Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jamesj

  • Rank

Previous Fields

  • Country
    United States
  • State (US/Canadian)
  • Real Name

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    Seattle WA
  1. Despite Sparta's culture and the movie's historical accuracy, it was fantastic to hear the words "Reason", "Freedom", and "Mystics" in one movie. On the Michael Medved Show, a Hollywood producer called in to say that market sampling has determined that this generation (the NC-17 generation) wants flawed hero's. Apparently the flaws make the hero's more realistic to the "therapy generation". I was worried that this marketing strategy would mean that Atlas Shrugged would fail in the box office. But now, with the success of 300, I think Atlas Shrugged has a great chance.
  2. Moose, you're dropping context. You're confusing the context of law enforcement profiling, the definition of the word Diversity, and the non-concept, Diversity, which is political Multi-culturalism. In fact, I think the Progressives who hi-jacked the word Diversity, planned such confusion, so they can keep the term subjective, and fill the void with their whims.
  3. I just wanted to add, that the problem with the bigot, or the racist, is that they look at perceptual level attributes ( i.e. big nose, black skin, perceived Mexican heritage), assign people with those attributes into groups, and then treat the individual, as the group (i.e. you big nosed are all alike), with different behavior toward favored groups, as to non-favored groups. The diversity movement groups people by their perceived attributes, and treats people as favored, or non-favored groups, just like the bigot. Only, the diversity movement has to employ techniques, or group think classes, to constantly convince themselves, or dupe themselves, into thinking they are really compassionate, and not bigots. This is different than conceptualizing Man as a rational being, affording individual rights, and then dealing with people in context, by your rational mind, to their rational mind. And it's certainly different than diversifying your portfolio, the subjects you teach, or the meals you have throughout the week. I wanted to add the above because I didn't read in the conversation above, that Diversity IS the old stigmatized Multi-culturalism. They are the same perceptual thinking, political movement. A diversity of opinions, feelings, and experiences, in a college entrance, group therapy session, is not the same as the Progressive movement of Diversity.
  4. I just watched Dio's Evil or Divine. I couldn't believe how good it was! Stopped following him after Sacred Heart. After watching his on stage dragon slaying, and listening to Claude Schnell's keyboard solo, even as a high schooler, I thought Dio was done for. Wow, was I wrong. As far as sense of life goes, I always thought Dio was writing irony. Don't talk to Strangers as his warning against suppressing risk, dressed up in an old parental bromide. Heaven and hell is anything but about the "physical places". I always thought of Dio and Maiden as conceptual poetry, wrapped in melody, and harmony, not anything like their perceptual level marketing. Is that rationalizing?
  5. You must see The Incredibles. The Objectivist Ethics will strike you hard. With no mention of God as a source, the movie exalts the individual against the collective, individualism, Egoism, Capitalism, the family, each person bringing their personal gifts in teamwork, love, people as value, heroism, productiveness, honesty, charity, and even the Good. It's rare to see this kind of movie on the screen. There's a short Also, the continuing buzz of this movie, even in it's 2nd week ($143,000,000), when movies aren't really grossing like they used to, makes me wonder why we, with Objectivist ethics, aren't writing movies like this.
  6. Since this is my first time, I'm treating this as an exercise in discovery. My group will contain a top to bottom mixture of the org chart hierarchy, from most all areas in the company. 20 of us will be sitting in a conference room for 4 hours, watching power-point slides, round tabling biased scenarios, from the news, and participating in group exercises, with multi-colored beads, and emotionalized communication tools, such as the "Rolling the D.I.E." (appropriately named). I'm actually a fascinated by the whole thing. I'm reading "Racism", "Global Balkanization", "The Age of Envy", and whatever else Ayn Rand has on the subject. It's a change to compare and contrast. It's also astonishing, that the language of the materials is so ideologically implicit. What comes out through the childish parable, is that the Baker, as an individual, has to go against his nature, and his conceptual level values, and "briefly change his lifestyle", thereby occupying himself, with a perceptual level, physical "tastes" object, in order to sacrifice it, and he, to a Collective, "pleasing whole", presided over, and controlled by, a whim-worshiping, irrational King. I don't think my company realizes who is the Baker, and who is the King.
  7. Perfect. I didn't think of it in that context. I have decided to irrationally co-operate for the time being. Defection is in the near future.
