On 10/10/2007 at 12:26 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:
Robert,
We agree on ARI's shortcomings and I like to think we are intelligent critics, not bashers.
I am curious as to why people demonize, i.e., distort and omit facts and make things up about a targeted scapegoat. ARI certainly does it when they get it in for someone. ARI-bashers do it, too. It's crazy because propaganda hardly convinces anyone except insiders in the age of the Internet. Those involved with a philosophy of reason should be above that.
I wonder what Angelina Jolie would say...
Michael
Hello Michael,
This being a reply 13 years later, I have no idea if you will read this or know of it. I will preface by saying I was made aware of ARI Watch only recently. I supported ARI for many years, without even thinking where their money came from other than me; I think I naively thought it was from people like me, just middle-class, but a lot of us. At any rate, it was when I was early in my journey toward deep understanding of Objectivist principles, and ARI offered good food for thought and learning. I haven't donated to them in a decade or more, for my own reasons. I don't know what was on ARI Watch in 2007; everything I have read on the site is from the last five years or so. I was rather shocked by the revelation of their funding sources and some of the leadership's close association to immoral men. The vehemence with which Mr. Hunter declaims against ARI is clear, and all his views on topics raised by ARI thinkers are not necessarily mine, but his revelations have made me ponder some interesting philosophical ideas:
Is it moral to use money you know is from corrupt sources, to promulgate right ideas?
Is it moral to gain a value from a source you know has accepted corrupt money?
ARI Watch
in ARI Corner
Posted
Hello Michael,
This being a reply 13 years later, I have no idea if you will read this or know of it. I will preface by saying I was made aware of ARI Watch only recently. I supported ARI for many years, without even thinking where their money came from other than me; I think I naively thought it was from people like me, just middle-class, but a lot of us. At any rate, it was when I was early in my journey toward deep understanding of Objectivist principles, and ARI offered good food for thought and learning. I haven't donated to them in a decade or more, for my own reasons. I don't know what was on ARI Watch in 2007; everything I have read on the site is from the last five years or so. I was rather shocked by the revelation of their funding sources and some of the leadership's close association to immoral men. The vehemence with which Mr. Hunter declaims against ARI is clear, and all his views on topics raised by ARI thinkers are not necessarily mine, but his revelations have made me ponder some interesting philosophical ideas:
Is it moral to use money you know is from corrupt sources, to promulgate right ideas?
Is it moral to gain a value from a source you know has accepted corrupt money?