sjw

What do you mean there's nowhere to go? Also, perhaps you could condense some of your writing down, there seems to be a good deal of rambling... Shayne

Roger, it's not quite so finely honed as I'd like (and I think the post you're replying to there didn't make it on your wall), but I drew a line. It was all self-published, I used OpenOffice (now LibreOffice) and CreateSpace. My son created the cover with my input. I got quite a bit of feedback from a circle of friends and family as I was writing it. Most of the ideas came to me in fragments while I was pedaling my bike, then I'd get home and jot them down. After doing that for a while the idea for the structure of the book started to take shape, but initially it was very vague to me. It started out as a laundry list with no logical order and had several false starts on trying to order them. Initially I didn't even think it was a book, but more of a shorter article or essay. Then one day I had an insight about the logic and the outline and then it was largely just placing all the little fragments in the right place, and then editing, editing, editing... until I said enough is enough. Shayne

I have learned from this thread and from past interactions that Dennis is a dishonest debater and constantly spins things to his own bias, refusing to deal in terms of facts but instead appealing to ad hominem. Note in this post, where he pretends (spins) that I react as I do because I lost some argument. I think it's clear that I have the stronger argument, or at the very least a quite plausible position. Is Dennis an idiot? Does he lie to himself? Or does he merely think he can manipulate a bunch of fools? Give his education about the human mind, perhaps he is very aware of what he is doing. Or perhaps he is a senile old man and is quite unaware. One thing is almost certain: I will never find out which is the actual case. I have learned that when you get this kind of bizarre irrationality from someone like Dennis, or Ninth, you never get to the bottom of it. It's just a brute fact of reality. And that's the nature of irrationality: if the irrationalist were to explain, he would cease being an irrationalist. Shayne

Shayne, I often think of you as a Ferrari: 0 - 60 in 3.2 seconds. Dennis is perceptibly no idiot, and I thought his post balanced out the good point that you have made. Over all, I agree with you on creativity motive above profit motive - but not by too far! Survival matters. I do believe there is an excess of admiration for the Trumps and Gates' of the world, in O'ist circles. The bigger the better, to fit the perceived Randian mode - but I wonder if she'd have had any respect for them. I spare many thoughts for entrepeneurs who didn't make it big, through bad timing or ignorance of marketing, or whatever. You and Dennis put forth good arguments, and I'm not even trying to be diplomatic. (Does this make me half an idiot?) Tony It's black and white. Either my post implied mind-body dichotomy or it did not. I think it's obvious that it did not, and Dennis is just trying to spin because he has vicious motives. So you got sucked up into his spin. So sorry, but I don't know what I can do. Learn to read in an "A is A" fashion. Shayne

I really don't understand your angle. It's all par for the internet course. Dennis's idiotic flaming of me, my returning his flame in kind, his next flame, etc. etc. My only point is I made no critique that plausibly is directed to my actual experience with him at work. I wish you hadn't brought that up, it's below the belt to accuse me of dragging his professional name through the mud without substantiation when I did no such thing. Shayne

I advise not interacting with him. It works for me. It would work for me too. Shayne

If Dennis requests, I'll edit it. It is certainly not my intent to harm his business. I just think that it is in no way a criticism of his actual business. On the other hand, he accused me of a mind-body dichotomy. So maybe he can take that back too. Shayne

Brant, I made no specific remark about Dennis's actual psychotherapy skills, just a generalized remark about psychotherapists in general. You go too far in your suggestion to the contrary, and you owe me a retraction and apology. Shayne

The forced, contrived aspect you're perceiving might have come from her Russian background. The Communist work ethic is -- work, work, work! Maximize profits for the good of the State! The purpose of work is profit, and the purpose of profit is to enlarge the power of the State. (See "The Masks of Communism", http://www.amazon.com/masks-communism-Dan-N-Jacobs/dp/B0007E2FVG ). A value-creator's purpose in work is much different. It is to create an object of love, to further human life, to strive for what one is capable of. It's not merely about profit maximization, although profit can certainly be instrumental to specific ends. It is ironic that idiot Dennis accuses me of a "mind-body" dichotomy, because this "pursue maximal profits" philosophy that I am repudiating is precisely an example of the mind-body dichotomy. An individualist doesn't pursue maximum profit, he pursues maximum life value, and life consists of far more than just profits. In the case where it is of great value for you to create the best possible computer, obviously that requires a great deal of revenue in order to do that. But the goal is the computer, not the revenue. This was Jobs' very healthy motivation, not the "profit motive", but the human values motive. Shayne

