Atlas Summit 2014


Guyau

Recommended Posts

Has anyone heard any news on what happened, or didn't', at the Atlas Summit?

J

Not me. But I'm willing to bet there were some strongly worded emails, the specter of a denunciation or two, and even the "renouncing" of a previous alliance afoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 140
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Has anyone heard any news on what happened, or didn't', at the Atlas Summit?

J

Not me. But I'm willing to bet there were some strongly worded emails, the specter of a denunciation or two, and even the "renouncing" of a previous alliance afoot.

Damn, that is one "peculiar" website...I know India is supposedly the 2nd most impacted country by Ayn.

However, if I was a rational individual in search of her ideas and this hit me visually...hmm

Can almost her the Sitars twelve (12) tones in the background.

http://www.atlassociety.org/as

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Jonathan's question is: what happened at the Atlas Summit?

Just to remind everyone of the original context, recall that Will Thomas suggested that people with questions about Harriman's appearance ought to show up at The Atlas Summit "and find out" where he stood on his prior connection to ARI and Leonard Peikoff. I predicted that he would be asked no tough questions, and would effectively say nothing. What happened? I didn't go, but I asked someone who did. Summary version: He was asked no tough questions, and effectively said nothing.

In fact, he disavowed the very suggestion that he had ever been closely connected with ARI or Peikoff at all. And really: how on earth could anyone have assumed that he was? Yes, he got some money from them, refused to disavow their denunciations or party lines, co-signed letters of denunciation with Peikoff, co-authored a book with Peikoff, edited the Journals under their auspices, and has kept mum about his friendship with David Kelley for about a quarter of a century. But I mean, come on--associated? With ARI? David Harriman? Just because a little ARI money has found its way into his bank account for a few years? I mean, that kind of thing happens to the best of us, right? You wake up one morning, check your bank balance, and there it is--another one of those annoying direct deposits from ARI. But you can't be held responsible for something like that.

Apparently, Harriman also distanced himself from all ideological party lines. He was, he said, a purely independent thinker, interested only in the truth, principally the truth about induction.

He ended his remarks with a sales pitch for a bridge he wanted to sell people--somewhere in Brooklyn, I think it was. A long list of people expressed a desire to buy it, then re-sell it, offering to donate the proceeds to TAS. I believe the auction will take place at the 2015 Atlas Summit, so make sure you go and "find out what happens" to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You wake up one morning, check your bank balance, and there it is--another one of those annoying direct deposits from ARI.

Thanks, Irfan. As usual you don't mince words. Did you receive a review copy of my book? Feel free to blast it with both barrels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could be a whore for an ARI direct deposit. Never mind all the nasty things I've said about ARI and Leonard Peikoff; I'll just change my name to Peter Brant.

--Brant Peter (Gaede)

where do I go for my induction physical?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could be a whore for an ARI direct deposit. Never mind all the nasty things I've said about ARI and Leonard Peikoff, I'll just change my name to Peter Brant.

--Brant Peter (Gaede)

where do I go for my induction physical?

I am afraid the deposit for your induction physical would come with too many deductions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sanity? Morality? Dehypocrisy? Knowledge? Decency?

--Brant

there goes my evil self (at least I now know the power of the dark side! Yum!)

maybe bank robbery----let me think on it! Baby, baby let me think on it, let me think on it and I'll give you my answer in the morning!

I have to know right now! Will you still be my bank robber in the morning? Get that money, love that money, spend that money (on me) in the morning? To the end of time?

Yes, yes, yes! Until the end of time! Now I'm praying for the end of time . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Jonathan's question is: what happened at the Atlas Summit?

Just to remind everyone of the original context, recall that Will Thomas suggested that people with questions about Harriman's appearance ought to show up at The Atlas Summit "and find out" where he stood on his prior connection to ARI and Leonard Peikoff. I predicted that he would be asked no tough questions, and would effectively say nothing. What happened? I didn't go, but I asked someone who did. Summary version: He was asked no tough questions, and effectively said nothing.

In fact, he disavowed the very suggestion that he had ever been closely connected with ARI or Peikoff at all. And really: how on earth could anyone have assumed that he was? Yes, he got some money from them, refused to disavow their denunciations or party lines, co-signed letters of denunciation with Peikoff, co-authored a book with Peikoff, edited the Journals under their auspices, and has kept mum about his friendship with David Kelley for about a quarter of a century. But I mean, come on--associated? With ARI? David Harriman? Just because a little ARI money has found its way into his bank account for a few years? I mean, that kind of thing happens to the best of us, right? You wake up one morning, check your bank balance, and there it is--another one of those annoying direct deposits from ARI. But you can't be held responsible for something like that.

