KacyRay

Thanks - I do alright with stories, I suppose. I think it's important to remember how I'm defining respect: A internalize recognition of someone's demonstrated capabilities or value. Feelings of respect and demonstrations of respect are two different things, so if there's any distinction in context to be drawn, I'd say that's the only one. But if you notice, every example I've provided to you thus far involves one person either recognizing (and acting on the recognition of) or failing to recognize (or act on the recognition of) someone else's demonstrated capabilities or value. So I don't think I'm switching contests. In the case of the dog - I knew that dogs bite when cornered. Honestly, it didn't concern me. There was no way I thought it would tear my hand up the way it did. Yes, when Roxanne gave me my little wake-up call, from that point forward, I knew that - whatever means of discipline I chose - it would not involve sticking my hand in her crate to pull her out when she was scared. In the case of Soprano - he was making clear that, while his nephew may by rejecting him, it would not change the fact that Tony was to by respected (i.e. his capabilities were unchanged). In the case of Captain Crunch - his behavior since that exchange pretty much shows that he realizes that I'm not going to be told how to run my shop. That was all I really cared about. Yell at me all you want, but respect my position. In the case of meeting strangers on the internet, you might say it's a bit different... my contention is that a socially healthy person would recognize a strangers potential value - until and unless the stranger demonstrates otherwise. I'd say that is why you (and just about everyone here) tend to welcome newcomers graciously, and you continue treating them that way until they demonstrate that they are only here to troll. You internally recognize their potential value. This is consistent with my definition. Your behavior is evidence that you are, by my definition, a person who is socially intelligent and grasps the concept of respect. I should point out here that the Soprano example might have been a little misleading, so I will clarify - one need not threaten another person with a demonstration of one's capabilities in order to invoke respect. I interpreted that exchange not as TS threatening Christopher, but as an example of him reminding Christopher that respect is not dependent on love or affection. That was my point in citing that particular exchange.

It seems to me that in "On Sanctioning the Sanctioners", Schwartz makes the case that, if a socialist or libertarian were invited to speak at an Objectivist function, it would be immoral, unethical, and even self-sacrificial for them to accept. Can't aid and abet one's philosophical enemies, right?

Not at all. Short example - a few years back I owned a Belgian Malinois. Loved that dog. But one day I woke up very, very hungover and found that she had pissed on the carpet. I wanted to "send a message to her" by holding her face close to the stain, pointing, and sternly reminding her that "No!" (because dogs sometimes forget!) But she saw it coming and hauled ass into her crate. I looked in there and demanded that she come out. She refused. I reached in there to grab her collar and felt a very quick, unexpected feeling on my hand. I backed away (still half drunk) and looked at my hand which was now dripping blood. I then looked down to see Roxanne (my dog) sitting directly in front of me looking up at me. If you don't think a dog knows how to apologize with their eyes, you've never seen this look from a dog. Anyway, I couldn't help but smile and kneel down and let her know it was alright. But I never forget what I learned that morning - respect the jaws. I learned a new respect for the jaws of a Belgian Malinois. To illustrate this point, I would quote Tony Soprano's confrontation with a very upset Christopher Moltisanti: Christopher: I used to love you! Tony: You might not love me anymore, and that's too bad, but you will respect me! Admiration, acceptance, love... none of those are necessary components of respect. I didn't like getting bit at all... but I sure do possess an internal recognition of what those jaws are capable of, and I treated her accordingly from that point forward.

I'm wondering, it there a list somewhere on the net of all the major figures who have been excommunicated from the Objectivist movement, with a description of the surrounding circumstances? We all know about NB, BB, and DK. But I know there have been other solid figures that aren't quite so well known, and I'd like to find out how many there are I don't know about, and what happened with them. Anything like that out there?

Stephen, Thanks brother. Good to make your acquaintance.

