, I have identified a few gaps in the movement. This is my attempt to organize our community to better identify these gaps and navigate more effectively in the future. Your input and collaborative effort are crucial for this process. Together, we can leverage our collective knowledge and experiences to make a more significant impact.

Some examples of non-objectivist ideologies and their spread in society to visualize spread of Objectivism better. These are reposted from one of the discussion in WhatsApp Group. (Reservation is Indian form of affirmative action, but much more rigid and deep)

I agree that there are some questions which should be answered before the philosophical stage can be completed. However, I think most of those are answered, at least in DIM Hypothesis and How We Know. I think the idea of Measurement Inclusion in Dr. Peikoff's and Dr. Harriman's thesis on induction offers something in the lines of formulating and validating propositions. Due to Objectivism's much greater emphasis on Induction, this theory of Propositions is quite different from that of Aristotle. Remaining ideas like Non-Political ethics are indeed highlighted in the seven Virtues and works of Dr. Tara Smith. Beyond this is Intellectual stage. Work of professors in universities and appropriate course material, which is derived from Objectivism, is also mostly Intellectual stage. The original post highlights some of the intellectual materials which can be used to derive more material based on the overall approach. Applying the ideas of intellectual stage in schools I think moves to the realm of social stage, and beyond that I will consider it Social Activism (for example ideas being discussed in non-intellectual families and gatherings).

The fundamental idea behind refutation of Analytic-Synthetic dichotomy is the discovery that concept is not only its essence (analytic or necessary part by other philosophers), but all the attributes which are not specified in essence or definition. Rationality for example is the essence of Man, but Concept Man includes distinctive characteristics like bipedalism, speech etc. Some of these characteristics may be derived from rationality, and some might be epistemologically independent, like bipedalism. Some might be common with other animals, like having a skin, though the specific nature of skin might be different and unique. The idea that Concept is not just its essence, but all attributes, is not possible unless one accepts the process by which essence is derived from Observation and Thought. That process is Measurement Omission. Therefore, even though Measurement Omission may not be explicitly mentioned in refutation Analytic-Synthetic dichotomy, it is implied in the fundamental idea behind the refutation. Bigger point however is that irrespective of Dr. Peikoff being tertiary philosopher or not, we need to be clear about the stage Objectivism is in. And it is very important that resources are marshalled, without majorly compromising on the interests of Objectivist adherents, and the ideology is pushed to Intellectual Stage, then Social Stage, then Political Stage, and then Businesses can also start adopting it heavily and consistently in their office culture. Even if we win short-term battles and debates, long-term and medium-term, time is running out. But good news is we have Internet and ChatGPT like tools, to accelerate the movements. But this cannot be done without some threshold of committed individuals.

Free-Speech is a necessary condition. Elimination of Government Subsidy is good to have, but not fundamental, at least in high income countries. Further however, these two are not sufficient conditions. The movements I highlight are needed for Objectivism to become dominant.

Analytic-Synthetic Dichotomy article, while crucial, is not fundamental. It is the application of Concept Formation through Measurement-Omission(discovered by Rand), applied to Kantian Epistemology.

I think criteria for Philosophy being mainstream is NOT Politician Quoting it. Instead, it should be considered mainstream when its Politics is comprehensively applied in culture. For e.g. even though Aristotle was quoted a lot in Renaissance, he did not really become mainstream until American Revolution discovered and applied Political implication of his Metaphysics and Epistemology.

As mentioned in this article, the criteria for philosopher being primary is not completeness or originality of specific philosophical ideas (though Rand's work I think was close to complete). Instead, the philosopher should be original in answering key questions in Metaphysics, Epistemology, and optionally Ethics, Politics, and Aesthetics. Original ideas of Dr. Peikoff like solving problem of induction will make him prominent Objectivist Intellectual besides Tertiary Philosopher, instead of Primary philosopher. Similar to Mohammad denouncing Idolatry makes him Platonic intellectual, even though Plato himself never advocated the denunciation. Reason for Mohammad being Platonic Intellectual and Intellectual Activist is that he brought implication of Plato's metaphysics to Aesthetics comprehensively. Blasphemy being application of Platonic Politics of Authoritarian Philosopher King.

