NATURE

VS

NURTURE

Exploring Role Of Genetics & Upbringing In Psychological Developments, Based On Latest Studies

INTRODUCTION

Until a century back at least, role of heredity in human development of psychological traits was well acknowledged. However, in past many decades, industrial and IT revolutions have led to extremely fast changes in society. As a result, variations in income, profession, locations, & lifestyle have been huge, just in a generation. This has caused many to question the significance of Heredity or Nature in brain development, and give more emphasis to Upbringing or Education or Nurture.

Few examples given for primacy of nurture are like huge difference in success of Mukesh & Anil Ambani, many Bollywood actors or Politicians failing even though they had highly successful parents, etc. Other than that, racist theories by followers of Hitler shoots down any discussion in favor of Nature, even before the discussion starts.

RECENT STUDIES

Agreed, some human races being superior to others was a hasty application of Darwin’s theory of evolution. Studies and inferences  by neurogeneticist Dr. Kevin Mitchell in his book Innate: How the Wiring of Our Brains Shapes Who We Are however are more relevant.

Most significant is the study of identical twins(monozygotic), fraternal twins(dizygotic), siblings, and population in general. Psychological traits of individuals were IQ and Behavioral traits. Behavioral traits can be further classified as Five independent psychological traits in an individual. These are Extroversion or urge to be with people, Neuroticism or different levels of anxiety among individuals in similar situations, consciousness or level of systemic behavior by the individual, agreeableness or friendliness, and openness to new experience.

The repeatability of measurements in the study was 90% for IQ tests, and around 70% for psychological traits on an average. That is, if same individual took the similar psychological test again, his or her score was 70% same as before, on an average. The scores were most matching for identical twins, then fraternal twins or siblings, and then strangers. Further, there was no significant difference between identical twins raised in same family or in different families. Most importantly, difference between siblings where one of the person was adopted, was equivalent to difference among strangers.

Final argument for the importance of genetics in psychology is personal. I spent more than a decade to work in software domain which was not growing and not changing fast. The reason was to fix significant gaps in soft skills like verbal communication and decision making. However, even after major effort and focus, the improvements were significantly sub-optimal. I still find myself quite similar to what I was 15 years back.

The take away however is not that one should stop self-improvement through self-effort. It is to highlight that role of genetics even in self-help needs to be considered and understood.

PSYCHOLOGICAL VARIATIONS BETWEEN MALES AND FEMALES

Dr. Mitchell’s book highlights differences in male and female psychology. Prominent among these are social skills and ability to articulate emotions, the traits in which females excel, on an average. Further, to reinforce this point, we can consider implications of human brain having evolved in mostly hunter environment. [200,000 years as hunters against 10,000 years as farmers and 300 years in industry. Plus, evolution of ancestors like Homo Erectus and others over a few million years]. Human children requiring significant care after birth, and significant risks during pregnancy compared to other mammals is the key factor in the variation of male and female psychologies.

 Lack of requirement to hunt made females less aggressive on an average compared to males. Female dependency on male partner, extended family, & tribe made evolution of neural wiring with social traits more advantageous for them.

Extrapolating hunter mindset further, men are good at spatial tasks, focused work requiring deep and long-term thought, and their modern versions like mathematics and engineering. Similarly, women are better at multi-tasking in activities not requiring deep thought.

Emphasizing these differences may seem like a digression, but point here is to highlight that males and females have differences in genetic, spatial, and social adoption, which in turn impacts their psychology.

IMPLICATION OF THE STUDY

Key to successful navigation in life is person’s mind. Education plays an important role in this. Role of genetics however was further undermined by the arguments like – If criminals are not controlled by their upbringing and their choices, then why should someone be punished for crimes? (Initial arguments are in the introduction). More realistically, such arguments can be refuted when we realize that genetics is not the only factor in psychological traits, but a primary factor.

That is, I am not trying to undermine self-improvement through awareness of self, surroundings, and society. I am implying that acknowledgment of the significant role of genetics can make self-help more effective.

For e.g.  we have someone like Steve Jobs who has high score in Extroversion & Neuroticism. If we accept Freudian literature and assume that these traits come mainly through childhood experience, then they can be improved by looking at causes and reversing them through Will Power based improvements. Practically, this would mean that one should list down causes of anxiety(due to Neuroticism), and try to avoid oneself from going in situations which have caused anxiety in past. Or perhaps make a mental note not to be too anxious, before one goes into such situations.

