Michael Stuart Kelly

Root Admin
  • Content count

    28,494
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

1 Follower

About Michael Stuart Kelly

  • Rank
    $$$$$$
  • Birthday 06/09/1952

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    Michael Stuart Kelly
  • Articles
    Initial Understanding of Islam on Fundamental Intellectual Issues Thoughts on the 12 Steps and Self-Forgiveness Why the Tolerance and Support? Atlantis in the Wilderness A Hunting Story Moral Perfection Like a Lamb to the Slaughter Letter to Madalena ... An Homage to the Value of Valuing Going Home... A Few Thoughts on Family Values Where Principles and Rights Break Down The Stigma of Addiction Book Review on an Addiction Fraud - A Million Little Pieces Charmed on a Raw Night The Nature of Private Written Correspondence – The Sciabarra Smear Online Objectivist Mediocrity The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth - Part 2 - Moral Ambivalence The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth - Part 3 - Brotherhood of Hate The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth - Part 4 - Rand's True Value The Virtue of Silliness (w/Kat)
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking

Recent Profile Visitors

62,526 profile views
  1. What's Up With Harvey?

    Finally they're going to nail a Republican well-nailed: REP. JOE BARTON APOLOGIZES FOR SENDING JUNK PICS And Sexting Woman I was beginning to worry about the deviants on the conservative side. I mean, where did they all go? Michael
  2. What's Up With Harvey?

    Dennis, I would be careful to not get caught up in a gotcha thing here. I'm not saying you are, but if you get so turned off to an entire book because of an example that was later debunked, you could fall into the error of glibness and dismiss important knowledge. For the reader, the Genovese case is when a woman was stabbed to death over and over in NYC and 38 eyewitnesses stood around and watched without doing anything. Except there were not 38 witnesses. This was an exaggeration at the time due to several factors, but since it was reported in the NYT and story was dramatic, that made it seem credible. Thus the story entered into a lot of psychological literature and was repeated often in popular culture for years. It was a great story for teaching ideas about human nature and society (both false ideas and true ones), which is probably why it survived as long as it did. The thing is the Genovese murder happened in the '60's and so did the famous NYT article. Cialdini's book, Influence, was written in 1984 and the latest revision, I believe, was 2006. The serious doubts about the story only started appearing in the mainstream in 2004 (by only one main journalist) and in 2007 it was debunked in American Psychologist (see here for some of the chronology). The year 2014 marked the 50th anniversary of the murder, so that's when the debunking started getting some traction for real in the mainstream. This was reinforced in 2016, when the attacker died. But here's the thing. The murder did happen with bystanders who did not help. So the debunking is over the number of bystanders, not the fact that the murder happened with bystanders. Also, the original NYT editor (Rosenthal) behind the reporting and slant, although he didn't write the article, leaned right, so there is probably a bit of partisan zeal in the more recent debunking attacks to show what an immoral dirty rotten scoundrel he was. What bothers me the most is the logical error. If a principle is correct (like Cialdini's social proof principle) and one illustrates it with a flawed example, that does not invalidate the principle. Yet invalidate the whole shebang is exactly the kind of conclusion and logical error that is promoted by the mainstream debunkers, at least the ones I read. In fact, this is the flaw behind the entire gotcha culture: that is, if you can debunk a detail of an account, you have invalidated the entire substance of it. I suspect this comes from an out-of-focus habit by the intelligentsia of erroneously reifying Popper's falsification theory to a metaphysical status instead of keeping it constrained to testing specific predictive propositions. Note: I'm not against correcting the record and setting urban legends right. I'm all for that. I am against using this effort to promote other errors, whether intentional or unintentional. But it can get worse. Errors of this sort can be dangerous. It's been a few years since I last read Influence, but if I remember correctly, Cialdini gave a piece of advice about what to do if you have a heart attack in a public place. Rather than rely on an appeal to the crowd by shouting, "Help!", he suggested you try to get eye contact with an individual and ask that individual for help. If that person doesn't help, find another and make eye contact. There is solid psychology behind this advice, both concerning crowds and individuals. If a reader is full of self-righteous certainty because he believes Cialdini has been debunked because one of the examples he used for illustrating a principle was, that reader might not even have noticed this advice or consider it when he most needs to. I bet future editions of Influence will run a correction on the Genovese case. You, yourself, could even write to Cialdini and suggest this. Michael
  3. What's Up With Harvey?

    Korben, When I say feminists in the context of media stunts like public pussy hat demonstrations, I'm mostly referring to third-wave feminists of the Marxist variety who hate men. btw - Ayn Rand once said she could never be a feminist because she was a male chauvinist. Michael
  4. What's Up With Harvey?

    And let's have a little fun... I'm not a predator, I'm a fucking gatekeeper... Hey, Johnny Cornstalk. Do you want to make it in showbusiness? Well then wear something lacey, because here comes Spacey... That's how it works... LOL... Michael
  5. What's Up With Harvey?

