RoR: Forum

Sounds a little like HOW TO WIN FRIENDS AND INFLUENCE PEOPLE, or a manual of social metaphysics! :P

Post 1

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 1:48am

More like 'The Irony of Being Solo'...

Post 2

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 2:54am

Ed�once I'd translated the title I read the article. Having read the article I was sufficiently intrigued to go see how many little gold fellas you'd accumulated yourself. Then I read your extended profile. There I saw this confession: "A few extra pounds." SOLO's Fitness Leader?! A few extra pounds?! And here's me, relying on you for advice about myextra pounds (now disappearing, btw: being a layabout is giving me the opportunity to pay attention to some vanity items like losing weight)!! This is serious denunciation territory!

Seriously, Ed, I want to take this opportunity to register how much respect I've built up for you over the time you've been here. Yes, you're an incorrigible rationalist, right up there with that Mormon Setzer, but you both have a passion that sizzles through in spite of it, and most importantly an over-arching decency than which I'm coming to believe nothing is more important. Decency, decency, decency, impregnated with passion. You ooze it, my friend, & I really admire you for it. You too, Luke. You can't fool me. Behind those Franklin Covey diagrams there's a veritable cauldron of seething, raging passion.

As for "How to win friends & gain Atlas points," the only thing I'd say to anyone who worries about accumulating them is not to. Don't be a sanction whore. The things get taken more seriously than they were ever designed to be. Frankly, I'd just as soon ditch them. Be yourself, not a participant in a popularity contest. The surest way to be popular is to be a touchy-feely group-groper, but is SOLO going to change the world as per the Credo via this route? I don't think so. The icons are a way of providing feedback, but they don't begin to compare with actual comments. And they're not necessarily an indication of merit, as the number of sanctions for the disgraceful Drooling Beast article demonstrated.

Shortly I shall be writing a sequel to Linz Sinz that will excoriate certain vices, over & above those already covered, that really piss me off. Equally, it will eulogise certain contra-virtues. I'd urge all SOLOists to practise those regardless of whether doing so earns them Atlas points or not. :-)

And we shall soon be running Joe Rowlands' magnificent SOLOC 4 presentation, All or Nothing (of which folk should still secure themselves a hard copy by subscribing to The Free Radical). This will underscore the point made several times in Ed's article, albeit not in quite these terms: SOLO rocks!

Linz

Post 3

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 3:40am

Hoy Thompson,-

It does all sound a bit kiss-ass, a bit Jehovah's Witness-like but without the cross and bible jaz.

If I were to give alternative advice to your Six Step Plan To Enlightenment I would say just come as you are and be true to yourself and admire whatever rings true, whosoever writes it. Say what you think and let it cost what it will. The Universe has its own way of either [omitted] or making you stronger if you strike up that bargain.

Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. - Emerson

So where ya been? I haven't talked to you for ages. Missed you.

Post 4

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 3:49am

Ed, I think this article can have the effect of encouraging unction.

As a matter of nature, people are already prone to tailoring their commentary for approval -- over originality, authenticity, innovativeness and the discomforting controversy that these sometimes cause. (On the flip side of the coin, eternal contrarians similarly tailor their commentary for disapproval -- with similar costs.)

Such tailoring amounts to a drabby fit for anyone's individuality. It may be paradoxical, but it requires a great deal of conscious effort to avoid these tendencies and be true to your inner self.

It's such effort that should be encouraged -- the effort to make sure one's commentary always reflects an authentic view of the truth or an original contribution toward reaching it.

Alec

Post 5

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 6:41am

Good article Ed (sanctioned it).

There is a certain thoughtfulness for a new member about the icons. But after a point they become not so important. What is important to me, is that what I write hits home for people.

There are people here whose opinion I value, and a posting or email exchange with those people, is worth more than a couple thousand icons.

John

Post 6

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 6:58am

As startling as it is for me to be with the majority, I have to agree with everyone else so far. Ed Thompson might have written humor. I have a few Atlases. I got my first whole Atlas before I figured out what they were. (See SOLO Economics for my thoughts on the social praxeology of Atlas Points, "Atlas Inflation.") I just came here to participate, as I have many times in many places.

These websites or blogs or whatever you call them are just BBSes, computer bulletin boards. We've been through that ten years ago. I joined The Well (www.well.com, where I am mercury.) in 1990 to interview Timothy Leary for an article for Loompanics. The Well is just like SOLO, but Berkeley, (the man equals the school) not Rand.

Back in 1971, I subscribed to The Libertarian Connection. The LC subscription bought you the privilege of contributing two pages per issue and you could buy more. We were mimeographing back then. (They went offset about 1975.) That is where my personal views comingled with the opinions, insights, and observations of Tibor Machan, Adam Reed, Murray Rothbard, Robert Poole, Jr., Harry Browne, and dozens of other names you might know. We argued back and forth. My favorite Tibor Machan work from that era has always been, "What the Hell is Steve Holbrook Talking About?" So, I did not come here to win Atlas Points. I just got them.