However, if the cause is genetic, then suppressing or planning with known causes will only result in new sources turning up. Instead, better approach will be to visualize self in potentially anxious situations, and prepare techniques to minimize or eliminate responses which will have negative outcome. (Avoidance or planning for known situations which can potentially lead to a negative outcome may still be applied, but preparation through visualization should be considered primary).

SPECIFIC SELF-IMPROVEMENT TECHNIQUES

Self-improvement after acknowledging primacy of genetics means that we should spend significant thought in learning from experience of father or uncles or even grandfather and his family. One of the significant challenges in life is to understand what exactly are real likes and dislikes of self, and how should one react in unfamiliar situations? If we ignore the role of genetics, then trial and error, literature, and experiences of self and people we know (like friends and colleagues) are the only sources to understand self. (We can add family members also to the list of people we know, but without considering the role of heredity, their role in understanding self I think is insufficient). However, more emphasis on learning from experiences of father & ancestors is more efficient, if we acknowledge and apply role of heredity in development of self.

In case you are wondering why am I focusing on male self-help instead of involving females also? First of all, as I mentioned psychological traits and their emphasis in females are different, on an average. Me being male, I have a better understanding of achieving goals originating and executing in male psychology. Further however, as we also saw that social traits impact female psychology and survival more; it looks like females are more capable of changing based on social situations, especially after marriage. I have seen greater diversity in the behaviors of female siblings than male siblings. Perhaps greater social impact in female psychology on an average might be the reason.

SIDE NOTE ON STUDIES

The study involving high psychological similarity among identical twins forms a key component in the foundation of this article. However, question arises, if the original genome is same in this case, why are there any differences at all among this type of siblings? The book explains this by considering life as a chain organic reaction, which begins with fetus. Starting with this first cell we have various stages of embryo, baby, toddler, child, teenager and so on. The final and intermediate products in this chain reaction depend not just on initial state(genetic blueprint of fetus that is), but also conditions in which the chain reactions happen. Conditions like temperature, pressure, concentration of different biochemicals and perhaps few more factors. Therefore, the final two babies are not exactly same even in case of identical twins. The variation of course increases for fraternal twins, normal siblings, and strangers.

The book also further minimizes the role of upbringing in family and even school. It argues that same traits which might seem like they are originating because of parents’ guidance of child, might also be rooted in genetics. Since genetics of parents, father in particular, are similar to genetics of child, son in particular; therefore, environment and practices which build child’s psychological traits in family are also significantly driven by corresponding genetic structure.

With regards to teacher’s behavior with child impacting the traits, it has been observed that teachers often treat children based on their overall behavior and temperament. Same teacher will likely respond to aggressive child differently, compared to a friendly one. And therefore, to some extent teachers’ impact is also determined by child’s genetics and genetic structure of child’s family.

CONTINUING SPECIFIC SELF-IMPROVEMENT TECHNIQUES

Why genetics based introspection, and why introspection in general?

I think there are three types of things one needs to consider to navigate various life situations. The environment in which the navigation is happening, tools and machines available with self for it, and understanding of self. The environment can be geographical environment if one is navigating rainy day or a hot day. Tools can be umbrella, or suitable clothes, or air conditioning. Self-awareness can involve one’s capability in dealing with corresponding environment. For e.g. my native is in a cold region, and therefore it is much easier for me to navigate winters in Bangalore compared to people with natives in warmer regions.

Similarly for navigating professional situation, environment is the market in which the profession is needed. Tools can be machines like computers and cars, or intellectual tools like management and communication techniques. Self-awareness in such situations however will involve psychological traits like degree of extroversion or introversion, agreeableness or more independent evaluation, conservative or more open to new experience and so on.

Someone who can evaluate self based on heredity of family is in a better position to navigate through various life challenges. Ideology or nurture becomes more important only at a very large scale or on top of the profession. For most circumstances however, I think genetics should be given more consideration than is usual these days.

Same logic I think can be applied in personal relationships as well.

CONCLUSION

The effectiveness of evaluating psychological traits from genetics was derived from experience of our forefathers with domestication of animals. They however went overboard beyond reason with rigid caste system or feudal system or slavery. Later we might have over-corrected in past few decades with primary emphasis on nurture.

Currently with latest psychological inferences like those by Dr. Mitchell, I think we can introspect better and improve better, even if precise quantification is still not possible today, for the attributes in human mind.