  8. It's my office's turn for our new, mandatory, 4 hours of "Diversity Development & Education" training. To set the tone, the following metaphor, as well as the lesson we are to learn from the metaphor, is printed in the introductory workbook: Introduction: There is an ancient parable of a king who decides to celebrate his birthday by hosting an enormous banquet for his entire kingdom. He sends out dozens of envoys to proclaim the day and time of the event, adding that while a gift is not required, each attendee must bring with him a jug of wine. At the onset of the event, the jugs are to be combined in a voluminous cauldron from which glasses will be filled for all to drink and be merry. However, the town baker, busily kneading and folding the dough in his shop, decides he doesn't’t really have time to leave and visit the shop that sells spirits. Instead, he figures he can just fill a jug with water and quickly pour it into the cauldron without anyone’s notice. Well, on the day of the celebration, all the king’s subjects fill into the hall and pour their jugs’ contents into the vat, and our noble baker slyly does the same. The king stirs the contents, holds the first glass up to his lips, and drinks. Seconds later, his glass sails through the air. Enraged, he screams out. “Water!” In this story, the baker did not make the effort to briefly change his lifestyle and counted on the rest of the kingdom to contribute real jugs of wine. He did not believe in the power of the individual and figured the rest of the citizens would do their part and the secret would stay with him solely. However, as was later discovered, he was not alone. Not a single subject had bothered to bring the wine, and consequently, the blend was uniform and tasteless. As we can see, the individual does matter. Here, one person could have made a difference by bringing along a single jug of wine, and that by itself would have added a distinct taste to the mixture. This “taste” is what multiculturalism is all about. The different jugs of wine represent the diversity of society’s individuals, the different “tastes” of our culture. Unlike the parable, we must not combine our differences into one “melting pot,” averaging out the different tastes into one unrecognizable sum, but rather we affirm the value of each individual, blending his special flavors and strengths with the rest to create a pleasing whole. Of course, this is amusing, if not jaw dropping. However, this Diversity training is taught by true believers, who put their heart into the materials, (3 workbooks, approx. 35 pages each, chalk full of skewed logic, package deal, agreement frame checklists, and unrealistic, forced behavior, group activities) and whose sole job is to train all corporate levels, in all 50 states, as well as update company policy, setting the tone, and atmosphere, for our workplace. I found this fascinating, and really something to chew on, or apart! Hope you liked it.
  9. I agree. Michael Moore is just the Leni Riefenstahl of the Fundementalist Liberal set. The war of the Mystic vs. Skeptic has definatly intensified since the 2000 election. At work, in the media, in my friends, it's everywhere. It's not even as though there's a wrestle for balance, this is out-and-out power lusting. Maybe it's just location. Living in Seattle, which is an extremist city, I here political rhetoric everywhere. Coffee shops, signs on houses, constant activism on corners of streets, etc. I wonder if fundementalism getting worse, is a matter of the constant protection of ideological flanks we have to go through on a daily basis?
  10. I totally agree. I love listening to Ayn Rand. One thing the printed speeches don't give you, is the Q&A sessions. Faith and Force, and Apollo & Dionysus, have great Q&A's. Also, OPAR online has many Q&A sessions, where Ayn Rand fills in for Leonard Peikoff. The Q&A's are great for a different perspective of recent history, as well as listening to Ayn Rands excellent rapport with her audiences.
  11. If your edit isn't of the Photoshop magnitude, you can edit a .giff file with the MS Paint application provided with MS windows. The program has all your basic tools, and you can save your files in different formats. Good luck!
  12. I have a friend who works for a famous anti-tobacco non-profit. He is a Grass-Roots Coordinator/Lobbiest. He makes about $40,000 per year. I was shocked at how much money goes through his cause. The ads you see on TV, before movies in the theaters, and on billboards, are paid for. He has legislation strategy meetings, and writing campaign "Legislative Action Alert" networks, that provide up to minute responses to congressional voting. He works for a national non-profit, so he is 1 of at least 250 other national advocates, magnified by the other 100's of advacates, from the other national non-profits that network and rally together. It is truely 70's, Leftist activism, and when he tells me about his job, I get angry, and awe struck. Ayn Rand, and Edwin Locke, quit within reason, due to the risks to their health. But make no mistake that now-a-days, smokers are the last persecuted minority because the mystics of muscle have made carrers in persecuting them.
  • Create New...