dsaum

I have tried to persuade some non-Objectivist physicists to listen to Harriman's lectures such as his 6 hour "The Philosophic Corruption of Physics", http://www.aynrandbookstore2.com/prodinfo.asp?number=CH54M but they gave up in disgust after a little of Harriman's hyperbolic condemnation of great physicists and exaggeration of the number of physicists who are in agreement with some of the extreme interpretations of physics theories. I think there is a real danger that Harriman's intolerant approach could be interpreted as "Crackpot Physics" and bring real harm to Objectivism. Physicist John Baez has a web page where he calculates a "CrackPot Physics Index" based on a score calculated from answers to a series of questions. Some of the questions are unfortunately close to Harriman's positions: +10 points for each claim that quantum mechanics is fundamentally misguided (without good evidence). +10 points for arguing that while a current well-established theory predicts phenomena correctly, it doesn't explain "why" they occur, or fails to provide a "mechanism". +10 points for each favorable comparison of yourself to Einstein, or claim that special or general relativity are fundamentally misguided (without good evidence). +30 points for suggesting that Einstein, in his later years, was groping his way towards the ideas you now advocate. +40 points for claiming that when your theory is finally appreciated, present-day science will be seen for the sham it truly is. +50 points for claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions. (the more positive the index, the more crackpot the viewpoint) For the complete index, see John Baez http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

Shayne, I agree with you. There is no need for an Objectivist movement today, and attempts to build or keep one pose too many liabilities. This why any expectation on Yaron Brook's part of absorbing the vanquished remnants of TAS is nutty and hubristic. And why Will Thomas's dream of uniting the Objectivist movement behind TAS was no less so. Robert Campbell http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-QKSNCFuC0&feature=related At 4:27 Deep Throat utters the timeless wisdom "Just follow the money", and that injunction is just as important for understanding the fate of the Objectivist movement today as it is for unraveling political conspiracies. ARI brings in at least $6M per year, and its president Yaron Brook made $348,398 in 2009, and even the secretary pulled down $123,684 according to public records. https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.charitynavigator.org/__asset__/_etc_/CN_CEO_Compensation_Study_2009_Final.pdf Even after those generous salaries, there is plenty of trickle down remaining to keep the insiders in line. And to keep a lot of folks on the outside salivating. Until the money flow stops, it is unrealistic to expect negative events like the McCaskey purge to slow ARI down. Edit: Here are some more recent ARI financials that show Yaron got a raise to $420,162 and income is up to $6.6M. Admin is $422k and fundraising is $594k. http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=8345