Visualization and preparation of self in unfamiliar situations, managed through the lens of genetics and rational ideas, seems like a good option.

REFERENCES

Reference to Book - https://www.amazon.in/Innate-How-Wiring-Brains-Shapes/dp/0691173885

Innate: How the Wiring of Our Brains Shapes Who We Are

Twin Studies - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1w7wROvqbhaEsf7NmnBGOMiuB5BVtu2Vh/view

Reference to the Five Psychological Traits - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PXGzk_tDPwvTjQiskKst5uYC2VxqHYoc/view?usp=sharing

Differences between Males & Female - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uNonepMJE_PZoVA6wsGHeGfCd1NmYfsj/view?usp=sharing

Role of Development from Genetic Blueprint - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IDB2O0AD1tpjXJGV41d-TdAsOJ6BWDa5/view?usp=sharing

Nature of Nurture - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1x4QAPfqv6ca3Ffx2UrSxv67iFTI28ViI/view?usp=sharing

MAPPING

FUTURE

OF

OBJECTIVISM

HOW CAN OBJECTIVISM BECOME A DOMINANT IDEOLOGY?

INTRODUCTION

The article is for long time Objectivists only. I think at this point only long time Objectivists can clearly visualize the logistics for making the ideology mainstream. Philosophy of Kant, Christianity, and Islam being examples of mainstream ideologies. Personally, I have been reading Ayn Rand and Objectivist literature for more than 20 years now.

BACKGROUND

Ayn Rand in her title essay of the book For the New Intellectual explained how philosophies of Plato, Aristotle, & Kant came to dominate the Western Civilization. Further, this article by a long time Objectivist highlights the spread of ideas in a structural way.

Basically, there are primary philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Kant, & Rand. Secondary philosophers like Plotinus, Aquinas, Kierkegaard, & Murray Rothbard (Libertarianism). Tertiary philosophers and intellectuals like Dr. Peikoff, intellectual activists, social reformers, political activists and so on…

GENERAL TRAJECTORY OF IDEAS

The Philosophical movement starts with primary philosophers who develop unique Metaphysics & Epistemology, and then derive Ethics, Politics, & Aesthetics from it. Sometimes like Kierkegaard or Murray Rothbard, some aspects of primary philosophy are picked, and secondary philosophy is developed. Tertiary philosophers structure diverse sources of primary or secondary philosophers into a single volume. Intellectuals and philosophers of science make certain implicit ideas explicit, and deep dive into specific subjects like Psychology, Economics, Education, and Sociology. Intellectual Activists and Broadcasters further disseminate ideas until these ideas reach to the man in street.

Examples include Dr. Peikoff as tertiary philosopher, John Rawls the father of DEI as intellectual, Dr. Tara Smith as Objectivist intellectual, and Dr. Yaron Brook as Intellectual Activist and Broadcaster.

Overall, here are the various stages in dissemination of ideas:

1.   Philosophical Stage: Philosophy is created by primary or secondary philosophers, and then structured by tertiary philosophers. Sociologically, whole stage can be classified as Philosophical Movement.

2.   Intellectual Stage: The structured philosophy is applied to sciences as in Induction in Physics by David Harriman, and Biological basis for Teleological Concepts by Dr. Harry Binswanger. Further, the Philosophy is also applied to subjects of Humanities like Judicial Review in an Objective Legal System by Dr. Tara Smith applying Objectivist ideas, or The Interpretation of Dreams by Freud applying Kantian ideas. Sociologically this stage can be classified as Intellectual Movement.

3.   Social Stage: Once Intellectual Stage is fairly established, the philosophical ideas need to move from Ivory Tower to the society at large. Examples include Egalitarianism of John Rawls moving into the policy of Affirmative Action, Libertarianism into Tea Party Movement, or ideas of John Locke adopted by Benjamin Franklin and applied for interpreting day to day news headlines. The sociological form of this stage being Social Movement.

During Medieval Ages sermons in Church to regular folks being example of Christian philosophy acting in social realm.

4.   Political Stage: After social movement, the next stage is Political Movement. Examples include American Revolution, conversion of Roman Emperors to Christianity and so on. Basically, considering high stakes in political decisions, social movement acts as an experimental ground for politics. That is, even though Philosophical Movement defines political principles, applying them at a state, national, or international level still requires creation of sufficient social ground. 

