Objectivists, Anger and Acrimony


Recommended Posts

I just read the article and I am in agreement with the majority (but not all) of Nathan's conclusions. More later on that, maybe.

I also just registered for an account at www.wethethinking.com. He has not opened his article to discussion yet, but I want to announce what I wish to do here first anyway - then there.

Nathan and I crossed cyber-swords many times and I believe we were both seduced by the over-emotionalism of the environment when we did. This led us both to say several things that were completely foolish in hindsight.

I would like to apologize to him.

This decision in no way is a result of recent monkeyshines by those leftover from the old SoloHQ site where we used to meet. Frankly, I have been meaning to apologize to Nathan for quite some time. I wanted to do it publicly on his site, but he went into inactivity around the time I wanted to do that. So I waited for a good opportunity. Now the time has come.

In addition to my own independent thinking on this, which developed as I watched events unfold, a while back Rich Engle was very persuasive about my need to take a second look at Nathan.

I did. I didn't like what I saw either. But what I didn't like was me, not Nathan.

Despite several areas of disagreement with him that still persist, I saw to my own self-disgust that my behavior toward him had been downright cruel and unfair on a few occasions (not many - I still stand by the majority of our encounters, but what I did wrong, I did wrong). I don't condone this behavior out of anybody else, so it certainly has no business being in me.

Also, Rich wrote an article on mysticism that he had sent me for a critical read. We both agreed that submitting it to RoR at that time would be suicidal and he decided to publish it on wethethinking.com. I liked the article and asked Rich if there would be any problem with Nathan on posting it in "Chewing on Ideas" here on OL.

There was no problem whatsoever. I thanked Nathan publicly for raising no objection.

I want to be clear, though. This is not the place to expound on a litany of points where I still disagree with Nathan or present justifications for my past behavior. This is an apology.

Nathan Hawking, please accept my apology for the times I have been unfair and mean to you. You did not deserve that and my opinion is that you are a highly intelligent person of goodwill. I was wrong and I deeply regret it. This behavior will not be repeated.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just received the following email from Nathan Hawking, dated February 19, 2006:

Hi Michael:

Thanks for the note. I appreciate the courage and personal integrity it took to respond in such a positive manner. Far too many of us would have simply shrugged and let an opportunity for constructive good go unfulfilled.

Too, your timing was wonderful. In a few days I'll have the time to explain, but for now I must let it go at that. Please feel free in the meantime to post this heartfelt "thank you" verbatim on your website.

Hopefully, by the end of the coming week I'll have completed the transition on my site to a new and cleaner layout--'Objectivists, Anger, and Acrimony' will be the among the lead articles and open to discussion.

Sincerely,

Nathan Hawking

"It's about the ideas."

Link to post
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