Yaron Brook at CNN: Our moral code is out of date

[sjw]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/09/16/brook.moral.code.outdated

[Reidy]

The title struck me as out of character for Objectivists, suggesting as it does that our moral code was once appropriate and timely. Brook and Ghate don't really say this in their text. They say that it was always wrong, just as the medieval scientific ideas and living standards were. Thus I suspect that it was the invention of some editor at CNN.

[sjw]

The title struck me as out of character for Objectivists, suggesting as it does that our moral code was once appropriate and timely. Brook and Ghate don't really say this in their text. They say that it was always wrong, just as the medieval scientific ideas and living standards were. Thus I suspect that it was the invention of some editor at CNN.

Good point, now that you mention it I'm sure you're right.

Shayne

[Selene]

He is.

[Dennis Hardin]

I wonder how Yaron Brook managed to get invited to speak at an event sponsored by The Economist?

Human Potential 2010

He is the second speaker listed under Motivation: Purpose vs Profit

[Philip Coates]

Subject: Marketing and Recognition

Why does Yaron Brook get invited by the world's most influential newsmagazine?

Perhaps by being ubiquitous - or at least relatively recognizable as a 'name', at least in a minor way.

Brook has been constantly appearing on business and political programs over the last few years, and so when a major organization looks at who has been 'heard of' his name is now on the radar.

That's not to knock for example, Ed Hudgins' appearances, but he simply isn't showing up with a new op ed or a radio or tvinterview every few weeks. Or at least not as frequently as Brook. The principle is the same as that of successful commercial advertising: Placing one ad doesn't result in much impact; in a world of "information glut", people have to see your name a while and get used to it before they will pay attention or remember. You have to keep knocking on the door regularly.

Every week I get another ad for each of the competing cable and satellite tv and internet services. Every time I turn to a certain channel I see an ad for a certain law firm explaining their services. I'm sure ubiquity and prominence brings them a steady trickle of new customers, and what one ignores the first ten times is heard the eleventh.

Edited September 17, 2010 by Philip Coates

[sjw]

Why does Yaron Brook get invited by the world's most influential newsmagazine?

Compared with rabble-rousers like Alex Jones, Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, and even the Tea Party, Brook is a way to appear outside the mainstream while essentially supporting the establishment. Better people become attracted to establishment-friendly ARI/Objectivism than to more radical ideas. IOW he's a convenient distraction.

Shayne

Edited September 17, 2010 by sjw

[Dennis Hardin]

Ayn Rand and Objectivism now represent the establishment.

NALOPKT.

[sjw]

Ayn Rand and Objectivism now represent the establishment.

In fundamental terms they most certainly do on a wide variety of issues. E.g. see my remarks here: http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9226&view=findpost&p=108337.

If you don't recognize it then I suggest that you educate yourself.

Shayne

[Dennis Hardin]

Ayn Rand and Objectivism now represent the establishment.

In fundamental terms they most certainly do on a wide variety of issues. E.g. see my remarks here: http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9226&view=findpost&p=108337.

If you don't recognize it then I suggest that you educate yourself.

Shayne

Thanks so much. Let's just say I'm not all that impressed by the teacher's credentials.

[Philip Coates]

Did you guys miss that I gave a serious answer to the question? And that it's an important issue?

[sjw]

Thanks so much. Let's just say I'm not all that impressed by the teacher's credentials.

The teacher I was recommending was reality. You might try consulting it from time to time.

Shayne

[sjw]

Did you guys miss that I gave a serious answer to the question? And that it's an important issue?

See my sig Philip.

Shayne

[Reidy]

I'd call Objectivist ideas "mainstream" rather than "establishment." Brook is, as Philip Coates has explained, part of the reason this has happened. Only a victim of terminal piss-and-moan Randroidism could find this grounds for complaint.

[sjw]

Only a victim of terminal piss-and-moan Randroidism could find this grounds for complaint.

Well, we wouldn't want any malcontents, they cause indigestion and uncomfortable feelings, so pinning the Randroid epithet on them seems the thing to do.

Shayne