5.   Reinforcement Stage: While philosophical ideas like Objectivism travel through different stages in movement, the application of ideas is not always linear. That is, if the movement has reached social stage for example, it will still face intellectual and sometimes philosophical resistance. For e.g. Kant and his intellectual successors lead to the downfall of Enlightenment ideas, because the Enlightenment ideas were not sufficiently grounded despite reaching mainstream political stage.

Therefore, even after philosophy establishes political stage, movements in other stages also need to remain active. Conversely, if ideology is in lower stage, it may still have a higher stage version also. For example, social and political awareness of Ayn Rand’s fiction can act as a recruitment tool for the New Intellectuals.

CURRENT STATE OF OBJECTIVISM

Primary & Tertiary Stage: Ayn Rand wrote on all domains of philosophy in Galt’s Speech, Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, Virtue of Selfishness, Capitalism: An Unknown Ideal, and The Romantic Manifesto. Dr. Peikoff acted as tertiary philosopher to consolidate her ideas in Objectivism: Philosophy of Ayn Rand.

Intellectual Stage: There has also been application in basic sciences through Induction in Physics by David Harriman, and Biological basis of Teleological Concepts by Dr. Harry Binswanger. In humanities we have legal application by Dr. Tara Smith. Dr. Peikoff has himself applied Objectivism to sociology in The DIM Hypothesis.

Current level: I think currently Objectivism needs to focus on Intellectual stage. However, given how deeply entrenched Kantian and Platonic ideas are in intellectual ecosystem, we need reinforcement of philosophical ideas as well. I think the reinforcement stage is working well through Dr. Brook, Don Watkins, Alex Epstein, Dr. Tara Smith, Dr. Peter Schwartz, Ayn Rand Institute,  and some more individuals & organizations.

However, it is difficult for non-intellectuals to consistently apply Objectivism, because many subjects like Economics[1], Psychology, and Management[3] have not been sufficiently investigated from the Objectivist perspective.

EXCEPTION TO THE LOGICAL FLOW OF PHILOSOPHICAL IDEAS

Here are some examples where logical flow of philosophical ideas is not beneficial to the spreading of ideology. For irrational ideologies like Islam, it makes sense to go to political stage without spending too much time in Philosophical, Intellectual, or Social stage. Significant discussion risks premature exposure of irrational roots. Therefore, these ideologies focus on reinforcement stage, where social, intellectual, and philosophical enhancements can be done in a controlled environment. Environment in which heretic ideas can be suppressed through political force like the Blasphemy laws.

Ideas like Aristotelian philosophy and Objectivism however need to follow the logical progression of movements.

CONCLUSION

The importance of ideas in culture & also day to day activities have been clearly demonstrated by movements from Aristotle, Plato, & Kant in past 2000 years. Objectivism offers unparalleled growth for self and humanity. However, to reach the Atlantis, law of identity needs to be applied in social realm. That is, logical progression of movements needs to be followed.

POST SCRIPT

If Objectivism is in Intellectual stage, how can non-intellectuals apply it in their day-to-day lives?

First of all, it needs to be acknowledged that there will be more mistakes, as intellectual foundation is not sufficiently built. One should be prepared to recover and learn from such mistakes.

Secondly, the deviation from mainstream opinion will be severely punished, as other movements like Communism have wider impact.

Thirdly, significant effort is needed by Objectivist individuals to understand ideology of persons & institutions one is dealing with. And sometimes tactical or even strategic retreat is needed to safeguard one’s livelihood in a hostile environment. For example, discussing one’s Objectivist opinions with trusted individuals rather than in public or even private forums.

REFERENCES

Lesser known applications of Objectivism

[1] Objective Economics: How Ayn Rand's Philosophy Changes Everything about Economics

Amazon.com: Objective Economics: How Ayn Rand's Philosophy Changes Everything about Economics eBook : Buechner, M. Northrup: Kindle Store

[2] Reinventing Management: Organizational Ethics From Objectivism

Reinventing Management: Organizational Ethics From Objectivism - Kindle edition by Gupta, Rohin. Politics & Social Sciences Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.

Cultural Survey

Ayn Rand’s insights into mind-body dichotomy, DIM Hypothesis by Dr. Peikoff, and my understanding of the differences between Aristotelian and Platonic Philosophy are applied here. The purpose is to survey ethical ideas in current culture, infer right ethical principles, and also understand the social reality of our time.