Brant, after seeing what some government licensed psychotherapists consider "work", I have to wonder whether Dennis even knows the meaning of work. Who knows, maybe the idiot actually gives people good advice, but I doubt it. Shayne

Dennis, you're dishonest. And you're an idiot. I suggested no such "artificial disconnect." "I don't intend to build in order to have clients; I intend to have clients in order to build."--Howard Roark Dennis clearly has never comprehended what Rand meant here. Shayne

More like: She intends to usurp the movement for her own ends. But if people are going to be anti-intellectual then this is what they deserve. Shayne

I think what we're seeing with Phil and OL is two kinds of vice playing off of one another. There are always important truths in what Phil likes to say, but he doesn't ever learn that those truths are of no interest to most of the members here. Also, he mixes in truth with half-truth or falsehood, which certainly doesn't help his case (which would be hopeless regardless but it's even more hopeless if it's not precisely correct). Instead of bitching and moaning about how wrong/bad people are (which he indeed may be right about in many respects), Phil should formulate his points into a philosophical essay. He could then post it here, get criticisms, and honestly apply those to revising the essay. Obviously he'll get a lot of bullshit criticism, but some of it will be helpful. Call it the "Gorillas in the Mist" phenomenon. I use it with George all the time ;) He has an ax to grind, and that's fine, but I say forge and grind and polish; don't just hack a crude ax out of stone, make a finely honed carbon-steel instrument. Shayne

It takes two to tango. The reaction to Phil has always overwhelmed anything Phil has himself done. Shayne

http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/25/steve-jobs-a-difficult-patient/?hpt=hp_c2 It would be extremely naive not to think that Jobs' approach here did not reflect a wider irrationality that negatively affected Apple. And yet, he is arguably one of the best CEO's that we've have in our current era of the mixed economy. There is no contradiction here. Shayne

Is that a dichotomy? If yes, which one have you chosen? I don't understand why this is so difficult for you. A business should have as its primary purpose the creation of value -- and by that I mean the particular products and services it creates as opposed to fiat dollars. Profit is the means to that end, it's not the other way around. There is no dichotomy between profit and real value, but there is a difference between means and ends. Shayne

Okay, what's the priority? Which is the cause and which is the effect? In a virtuous pursuit, profit is a means to an end. The end -- the creation of the value that is the product -- has priority. You can't passionately serve two masters. Either what drives you is fiat money, or what drives you is to create something excellent. Shayne

Jobs had his faults of course, but his primary motives were heroic. One of his faults is what may have gotten him killed (as his biographer points out). Jobs is the person that can be compared to Roark or Rearden. Not completely, but in a general way. But Gates -- the antithesis of Jobs -- is the one that Objectivists have historically most connected to business heroism. Shayne

There is obviously no strong correlation or dichotomy between products and profits. If you believe there is, the Apple Lisa and Apple III are counter-examples. And here we go. Thank you for joining the party and showing what I'm going on about. I never said there was a dichotomy. I said there was a priority. Shayne

Another thing I used to argue with Objectivists about was whether Bill Gates should be seen as a hero. They also used to berate Jobs for his Eastern-style philosophy. You don't have to argue with them about these things anymore. Shayne

“It isn’t the consumers’ job to know what they want.” --Steve Jobs “Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life. Don't be trapped by dogma - which is living with the results of other people's thinking. Don't let the noise of other's opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.”--Steve Jobs Shayne

This seems to follow the Rearden and Roark paradigms of achievement. Yeah, I tried pointing that out, to no avail. It's not about a "profit motive"; it's about having a value-creation motive. Profit is a means to an end. I'm glad that with Apple I have at least one American company I can point to when I make this case from now on. Shayne

I used to try to convince Objectivists that product not profit should be the main priority in business and caught a lot of flak from them over it. Who knows, maybe after the mainstream figures it out, they'll come around too. http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/10/steve_jobs_solved_the_innovato.html Shayne

Why do you say this? What if you just pack your things (by property rights you own them) and leave? Shayne

John, Michael has a light moderation touch, I wouldn't expect him to ban you for criticizing him unless you started getting obsessive about it. There are a few posters here who routinely toss in off-topic barbs at him and even they're not banned. Shayne