Apparently, Harriman also distanced himself from all ideological party lines. He was, he said, a purely independent thinker, interested only in the truth, principally the truth about induction.

He ended his remarks with a sales pitch for a bridge he wanted to sell people--somewhere in Brooklyn, I think it was. A long list of people expressed a desire to buy it, then re-sell it, offering to donate the proceeds to TAS. I believe the auction will take place at the 2015 Atlas Summit, so make sure you go and "find out what happens" to it.

I was not planning to go to the Atlas Summit, primarily because the brochure sent to me from TAS did not show many topics or speakers that I was interested enough to traipse to New Hampshire to attend. This is not to say that the topics and speakers may have been interesting to others. But after the rather blunt exchange after TAS announced that Harriman was to speak at their conference, I did not feel my attendence would be welcomed, at least by David Kelley.

But, as some may have guessed based on my initial post on the TAS site, that I found the invitation to David Harriman as "nauseating," I am afraid to say that, had I attended, it is unlikely that I would have sat through the entire conference without taking that opportunity to publicly ask Harrimann for "clarification." From Irfan Khawaja's report, apparently no one did ask Harriman, at least publicly, any pointed questions re his jumping from the ARI ship.

According to a conversation with someone who attended ARI's OCON 2014, the absence of Harriman and his defection to the despised "Kelleyite moral tolerationists," was also not brought up with Leonard Peikoff (who attended and judging from some photos from the conference published on Facebook, looked rather well and even participated in some of the evening entertainment, as a member of a jazz combo. No, really.). This is all rather curious, since Leonard had gone to great (one might say, extreme) lengths, considering his angry involvement in defending Harrimam from a rather mild criticism from John McCaskey, resulting in McCaskey resigning from the Anthem Foundation). Peikoff's contributions to Harriman's The Logical Leap, and Harriman's contribution to Peikoff's The DIM Hypothesis, are quite evident.

Well, maybe they were just trying to be polite or at least put the best face upon it by pretending that the Harriman defection was non-controversial, or that there was no issue here at all. Or (implied by his not being mentioned) ARI/OCON acting as if Harriman did not exist.- at least as a topic for polite conversation.But this attempt, by TAS or by ARI, to "sweep it all under the rug" will not last. ARI's previous attempts to re-write the history of the Objectivist movement, by excising or minimizing, or in some cases outright denying, the contributions of both Nathaniel and Barbara Branden, are impossible to be maintained, at least in a free society, where the Brandens' contributions can be easily ascertained..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never heard of Peikoff being a musician. What instrument does he play?

He had a piano in his Colorado home that he sold when he moved back to LA. I think his wife had an AF Academy teaching gig while he was writing his DIM book. I got the impression the piano was for him.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check out the Andrew Lewis Trio at OCON 2014. One of them is "The Great OPAR," himself! The guy with the Elton Johm glasses! Also click to enlarge the one showing the piano - and there is Lenny. .

https://www.facebook.com/groups/826754814006397/

The description also says that sometimes the the trio is a quartet (maybe Nathaniel on the..... Theremin ?? Here's a Theremin example :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTZK9FNgK74

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Krell,

Here is the playlist on YouTube:

http://youtu.be/eSzWqMx-8OY?list=PLnHOyZsmJrozMW0HnX1fLfKfQA9rlrHuk

And the Panel and Closing Event that includes Harriman you linked to:

Michael

I woudn't count on anybody building the John Galt line among that crew any time soon.

I made it through about 36 minutes before I couldn't take it anymore. Garth Brooks has a song with the line "sometimes I thank God for unanswered prayers." I now wish to thank Leonard Peikoff for helping me avoid the Objectivist "movement" of the last 25 years.

And please, can somebody please--pretty please--pass out cough drops to Objectivist speakers from now on? What is with all the literal and figurative the throat clearing in Objectivism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While Barbara Branden would definitely disagree if she were still with us, I don't think there is an Objectivist movement. Such as it may have been was most pronounced in the NBI 1960s then it blew up with The Break of 1968. In the 1960s, however, it was mostly a bunch of people listening to lectures and reading books and antagonizing their college professors. You see, it was "earlier than you think." So this "summit" isn't referring to anything identifiable if I'm right, and if I'm right they're riding a dead horse.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David,

You should have gone farther for strange.

Will Thomas seemed like he was on the verge of crying as he wound up the last part. You can catch that part starting at around 58:41.

It was odd.

There are some undercurrents going on in this talk I can't put my finger on.