—

Whether it’s in supermarket, or career selection, or falling in love — every decision and corresponding actions have consequences. Actions that lead to a good life are right. A good life is a life that is healthy — physically, mentally, and emotionally.

However, it’s not automatically clear which decisions are right or wrong. Some thinking and judgment are required to check correctness. This thinking and judgment are guided by the subject of Ethics. Further, intensity of thinking and impact of consequences range from very small to extreme. For example, career selection and love-related decisions are impactful, and decisions in the supermarket have relatively less impact.

Purpose of Ethics is three-fold. First is to help an individual identify values. Second is to enable an individual to prioritize identified values. And third is to guide the individual, as he acts to achieve or maintain the identified values.

The three criteria of ethics, identification, prioritization, and action on values will be used here to understand and judge different Ethical Systems.

So here are various Ethical Systems:

Altruism: Historically and widely popular, it calls a decision or action right if it involves intention to sacrifice values. This sacrifice may involve values owned by self, or values owned by others. Examples can be charitable actions of Bill Gates for sacrificing values of self. Or actions of socialist leaders in Venezuela and elsewhere, for sacrificing values owned by fellow men in society.

So it’s clear that in Altruism, the main criteria for right and wrong is action aspect of Ethics. That is, a person is judged good by this Ethics if he or she sacrifices values. Identification and Prioritization of values is subservient to the decision to sacrifice. For example, Mother Teresa mostly just made death easy for the sick and homeless. But because she sacrificed her own life for others, she was given high moral credit, driven by the Ethics of Altruism.

Further, in Altruism, the focus is on other people rather than self.

Predatory Egoism: Like Altruism, Predatory Egoism also has sacrifice as the standard of right and wrong. Further however, it classifies an action or decision as right if the beneficiary of the sacrifice is the person making the decision. Examples can be Donald Trump maligning Amazon and Jeff Bezos, trying to sacrifice their reputation and therefore market, to appeal to his political followers; or many industrialists like Gang of Four in American Railways around 19th Century, pushing government regulations that harm competitors and therefore benefit themselves through coercive (forceful) monopolies.

Here, too, focus is on other people rather than self.

Hedonism: The most visible image of a Hedonist is a drug addict or a raging alcoholic. However, since hedonism refers to those who make decisions solely based on what they feel is right, often based on their mood, so hedonism should also include those who make career and love decisions primarily from their feelings, even if they are not using drugs or alcohol.

Ethics of Eudaimonia:Eudaimonia is a Greek origin word which means human flourishing and prosperity. According to this system of Ethics, human happiness realized due to flourishing is the standard of right and wrong. (As against hedonistic happiness). However, when we go into specific principles of Eudaimonia, there is resistance to facts as the basis of Ethics. That is, whenever there is a conflict between the judgment / intuition / feelings about what is valuable, and facts that might have been basis of those values, then practitioners of Eudaimonia prefer intuition over facts. And therefore sometimes, Eudaimonia implicitly promotes altruistic thinking like charity as very important or helping colleagues over personal career etc.

Rational Egoism:Like Eudaimonia, Rational Egoism also has life and well-being of the valuer as a standard. Unlike Eudaimonia however, here relevant facts are given primacy when in conflict with intuitive guidelines. Example of relevant facts is production as a fundamental element in human survival and flourishing, creating values like e-Commerce and factories from ideas, that is.

Further, there is hierarchy or definite order in which the Ethical code is identified and then applied. Virtues or guides for obtaining values for flourishing are derived from flourishing life as standard, and after that organization of facts relevant for flourishing life. For example in this Ethics, we have virtues or guidelines that involve evaluation of individuals based on how they contribute to one’s productive purpose, or seeking of knowledge for purpose etc.

Production rather than sacrifice as the focus of pursuit is the foundation for purposeful action in Rational Egoism. This is the fundamental difference between Rational Egoism and Predatory Egoism.

Since the nature of valuer, wants of the valuer, and socio-ecological environment of the valuer is used for identifying the Central Motivation of his or her life, therefore Egoism or the view of self is a key element in this ethics. Further, since purpose is derived from facts, and executed based on Ethical Principles derived from facts, so Rationality is also the key element here.

Actions of Steve Jobs, whether being able to visualize future benefits from technology, or praising good Computer Engineers, are examples of Rational Egoism. Overall, this is the only Ethical System, whichconsistently considers identification of values as primary. Eudaimonia being the system which inconsistently considers identification and prioritization of values as primary.