I guess the rub here is that I don't quite know what you mean by "rejection". I hear the "rejection of a person's goodwill" part, but my definition of disrespect is to fail to treat a person with respect. It's basically that simple. I guess that, in a sense, it requires the rejection of some aspect of that person (whatever aspect of them happens to merit respect), but I think it would be more accurate to say it requires the complete disregard for it. To disregard something or someone is not necessarily to reject them. For example, if I fail to express appreciation to my wife for the effort she puts in to preparing a fantastic dinner... I haven't rejected her at all. I've simply failed to regard the value she provides me. I've failed to regard her effort as valuable. Speaking in objectivist terms - I've failed to provide her the emotional reward she merits in return for the value she has offered me. As I was telling SB earlier - I see respect as an earned value. To disrespect someone is to fail to offer that internalized recognition one has earned. I just don't see "rejection" as having an integrated role. But it does seem that, while you and I both appear to abhor the idea of disrespect, we have diverging views on what exactly it is. But I suspect that, even with those diverging concepts and definitions, the resulting behavior is pretty much the same. I would be very surprised if our different concepts of disrespect resulted in significantly different manifestations.

I've met him. He's a nice a person as you'll ever meet, as is Mrs. Obama. If this is your idea of a tyrant, you have no idea what a tyrant is.

MSK, Your comments on rejected are well-received and useful... I just don't think that the issue of disrespect is an issue of rejection. Neither necessarily involves the other, I don't think. In fact, lots of people endure disrespect at the hands of spouses and friends on a daily basis. It's usually an integral part of a typical dysfunctional relationship. I remember being appalled at my own daughter's relationship with her b/f... they spoke to each other like they were pieces of garbage, yet they were together for 10 years (and counting, maybe? I don't know... I have ceased involving myself in that drama). I think disrespect is exactly as I've described it - a failure to treat someone with due respect... either actively treating someone in such a way that disregards their demonstrated abilities and/or value or neglecting to treat them with such recognition at the appropriate time. An example of the former might be - unprovoked insults to a friend or friendly acquaintance An example of the latter might be - you accept an invitation for dinner at a friends house. After enjoying a meal his wife spent time preparing, you just get up and say "Well, gotta go." and leave without a single word of gratitude. (Or, more commonly, to fail to express gratitude to one's own wife for the effort she puts into nurturing you every day). Neither of those examples involves rejection, but both amount to brazen disrespect. But again.. your comment does contain valuable insight and well-earned nuggets of wisdom. By the way... physical therapy sucks, yes. But physical wounds of battle typically heal much more quickly and completely then psychological wounds associated with having walked away with your tail tucked between your legs. Those normally don't ever heal.

I remember I wanted to go... I just don't remember why I never did. It probably had to do with the fact that I was a much more comfort-zone oriented person back then and didn't leave the house unless I had to. Or, maybe I had to work (was still bartending/waiting tables at the time). Now I'm wishing I had gone and seen that. Would've been good for a laugh. I remember Tyler actually made the first argument I'd heard against Rand's theory of Free Will. SB was arguing in the affirmative, and TD kept drilling with questions. I dismissed TD's argument at the time, but now I realize the merit in it. Bottom line - the questions were never answered satisfactorily, and I don't think they can be. Yeah, he's a unique individual.

"I trust I need go into no further detail." Eh... I disagree. No idea what you're saying here.

I read "The Case Against God" about 17 years ago and then loaned it out to a girl I was dating. Never saw it again. I need to call her and get that book back.

Holy shit... I never heard that story. I remember when you guys were going to the SOAR meetings. I wish I'd have gone... don't remember exactly what was going on in my life at the time, but I'm sure it was chaotic and unstable. I can understand why Tyler never told me the story. I'm a little surprised SB didn't.

Just realized... T.D. could've been "Tim Dog". heh...

It is not Tim. Just a side note... lots of times when people use initials like that, it's specifically because they didn't want to name names publicly. But no, it isn't Tim. Reminds me of this one time when I worked at Cicso's Cafe in Miami Springs. I was probably 21 then. I was in the kitchen when I casually asked a friend of mine "Hey, wasn't that you I saw outside the AA last week?" God bless him... he just smiled and said "Nope". Then about 10 minutes later, when no one else was around, he said "Hey Kacy. You know what the second A in AA stands for, right?"