Michael

Sounds like he's saying goodbye. He also sounds like an acknowledgement there is no real movement for "practical" efforts are needed.

When I stopped paying much attention to TAS in the late 1980s (early 90s?) it was simply because I couldn't see the value aside from being not-ARI.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are Objectivist movements.

It almost breaks along Jewish religions structure. Lots of exceptions also. No concept of unity that is for sure.

Orthodox being ARI.

The decision to abstain from politics is basically self destructive for a movement of this kind.

I agree with Brant that the 1968 schism derailed the movement and I am reasonably sure that it cannot get back on the tracks.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks.

He was a speaker at a NJ Tea Party day long conference that I was at. Real good speaker. Nice guy, we talked for a bit in the area with the tables for different books, organizations etc.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/391047/enduring-power-story-jonah-goldberg

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent link. Apropos is how Rand was a great story teller and how that did so much to power her ideas. Once the ideas are more closely examined the more tentative many of them become. The philosophy of Ayn Rand--Objectivism--is a tremendous story. But a philosophy of objectivism doesn't even have a capital letter to show itself off. I personally couldn't continue to call myself an Objectivist without using a lower-case "o", which I couldn't stand, so I stopped calling myself an Objectivist. I'm simply not willing to have a personal philosophy that's as much a myth as truth. Truth gets the short stick in such a combination.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete,

Thanks for pointing to that.

I fully agree with Goldberg, especially this quote:

Ideas are surprisingly easy to let go of, if pried loose by the right story. Stories, meanwhile, are shockingly difficult to let go of, even if they convey a bad idea.

That's why I have been studying story so hard.

I know one thing. A story engages more parts of the brain at the same time than any idea ever could.

In other words, you can embed an idea in a story. That's easy.

Going from the other end, you can use stories to explain or illustrate parts of an idea, but if you try to embed a story in the actual idea, you will discover that underneath, the story came first and is more fundamental. For example, there is no capitalism without the story of good people building things and freely trading with each other in peace.

I just had a whim. Let's have some fun. Here is a typical sequence of events in a real-life storyline that ensnares lots of young people when they first discover Ayn Rand.

They read Atlas Shrugged or some other work by Rand in a blinding flash of, "Yes!"

They hear the calling. They know the world is perishing in an orgy of irrationality. And they know they are ordained to preach the truth because they found The Source (Ayn Rand). They know she's right.

So they start looking. They see gatherings like The Atlas Summit and OCON. They see people get up and teach others about the meaning of life. About saving the world. About What Rand Really Meant. They see these thought leaders fighting the same enemies Rand fought. Presenting the same vision Rand painted in such detail in their minds. They hear the applause. They rub elbows with the admirers. And the stars echo in their eyes. This is sacred. They don't know how it started, but they crave it. In their minds, they see themselves standing in front of people. Talking. Teaching. Telling others how to live. Not later. Not tomorrow. Now.

So they go about preaching. And bashing Rand's enemies. And gushing about the things Rand approved of. They are young and energy-flushed, so they do it and do it and do it. Then do it some more. They root out irrational people to intellectually slay wherever such may be found. Evil must be trounced without mercy. NOW, dammit!

Before too long, they discover irrational people are everywhere. Every... fucking... where. And these suckers refuse to bow before superior reasoning. So the young saviors of mankind look to Rand. She made bad people bow with a dramatic gesture or a well-crafted put-down. That's all over her writing and speeches and Q&As. But when they try to do this with the people around them, those irrational bastards keep on being what they are. They refuse to bow. They don't slink away in humiliation. They know no shame. And they keep believing they are right. That crap in their heads--they say it's right! Oh, the bastards! The rotten bastards!

So the young preachers get entangled in bickering. Nasty vicious bickering. Time after unending time.

Before too long, they start acting irrationally and spiral out of control. They soon develop neurotic anti-social patterns and become predictable.

People call them Objectivist assholes and avoid them.

:smile:

Oh... many eventually come around to understanding life better and start taking ownership--authorship--of their own storylines.

Or they go off and join Binswanger's list. :smile:

(Just joking... :smile: )

Someday I expect "The Young Objectivist" storyline to change. That one sure is lame, but it's common enough.

Maybe if we started telling inner-subculture stories where young people go through that but come out of it, with plenty of specific events: what happened, how they did it, why, what they intended and how they reacted, what the results were, who they loved, who rejected them, you know, stories... Kind of like cautionary tales or coming of age stories.

That would be better--a hell of a lot more effective--than a list of "rational rules" to follow. And it would sure save some heartaches.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now