Pragmatism: Discarding principles of any kind is the essence of Pragmatism. Whether principles are value-generating or value-destroying, Pragmatism holds that as long as an individual reaches out to principles for creating or protecting values, he is acting on a wrong premise. An example is a statement such as an idea may be good in theory, but is bad in practice. So rather than question specifics of theories or principles, the school of ethics rejects the need for principled and abstract thinking itself. So here too, like Altruism, identification and prioritization of values is secondary, compared to actions in pursuit of values.

Categorical Imperative: Converse of Pragmatism is this school, where the need for Principle to be practically validated is completely discarded. So if any principle is raised to the Ethical level, then the school says it is wrong to attempt to consider its practical implications. For example, the school says charity or socialism as good should not be validated with facts of reality. Or even ideas like will of majority is always true, should not be validated.

Further, the Ethical Principles that Rational Egoism or Eudaimonia correctly derive as right, are often misrepresented by the school of Categorical Imperative while executing. For example, earning more money is a right thing, as long as it improves flourishing life and does not involve coercion, overall, supporting the Central Purpose of the individual’s life. However, since Categorical Imperative disconnects this principle from practical aspects like flourishing, so this can lead to an unhealthy or irrational obsession with wealth. Therefore through the Ethics of Categorical Imperative, wealth becomes a distraction rather than the means to promote rational purpose and happiness.

Therefore Categorical Imperative also falls in the same category as Altruism and Pragmatism, only more extreme. It completely discards identification and prioritization in favor of action. Divorcing What from How, that is.

Nihilism: In Predatory Egoism, sacrifice of other people and their efforts for benefit of self rather than mutual benefit is considered. Nihilism goes one step further. Here the action or the decision is considered right, if it involves sacrifice, or more precisely destruction of values. (Destruction being the motive, with sacrifice as the straw man or the rationalization.) Unlike Predatory Egoism, here there is no intention to gain from sacrifice or destruction. Destruction is an end in itself. Example can be socialized medicine destroying medical institutions, without providing any tangible gain to anybody.

Skeptical School of Ethics: This school focuses mostly on maintaining already achieved values, and not on creating new values. The examples of this school are nutritionists, environmentalists, Libertarians etc. (There is an element of nihilism also in this school.) The best of environmentalists focus on the negative impact human activity has on the environment, which in turn impacts humans back. The solution they offer is abstinence from progress itself. The worst of the environmentalists consider environment as an end in itself. And like Altruists, such environmentalists also want individuals to sacrifice for the environment, irrespective of whether the sacrifice provides overall benefit to the individual or not. Similarly, Libertarians focus on negative aspects of government only, some of them advocating anarchy rather than specific reforms.

Since Production or Creation of values is low on the agenda of skeptics, they end up stalling the flourishing. (Values for flourishing being not just products but also methods, processes, guidelines like law and Constitution etc.). Flourishing refers to activities that make humans more capable of surviving. And therefore skeptics turn into nihilists by implication.

Conclusion: Survey of various Ethical schools brings out a few types in decision-making: a type that is focused on sacrifice and destruction of Values; a type like Libertarians and Environmentalists, who look only at the negative aspects of Production; a type that considers flourishing life as the standard of values, but is reluctant to question sacrificial or Altruistic actions; a type that discards principled thinking and puts emotions over fact-based principles; a type that disconnects principles from facts and implications, making them out of context absolute. And finally a Rational Egoist, deriving decisions from facts about self and own environment, and using fact-based rational principles to execute these decisions.

Of course, many subscribe to mixtures of these schools. For example, Altruism leading to a sense of entitlement and therefore Predatory Egoism. Or Pragmatism leading to Hedonism.

At an even wider level, there are schools of Ethics that give primacy to actions on values. Here content of values involving identification and prioritization is mostly an afterthought. Rational Egoism and Eudaimonia, on the other hand, promote identification and prioritization of values before any decision related to action is taken. These give importance to What over How, Content over Form, and therefore are from the Aristotelian Philosophy. Remaining schools are different versions of Platonic Philosophy.

Based on feedback to previously musical video, added a voiceover in American accent. Checkout this updated video on human motivation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZQKk_x_gqs

Final draft of video

It captures the essential concepts involved in Human Motivation, introduces the most popular model for motivating humans, identifies the gaps in that model and fixes them.