Brant; - What I do isn't a secret. Nor is it glamorous. But being one of the ship's department heads has its perks, fo sho. http://www.google.com/search?q=Combat+Cargo+Officer&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

jts, your story, while irrelevant, is also misguided. First off, the slogan that we're an "all volunteer force" is pretty misleading. We're only volunteers in the same sense that a the police force is also a volunteer organization. We all have contracts, we all receive a compensation package, we all rely on our paychecks to survive. The only thing we "volunteered" to do was to become a government-contracted professional supporter and defender of the US Constitution (for a reasonable fee). Only guys like Pat Tillman can claim to have "volunteered", and you can count the number of those kinds of guys on one hand. Not enough to win a war, I'll put it to you that way. But I'm guessing from your comment that you are going to ignore the points I made in my comment. That's okay... luckily there aren't enough people around that don't share your idealism that we don't have to worry about financing our national security (yet).

jts, Have you seen any of the studies done on the response that people tend to have toward crisis situations when they are in groups versus how they respond when they're the only ones around? It's been demonstrated time and time again that when individuals observe what they perceive as a crisis that requires intervention, they tend to intervene - particularly when there's no one else around to handle it. However, when a crisis situation is observed by a group, individuals tend to observe the situation shell-shocked and confused, apparent waiting - and expect - the situation to be handled by one of the other observers. In other words, they take more of a "Hey, one of these other people can handle the problem" approach. This has been tested and demonstrated over and over again.It's been observed in uncontrolled situations as well as controlled experiments. There have been cases where an entire city block of people watched as a woman was beaten and killed... and all the observers interviewed went on to say some variation of "I kept waiting for someone to help that poor lady out!" As it is, we can barely get half our citizenry to go out and vote. All of them (with good reason) believe that, individually, their vote won't count for much. All of them (correctly) figure that the country will go on just fine without their individual contribution. Imagine a wartime scenario where you have a country of people, all of whom are thinking "I could donate to this cause... but it I don't, it's alright because enough other people will". And among the ones inclined to donate, there are a good percentage who figure "You know, I want to donate for the war cause, but how do I know my money will go toward it, and not toward some general's personal cook?" Everyone figures that someone will do something, and therefore they don't really need to do anything. If you don't believe that would be the prevailing thought process, then you are the picture of idealism. There's absolutely no way our nations defense could be funded by voluntary donations, particularly not with all the enemies we've made at this point in our history. Don't forget... if we were attacked in such a situation, it would probably be be a nation that funds its military with taxes. Game, set, and match. We lose.

That's exactly what us liberal/progressive/jewish conspirators want you to think.

Brant: I'm a Marine Officer stationed on a Navy amphibious ship. https://www.facebook.com/Kearsarge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Kearsarge_%28LHD-3%29 I'm the Combat Cargo Officer for the ship.

Actually, I know who he is. What I don't know is why people are thinking he's some dude named Brad Trun. Who is Brad Trun? Some banned troll?

SB is not Brad Trun (whoever that is). Not a libertarian either, as far as I know. Can't speak for any of the rest.

Yep. Under every stone there's a liberal Boogeyman. And a Jew.