REFERENCE TO SOME MORE DISCUSSIONS ON THE SUBJECT REDDIT SAMPLE FACEBOOK Objectivist Friends Group Australia | Please check my article titled - "***HOW CAN OBJECTIVISM BECOME A DOMINANT IDEOLOGY | Facebook SAMPLES

NATURE VS NURTURE Exploring Role Of Genetics & Upbringing In Psychological Developments, Based On Latest Studies INTRODUCTION Until a century back at least, role of heredity in human development of psychological traits was well acknowledged. However, in past many decades, industrial and IT revolutions have led to extremely fast changes in society. As a result, variations in income, profession, locations, & lifestyle have been huge, just in a generation. This has caused many to question the significance of Heredity or Nature in brain development, and give more emphasis to Upbringing or Education or Nurture. Few examples given for primacy of nurture are like huge difference in success of Mukesh & Anil Ambani, many Bollywood actors or Politicians failing even though they had highly successful parents, etc. Other than that, racist theories by followers of Hitler shoots down any discussion in favor of Nature, even before the discussion starts. RECENT STUDIES Agreed, some human races being superior to others was a hasty application of Darwin’s theory of evolution. Studies and inferences by neurogeneticist Dr. Kevin Mitchell in his book Innate: How the Wiring of Our Brains Shapes Who We Are however are more relevant. Most significant is the study of identical twins(monozygotic), fraternal twins(dizygotic), siblings, and population in general. Psychological traits of individuals were IQ and Behavioral traits. Behavioral traits can be further classified as Five independent psychological traits in an individual. These are Extroversion or urge to be with people, Neuroticism or different levels of anxiety among individuals in similar situations, consciousness or level of systemic behavior by the individual, agreeableness or friendliness, and openness to new experience. The repeatability of measurements in the study was 90% for IQ tests, and around 70% for psychological traits on an average. That is, if same individual took the similar psychological test again, his or her score was 70% same as before, on an average. The scores were most matching for identical twins, then fraternal twins or siblings, and then strangers. Further, there was no significant difference between identical twins raised in same family or in different families. Most importantly, difference between siblings where one of the person was adopted, was equivalent to difference among strangers. Final argument for the importance of genetics in psychology is personal. I spent more than a decade to work in software domain which was not growing and not changing fast. The reason was to fix significant gaps in soft skills like verbal communication and decision making. However, even after major effort and focus, the improvements were significantly sub-optimal. I still find myself quite similar to what I was 15 years back. The take away however is not that one should stop self-improvement through self-effort. It is to highlight that role of genetics even in self-help needs to be considered and understood. PSYCHOLOGICAL VARIATIONS BETWEEN MALES AND FEMALES Dr. Mitchell’s book highlights differences in male and female psychology. Prominent among these are social skills and ability to articulate emotions, the traits in which females excel, on an average. Further, to reinforce this point, we can consider implications of human brain having evolved in mostly hunter environment. [200,000 years as hunters against 10,000 years as farmers and 300 years in industry. Plus, evolution of ancestors like Homo Erectus and others over a few million years]. Human children requiring significant care after birth, and significant risks during pregnancy compared to other mammals is the key factor in the variation of male and female psychologies. Lack of requirement to hunt made females less aggressive on an average compared to males. Female dependency on male partner, extended family, & tribe made evolution of neural wiring with social traits more advantageous for them. Extrapolating hunter mindset further, men are good at spatial tasks, focused work requiring deep and long-term thought, and their modern versions like mathematics and engineering. Similarly, women are better at multi-tasking in activities not requiring deep thought. Emphasizing these differences may seem like a digression, but point here is to highlight that males and females have differences in genetic, spatial, and social adoption, which in turn impacts their psychology. IMPLICATION OF THE STUDY Key to successful navigation in life is person’s mind. Education plays an important role in this. Role of genetics however was further undermined by the arguments like – If criminals are not controlled by their upbringing and their choices, then why should someone be punished for crimes? (Initial arguments are in the introduction). More realistically, such arguments can be refuted when we realize that genetics is not the only factor in psychological traits, but a primary factor. That is, I am not trying to undermine self-improvement through awareness of self, surroundings, and society. I am implying that acknowledgment of the significant role of genetics can make self-help more effective. For e.g. we have someone like Steve Jobs who has high score in Extroversion & Neuroticism. If we accept Freudian literature and assume that these traits come mainly through childhood experience, then they can be improved by looking at causes and reversing them through Will Power based improvements. Practically, this would mean that one should list down causes of anxiety(due to Neuroticism), and try to avoid oneself from going in situations which have caused anxiety in past. Or perhaps make a mental note not to be too anxious, before one goes into such situations. However, if the cause is genetic, then suppressing or planning with known causes will only result in new sources turning up. Instead, better approach will be to visualize self in potentially anxious situations, and prepare techniques to minimize or eliminate responses which will have negative outcome. (Avoidance or planning for known situations which can potentially lead to a negative outcome may still be applied, but preparation through visualization should be considered primary). SPECIFIC SELF-IMPROVEMENT TECHNIQUES Self-improvement