Hi All,

        I am in middle of converting the content of blog into video.

       Please check the first draft of part of video and share feedback.

      Pending : Voice over and parts explaining values, Central Purpose of Life, and Alternative model.

3 hours ago, Brant Gaede said:

Qua life the central purpose of life is life--that is, the propagating of one's DNA. Qua life this is axiomatic.

Safety, negative or not, is l likely the first operative step in securing the organism.

Maslow's ideas are a hodgepodge.

Everybody is motivated by a purpose, even not to have a purpose. That can be a plus or a negative. Or purposes. This can be quite complicated. For instance, the purpose of envy appeasement. Someone who is extremely productive can be a grovelling, ignorant controlled coward.

One can be immune to envy but not realise he's living in a sea of envy the creatures of which are out to get him.

Explications on CPL with no mention of envy is pure intellectualization.

--Brant

Please differentiate between civilized humans and animals.

Also, some of your answers are in the blog. Hint - Productiveness as the core.

A more elaborate explanation is here

https://medium.com/@rohingupta2k18/reinventing-maslows-model-of-motivation-5cdc0d173caf?fbclid=IwAR1A2QxMa6NfYpUeu_zkYQJPbPtDnWIdKzl5szrk3aTXobSQD3FQEiL97Yc

P.S: The Maslow's model of motivation is widely quoted in many influential books of management. I use Objectivist Ethics, concept of Central Purpose of Life in particular, to improve the model and its application.

Maslow’s theory of motivation claims that first motivators are physiological factors like food, shelter, etc., after that safety factors like rule of law and insurance(protection in general), then meaningful social relationships, then social status and reputation, and finally an individual’s need to find himself or herself. The final one being self-actualization.

From OEFO perspective, not a chosen few, but all adults are or should be motivated by self-actualization (OEFO refers to my book “Organizational Ethics from Objectivism”, from which the snippet is taken). The Central Purpose of Life (CPL) in Objectivist Ethics is quite similar to the concept of self-actualization. Other needs in Maslow’s model, ranging from physiological, safety-related, social, and emotional should be inferred and adjusted based on the CPL. For example, a CEO of an organizations will need a bigger social circle than a scientist(generally speaking), since the latter focuses more on in-depth study, and the former more on collaborative actions for building products and services. Safety is a negative factor and should not be the primary motivation. E.g., retiring early without having any clear CPL is not right. Also, the emotional part of the self should be fuelled using art or sports, such that one is sufficiently motivated to move towards their CPL. The same criteria is true for personal and other relationships. The contribution of each relationship towards the CPL should be evaluated.

Good Morning, today is Saturday, 16th March. Second part of the study-group starts now.

Following is the scope for this week’s study

------

Good Morning, today is Saturday, 9th March. Main study starts now.
Following is the scope for this week’s study
------
WEEK 1

Please check following links to get a glimpse of whats in store.

1. Study Group on intellectual development of Ayn Rand - http://forum.objectivismonline.com/index.php?/topic/28351-ayn-rand-chapter-from-the-power-and-the-glory/

2. Study Group on how iPhone was conceptualized and developed - http://forum.objectivismonline.com/index.php?/topic/29185-becoming-steve-jobs-how-a-reckless-upstart-became-a-visionary-leader/
 

Pre-study started yesterday

-----------------
WEEK 0

Mini version now available here - https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07NWBS1SJ?fbclid=IwAR1oBovyShIf5wtAwtPCrFiwDpLmPG3VFZNz8eXEhosyqHvJ64fm-UJQgUs

So those who may not have bought the full book, considering it complex, can still buy the mini-version and participate in the study-group.

Just posted following etiquettes for the upcoming study group.

Etiquette is the art of facilitating trade by applying principles and rules of behavior to social situations. In this case we are trading ideas on particular topic, and etiquettes deal with how we should post and interact in the thread.

Here are etiquettes designed specifically for study-group method of discussion.