The story is interesting and illustrative. Moreover, I'm glad you posted this because it gives me a chance to clear up some bad assumptions you're making. 1. The "you do NOT have the right to talk to me that way" response is not one I would have ever endorsed. It's not an alpha response, and it's also not an effective one. For one, alpha's aren't so concerned with rights - they take more of a "Talk to me that way at your own peril" response. (But even that isn't typically stated explicitly. It's usually done through non-verbal communication.) I can tell you that, in that situation, my knee-jerk response would probably have been something to the affect of smiling in agreement and nodding, saying "Alright motherfucker!", attempting to (hopefully) communicate some version "You got me this time, but I'll get you next time!" playful response. I don't know if you remember a certain Facebook post I made... it was almost 2 years ago... I'd link you to it but I cannot access FB during certain hours of the day. I said (I think this is verbatim) "Those who have to demand respect have ceased to merit it". Hopefully this lays rest to your apparent misconception about my view that one gains respect by stomping their foot and whining that they haven't received it. 2. Once again - I define "disrespect" as "The failure to demonstrate due respect". If this guy pointed out that you're in outer space most of the time, and it's the truth, then all he did was point out the truth. (I should note that the use of the word "fool" in his statement was clearly playful and I wouldn't really enter that into my analysis). It seems to me you brought that situation on yourself. You opened yourself up for it by asking the question "How did I miss that", and someone playfully boxed your ears. I don't see this example as one of overt disrespect. I have to point out here that while I assume you've accurately relayed the words spoken in this anecdote, there's no real indication as to what his non-verbal communications were. In order to accurately assess the appropriateness of his statement and your response to it, I'd have to know the entirety of what he was attempting to communicate. It sounds like he was being playful, but I can't know that for sure given only the information you've provided here. If I'm wrong on that, then it changes my entire assessment. With that said, you're right about the implications contained in the other guy feeling the need to point it out to you. If that's how you're perceived, then that's how you're perceived. It sounds to me like you're being afforded the respect you've earned. But this example misses my point entirely. Your explicit suggestion that I would endorse "demanding" respect brings the house of cards down. I've been clear about certain things. First off, I've defined respect as an internalized recognition of another's demonstrated abilities and/or value. This means that respect is a response in one person to the actions of another, no different than love, anger, admiration, etc. To demand respect that you have not earned is equally as irrational as demanding that someone love you, admire you, be attracted to you, or have any response whatsoever to you. Look, if you have lost the ability to understand why it's a good idea to talk to people on online forums as though they are human beings, that's going to be your own poison to drink. It came as no surprise to me when, the moment you started posting comments here (after I got here) that you began rubbing people the wrong way. 3. If you believe that I don't get the same sorts of ribbing that you got from Albert from guys I work with all the time, you are mistaken. That sort of situation is common, and easy to negotiate. Let me give you an example of a situation that is much more illustrative of my point: There’s a certain guy who works on this ship (we’ll call him Capt Crunch) that has a job closely related to mine. He works for the landing force, I work for the ship. This means we have two different chains of command. My ship operates in support of the landing force, so I’m in a support role. He is senior to me (which makes the situation interesting), he is an extreme alpha male (which makes the situation even more fun), and he’s a former drill instructor (which makes the situation basically perfect). He is loud, he is aggressive, he is a senior officer, he has about 3-4 years more experience at the job than I do, and he is in a position supported by my department. Basically, all the cards are in his favor (with the one very important exception being that I do not answer to him). . I noticed early on in our working relationship that he had very little regard for my position. When I relayed the requirements the ship has in order to provide support, he routinely blew them off. He blew off the inspections we told him we needed to conduct. He allowed the LF to put stuff in containers they weren’t supposed to bring. He showed no regard for policy. He basically ran roughshod over the constraints we placed on the landing force’s load plan, and he wound up making himself look really bad in the process. But I allowed it to happen, knowing that he didn’t need my help in screwing things up. I told him stuff wouldn’t fit, but when he brought it to the ship, we packed it in. When it looked like a nightmare in the vehicle holds, my response was basically “Well, no kidding!” When HazMat started dripping out of containers, we just put them back on the pier. No cross words spoken – no complaints. My department supported him every step of the way. We were always on time, and always got the job done. Then when it came time to deploy, he gave us his plan to pick his stuff up off the beach. I received a phone call from him (from inside the ship) telling me that he wanted my guys to operate on a particular schedule. I told him that we would get the job done, but that I will determine how it gets done (thank you very much!). His response, paraphrased was “Alright, but god help you if you’re late on this!”