    Here's a guy who thinks Charles Manson's ghost helped take down Charlie Rose. Charlie went up with Charlie, and Charlie went down with Charlie on the same day. (For the record, Manson died Nov. 19 and the story about Rose broke on Nov. 20, but there were already some indications on Twitter and the alt media on Nov. 19, so the attack plan was already settled and moving by then.) Michael
  6. Canada Let A Cockroach In

    Let's rub it in a little: Michael
  7. Canada Let A Cockroach In

    Big Brother has no honor. Friggin's wuss. This guy is only good for bullying vulnerable young women behind closed doors. I bet he has rape fantasies, too. Michael
  8. What's Up With Harvey?

    Korben, That's not the law of the jungle. Hungry predators become more vicious to the helpless than to a prey that can fight back. When a predator smells blood and is hungry, do you think it prefers a nasty fight? Or do you think it wants an easy kill? In the jungle, it's the easy kill... As for humans, you can take humans out of the jungle, but you can't take the jungle out of humans when they go into predator mode. (btw - That's a good reason NOT to advertise your own weakness if you are publicly poking adversaries.) Do this thought experiment. Imagine that the list of celebrities being accused of abuse of power for sex and losing their gigs are: President Trump, Vice President Pence, Rush Limbaugh, Jerry Falwell Jr., Mike Huckabee, Steve Bannon, James Wood, Jon Voight, Chuck Norris, Newt Gingrich, Ted Nugent, Kid Rock, Sean Hannity, Lou Dobbs, and so on... How many progressive people do you imagine would be on a soapbox in outrage and making demands? They would have plenty of press and discussion panels, that's for sure. I could even see women destroying property in the molds of BLM under Obama... Viva Antifa!... Remember when it was Roger Ailes, then Bill O'Reilly? The feminist demonstrations were revving up and threatening to go into high gear. But then something happened and the Great Feminist Fizzle got underway... I wonder what it was... Michael EDIT: I will give you this. When you keep telling someone they have power, when you advocate for that power, when you celebrate that power, don't be surprised when that person wants to assume and use power. And you better not be abusing such person when that happens. That is one of the root problems for this situation with progressives. Here's another. The males among them found out that when they SAID they were for women's rights (pro-choice, equal pay, fixing words like "mankind," etc.), they got easy poontang and, at the same time, this made it hard for women to accuse them of abuse. What's not to like about that and what could possibly go wrong? They were never truly interested in women's rights. The sheer number of prominent progressives going down proves it. And another root problem. They had the example of Horndog in Chief, Bill Clinton, as role model. After all, if he got away with it, why shouldn't they? Darn, it used to be a man's world...
  9. Canada Let A Cockroach In

    Well, secret recordings do work against Big Brother. At least for now... Laurier university issues apology amid censorship controversy Before we can even get to philosophy, we have to establish the norms of power abuse. Otherwise, PC language turns into bullying, which turns into thought crimes, which leads to punishment and persecution. Michael
  10. What's Up With Harvey?

    I'm still waiting for coast to coast demonstrations by feminists with pink pussy hats against all this female abuse by progressives. Where's Madonna when you need her? And Katy Perry? And on and on? I feel a craving for a celebrity-studded emotion-laden diatribe against the patriarchy... Michael
  11. SJW Super Hero

    SJW Super Hero From the wilds of wanton willfulness... From the seas of sleeper salvagers... From the tempests of transcendent tolerance... Comes the new man, the new woman, the new gender... The talebearers of telltale tamper... Thus shall they be legion... Thus shall they be legend... Michael
  12. What's Up With Harvey?

    I swear, all these tattle-tale sexual abuse scandals have me running back into the literature of Harold Robbins. I devoured that stuff in my youth (The Carpetbaggers, The Dream Merchants, The Adventurers, The Betsy, etc.). In a typical bedroom scene in one of his potboilers, a rich woman will mouth off to a dude who has clawed his way to the top from poverty through grit, nasty fights and intrigues, he will slap her around, they will land on the bed, then she will beg him to possess her while showering him with sexy kisses. Whew! Life suddenly feels normal again... btw - I sympathize with the women who are actual abuse victims. God knows I've defended my share. What's going on in the culture, though, is starting to fall in the "madness of crowds" category. For a con man, it's a good time to run a scam... At least and for the most part, it's ruling class establishment toadies who are going down... Michael
  13. [Atlasphere]Exciting Changes on the Horizon for the Atlasphere

    Heather, Good luck on this new phase of Atlasphere. Michael
  14. Canada Let A Cockroach In

    Canada Let A Cockroach In The cockroach is called thought crime. Here is the cockroach starting to breed: Extended: Excerpts from secretly recorded meeting between Wilfrid Laurier University grad student and faculty It's hard to listen to. This young woman being accused does not--and cannot by decree of this kangaroo court--know who her accuser is, how many there were, how she damaged her accuser, and so on. Her crime? She presented the different points of view in the culture on gender names without taking a stand. This thought crime thing is breeding under the initial banner of demonizing and taking out Jordan Peterson. Once more cockroaches breed, in the not too distant future, I see formalized indoctrination with forced reeducation camps to avoid jail sentences. I really hate to see this happen to Canada. It will still be OK for a long time, but this is cancer. If not treated, this cancer will eventually kill the host. I hope for--and look forward to--a healthy backlash. Michael
  15. What's Up With Harvey?

    Neil, Now there's an idea for ya'. I wonder what the Romans paid the Apostle Paul with, money, sex and power? Land? Camels? What would life be without goofballs like Valliant for amusement? Michael