1. THE NATURE OF POSTS IN THIS STUDY GROUP

a. Focus on the Text. The study-group is a text-focused series. This means each participant's weekly post should be either an outline of the text, a summary of the text, a "chewing" on some point in the text, an elaborated question about a point in the text; or an answer to the weekly optional questions about the text.

b. Unacceptable Substitutes. Not acceptable as core subjects of the main weekly posts are: personal comments; mere statements of agreement or disagreement; links to sources other than the particular text which is the object of study; criticisms of the author's style; or debate with the author. Any of these might be appropriate as an aside in the main weekly post.

c. Duplication. Duplication of form is not a problem. Even if, by unlikely accident, all participants were to write the same kind of post (e.g., a summary of the text assigned for the week), the content will inevitably be different.

d. Secondary Posts. Sometimes a secondary post (written after posting an outline, summary, etc. for the week) can increase learning about the text. Secondary posts are optional. Topics might include: showing a connection to another field; asking about the best study method to be employed for a certain text; or describing one's personal experiences with the subject of the text. Of course, these secondary topics, if very brief, can be woven into the primary post.

2. DO

Do address issues, not individual SGO members. If Mike says "X and Y and therefore Z," address his argument, summarized in your own words, but without naming him.

Do remember that no member has an obligation to respond to another member's questions, invitations, or comments.

Do edit for typographical errors.

3. DO NOT

Do not name other participants in your posts, but instead deal only with ideas. For example, you could write "The notion of 'necessity', as it is traditionally used, implies a false dichotomy of . . . ," instead of "John Smith's bizarre fantasy about 'necessity' in metaphysics . . . " or any other personalized statement.

Do not link to, name, or discuss individuals, websites, or ideas not relevant to the topic discussed in a study group.

Do not quote participants, but instead express their ideas in your own words.

IMPLEMENTING ETIQUETTES

I will be sending the message to the person in case I think the etiquette is violated. And he can edit accordingly, or reply back if there is misunderstanding.

These etiquettes are adapted from etiquettes of Burgess Laughlin's study-group.

Study Group Link is as follows:https://www.facebook.com/groups/146490542953558

Continuing my journey to apply Objectivsm into Management, I have started a study group.

OVERVIEW

The study will involve chapter 6, Organization, of the book "Reinventing Management: Organization Ethics from Objectivism". The chapter builds on the Employer-Employee and Employer-Employer relationships from chapter 3, Collaboration. Delving into relationships like creating complementary material values, skill building, wages, and Central Purpose of Life in a skewed social system.

Details of the study-group are here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/146490542953558/

The book can be bought here -  https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07MH79D18

Once the study is completed, I will convert the group into a discussion forum for working professionals. The forum will cover topics related to work environment and work culture, career and job related discussions, business counsel etc.

2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Rohin,

Good luck with your book.

 

Michael

Thanks Michael.

Already a bestseller in a category

https://www.amazon.com/gp/new-releases/digital-text/8493717011/ref=zg_b_hnr_8493717011_1

Got a question in another forum, which is relevant here also.

Quote

Just curious: what's your background? Have you worked for or managed a large business before?

Quote

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

 “The objective should be to improve the Enterprise, and not just the Enterprise Software.” When Rohin first started working in the field of Enterprise Software, this tweet was the anchoring thought. However, he soon realized, even if he molds himself into the Steve Jobs and Dennis Ritchie of the field, he will not be able to do the Justice the enterprise deserves; that would require fixing the very foundations of the subject that drives the enterprise, the subject of Management.

 Having spent 14 years studying Objectivism, working on Enterprise, Mobile, and Network management software, connecting these to various aspects of life: Rohin Gupta delves into a previously undiscovered aspect of Management Science and Philosophy, a set of practically applicable theories, in the form of Principles applied to concrete aspects of business.

Proud to announce that the book is now released - https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07MH79D18

Hi All,
       I am happy and proud to have written the book, "RE-INVENTING MANAGEMENT: ORGANIZATIONAL ETHICS FROM OBJECTIVISM".
       In a sentence, the book is about applying Objectivist Ethics and Epistemology in a non-political social space. 
       Specifically and primarily, within the business.

      You can get the book here - https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07MH79D18
 

       The book also resolves the question I think is crucial not just for businesses, but every Objectivist.

       "Analyzing Maslow's model of motivation from Objectivist perspective"

Thank you both for the encouragement.

I will start working on my debut book this year.

Working title(or maybe even final title) is “REINVENTING MANAGEMENT: ORGANIZATIONAL ETHICS FROM OBJECTIVISM”.

Many or all of you are connected to the domain of the planned book. Urging you to leave relevant comments here.

Mission statement is as follows

-------------------------

-------------------------

CHAPTER 3 - CHARACTER SKETCH OF DAENERYS

CHAPTER 2

GAME OF THRONES – THE PLOT THEME