. That’s where the line was crossed. I very calmly said “Okay, you know how you’re feeling right now? I want you to know that it’s exactly how I felt when I was at your base two weeks ago sitting on a HMMWV, waiting for your guys to show up for an inspection. That’s how I felt when I was waiting for gear to arrive. That how I felt when (on and on and on)…” I politely and professionally began explaining to him that during our working relationship, I had given him no reason to believe I would fail to support, and that on the contrary, it was normally he who failed to operate as promised. During the time I was saying this, I could hear him trying to interrupt. He started indicating that he was upset (started calling me CCO instead of Kacy – which basically formalizes the conversation), and telling me that I’d better not compare what I was doing to what he was doing. I didn’t stop. I kept saying “Alright, just understand that how you feel now is how I’ve felt during this entire deployment” Finally, he snapped “DON’T TALK TO ME LIKE I’M A LITTLE FUCKING KID!! I’VE BEEN IN THE MARINE CORPS 20 FUCKING YEARS!!!” I didn’t stop. He hung up on me shortly thereafter, and since that time, we haven’t spoken informally to each other. And that’s fine. But one thing is for sure – there is no question in his mind that, while my job is to support him, I do not answer to him. And not once since that time has he called down here trying to tell me how to run my shop. The assertion (for my position) was necessary on my part. It wasn’t fun, because my relative rank ensured I could not return fire, nor could I demand that he speak politely to me. But that didn’t matter – what mattered was that, in refusing to kowtow to his aggressive manner, I set the expectation for the entire deployment. My department supports requirements, but no one other than the ship’s Commanding Officer will tell me how to run my department. Not Capt Crunch – not anyone. Had I done otherwise, I'd have been his bitch for the entire deployment. I can assure you that the words “You can’t talk to me that way!” never entered my mind. What entered my mind was “You can talk to me however you want, but what you can’t do is tell me how to run my fucking department”. And I communicated exactly that. I asserted respect for my position. It is a respect I have earned, and it is a respect that I will be afforded. I respected his rank (as I must) and he will respect my position (as he must). I realize that when you extract things such as rank form the equation, things aren’t quite so clear cut. But the principle is the same. That’s why Dan is no longer on my facebook page. Piss on my leg in my own house, and you’ll find yourself on the street. (I know you like to believe that his issues with me were of my own making – but I’d be interested in hearing you explain why Dan is the only person I’ve had such issues with. There are plenty of very vocal far-right-wingers on my friends list, some of which I’ve been involved in very spirited debates with, all of which have been very polite, courteous, and dare I say… respectful – none of which I’ve had to even mention issues of respect with. In fact, I wish there were more of them. If you can’t see that Dan – specifically Dan – was the problem, then you’re suffering some serious cognitive dissonance.) In short – no, I don’t endorse stomping your foot and “demanding” respect. Quite the opposite. This is wisdom that I’ve gained at an extremely high price over the last few years, and it’s a price I continue to pay. But you can dispense with all this if you like, man. Let me know how it works out for you. To summarize - Everyone should become a progressive liberal, castrate men, turn gay, abandon traditional mores, and vote democrat.

XRay, did you read the OP? You seem to be surprised that I'm agreeing with something I've already made clear. Here, let me provide you the relevant text. Disclaimer: I'd like to pre-emptively confess that my entire formulation on arbitrary assertions is merely an attempt to inject seeds of liberal progressive ideology into the hearts of America in order to feminize the overall population and create a culture of victimhood where men are enslaved and the Jews take over. Just wanted to make that clear before Serapis Bey comes in and cracks the code. The jig is up!

You're right, SB. I'm a liberal. I've tried to mask the truth from you, but you're just too damn perceptive. And all this talk of respect... just a ruse I use to advance a victimhood advocacy position. And that talk we had about your Jewish views... just a front for a victimhood position. And that debate we had about which is better: The Whopper or the Big Mac.... I don't know how you did it, but you were able to discover my liberal motives in that one too. I give up. You win. Can't pull the wool over your eyes. And to think... you were the only person here perceptive enough to spot the insidious liberal nature of my comment. Imagine that. All these less-perceptive folks thought I was just talking about respect, but no, not you... you see right through the nonsense straight to the heart of my liberal progressive propaganda.