after acknowledging primacy of genetics means that we should spend significant thought in learning from experience of father or uncles or even grandfather and his family. One of the significant challenges in life is to understand what exactly are real likes and dislikes of self, and how should one react in unfamiliar situations? If we ignore the role of genetics, then trial and error, literature, and experiences of self and people we know (like friends and colleagues) are the only sources to understand self. (We can add family members also to the list of people we know, but without considering the role of heredity, their role in understanding self I think is insufficient). However, more emphasis on learning from experiences of father & ancestors is more efficient, if we acknowledge and apply role of heredity in development of self. In case you are wondering why am I focusing on male self-help instead of involving females also? First of all, as I mentioned psychological traits and their emphasis in females are different, on an average. Me being male, I have a better understanding of achieving goals originating and executing in male psychology. Further however, as we also saw that social traits impact female psychology and survival more; it looks like females are more capable of changing based on social situations, especially after marriage. I have seen greater diversity in the behaviors of female siblings than male siblings. Perhaps greater social impact in female psychology on an average might be the reason. SIDE NOTE ON STUDIES The study involving high psychological similarity among identical twins forms a key component in the foundation of this article. However, question arises, if the original genome is same in this case, why are there any differences at all among this type of siblings? The book explains this by considering life as a chain organic reaction, which begins with fetus. Starting with this first cell we have various stages of embryo, baby, toddler, child, teenager and so on. The final and intermediate products in this chain reaction depend not just on initial state(genetic blueprint of fetus that is), but also conditions in which the chain reactions happen. Conditions like temperature, pressure, concentration of different biochemicals and perhaps few more factors. Therefore, the final two babies are not exactly same even in case of identical twins. The variation of course increases for fraternal twins, normal siblings, and strangers. The book also further minimizes the role of upbringing in family and even school. It argues that same traits which might seem like they are originating because of parents’ guidance of child, might also be rooted in genetics. Since genetics of parents, father in particular, are similar to genetics of child, son in particular; therefore, environment and practices which build child’s psychological traits in family are also significantly driven by corresponding genetic structure. With regards to teacher’s behavior with child impacting the traits, it has been observed that teachers often treat children based on their overall behavior and temperament. Same teacher will likely respond to aggressive child differently, compared to a friendly one. And therefore, to some extent teachers’ impact is also determined by child’s genetics and genetic structure of child’s family. CONTINUING SPECIFIC SELF-IMPROVEMENT TECHNIQUES Why genetics based introspection, and why introspection in general? I think there are three types of things one needs to consider to navigate various life situations. The environment in which the navigation is happening, tools and machines available with self for it, and understanding of self. The environment can be geographical environment if one is navigating rainy day or a hot day. Tools can be umbrella, or suitable clothes, or air conditioning. Self-awareness can involve one’s capability in dealing with corresponding environment. For e.g. my native is in a cold region, and therefore it is much easier for me to navigate winters in Bangalore compared to people with natives in warmer regions. Similarly for navigating professional situation, environment is the market in which the profession is needed. Tools can be machines like computers and cars, or intellectual tools like management and communication techniques. Self-awareness in such situations however will involve psychological traits like degree of extroversion or introversion, agreeableness or more independent evaluation, conservative or more open to new experience and so on. Someone who can evaluate self based on heredity of family is in a better position to navigate through various life challenges. Ideology or nurture becomes more important only at a very large scale or on top of the profession. For most circumstances however, I think genetics should be given more consideration than is usual these days. Same logic I think can be applied in personal relationships as well. CONCLUSION The effectiveness of evaluating psychological traits from genetics was derived from experience of our forefathers with domestication of animals. They however went overboard beyond reason with rigid caste system or feudal system or slavery. Later we might have over-corrected in past few decades with primary emphasis on nurture. Currently with latest psychological inferences like those by Dr. Mitchell, I think we can introspect better and improve better, even if precise quantification is still not possible today, for the attributes in human mind. Visualization and preparation of self in unfamiliar situations, managed through the lens of genetics and rational ideas, seems like a good option. REFERENCES Reference to Book - https://www.amazon.in/Innate-How-Wiring-Brains-Shapes/dp/0691173885 Innate: How the Wiring of Our Brains Shapes Who We Are Twin Studies - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1w7wROvqbhaEsf7NmnBGOMiuB5BVtu2Vh/view Reference to the Five Psychological Traits - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PXGzk_tDPwvTjQiskKst5uYC2VxqHYoc/view?usp=sharing Differences between Males & Female - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uNonepMJE_PZoVA6wsGHeGfCd1NmYfsj/view?usp=sharing Role of Development from Genetic Blueprint - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IDB2O0AD1tpjXJGV41d-TdAsOJ6BWDa5/view?usp=sharing Nature of Nurture - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1x4QAPfqv6ca3Ffx2UrSxv67iFTI28ViI/view?usp=sharing