I have tried to curry them. It always fails. My brilliant statements of minor insight from major Objectivist truths typically get ignored. And I know why: "So what else is new?" At least, that is why I do not sanction the usual stuff, though I see bland opinions boosted by others. I sanction the unusual. Apparently, my own empirical facts and rational frameworks occasionally appeal to other unusual thinkers. Also falling flat are my rants, though I see the tirades of others garnering approval. Apparently, I gain points for the same things I grant them. For me, SOLO is a mirror.

Ed is right: it comes down to winning friends and influencing people, to the social metaphysics of an Objectivist in-group. But you cannot win that game by playing it. You cannot act sincere when it is "necessary." To win friends, you have to be a friend -- but no one likes a sycophant, except, perhaps Ed Thompson, who was gracious and magnanimous when he forgave me for contradicting him in an area of his expertise, gorilla guts.

Sometimes, when I have found people engaged in argument with me, I write a personal message to clear things up. Sometimes, I have gone back and read something I ignored and if I like it, I sanction it, and send an email. I am not sure that this is the path to Atlas Points, but it does make SOLO more enjoyable for me. And that is why I come here: for myself.

(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 8/29, 7:02am)

Post 7

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 9:23am

Ed,

I found this to be a wonderfully inspiring article and you just got more sanction points from me.

As a bearer of large number of them, I want to state that I have never been interested in them too much except for once when it seemed that there was a glitch in the system. Sure they are pleasing to look at, and it feels good to know that you get strokes of approval (whoever says he/she doesn't like approval at all is lying), but I really, really care about the ideas. They are what move me. The number of sanctions just sort of happened over time.

That's the way they're supposed to work, I guess.

(All right, all right. I also use them as way to express gratitude at times, like sincere response to an article of mine.)

One of the most inspiring things you wrote in your article is:

... when drawing closer to the light of others, don't let your light go out.

That one brought tears to my eyes. (You should see a dressing room of a Maestro right after a concert for a tortured collection of snobbish moths going crazy trying to burn their wings...)

On a humorous note, there is an Internet essay that periodically makes the rounds called "Dark Suckers," which are physical light sources, but treated with double entendre. Well there are light suckers too. They show up around here once in a while. But all they find out is that Solo is one big mother of a dark sucker.

Solo is slowly becoming a major shining light to the rational world.

As I see it, your article is more about sincerity and honest passion for ideas than about sanction points or Atlas icons.

I enjoyed it tremendously.

Michael

(Edited by Michael Stuart Kelly on 8/29, 8:01pm)

Post 8

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 12:01pm

Thanks for the feedback, you guys!

The "jib-jabs" from Joe & Robert & the poignant Rick made me chuckle -- but without injury;

the "registration" of an earned respect from a man whom I, despite some personal history of dialectical friction, sincerely look up to and admire -- brought a calm ecstasy to my soul;

the most thoughtful (read: morally excellent) of the "jib-jabs," which came from Alec's careful attention to the human dynamics which serve as the arena in which this article would be applied -- was truly appreciated;

the usually succinct, but somehow (in spite of that) always full of heart, words of John -- reminded me there's good people out there, which is no surprise as John always reminds me of the good;

the deeper-than-required introspection from my off-the-wall alter-ego Michael M. (brothers in spirit, though not in letter) -- was expected though counter-intuitively appreciated for it's (always) unique perspective;

and last, but not (in any way, shape, or form) least, the characteristically grand observations -- from a man who makes me feel like he can see into my soul -- flooded my own eyes with a contagious sense of the sublime (though this time, I was the candle, and he the mirror -- shining my own light back onto me). Thank you, Michael.

Ed
(Edited by Ed Thompson
on 8/29, 12:04pm)

Post 9

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 1:03pm

Aw, golly, Ed, that was so sweet, I sanctioned it.
We love you, too!
<group hug>

Post 10

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 1:37pm

Michael, Michael, Michael,

I detect a sarcasm in you that has little benevolence to it. I sense that you sense that folks can't sense real value in others (so that we're left with a mockery of brotherhood, merely going through the motions of togetherness).

To psychologize, I also believe that this assumption (of you feeling intractably isolated, and of all the kindness in the world being ultimately inauthentic) -- stems from your past (when others never "got" you; when they never "got" who you were, or what you had said). If it pisses you off that I'd get so personal with you, then DON'T ENGAGE ME SO.

Let me deconstruct your thoughts, Michael ...
=================
Ed is right: it comes down to winning friends and influencing people, to the social metaphysics of an Objectivist in-group.�
=================

Michael, you forgot about value -- producing real value. Money -- like Atlas icons -- is evidence of value production. In short, Rand's defense of money can be applied to my article (do this now, in your mind, so that you can see the value that I can).

=================
But you cannot win that game by playing it.� You cannot act sincere when it is "necessary."�
=================

But you forgot about habit. If you get into the habit of always being sincere with people, then you will become moral. Think about it. Think about how people become better people.

=================
To win friends, you have to be a friend -- but no one likes a sycophant,
=================

That's so true.

=================
except, perhaps Ed Thompson,
=================

That's so false.

=================
who was gracious and magnanimous when he forgave me for�contradicting him in an area of his expertise, gorilla guts.
=================

That's non-benevolent sarcasm again. The kind of bullshit that you started with here. I have a new acronym for you Michael: BIBO (bullshit in - bullshit out). Let something other than shit into your head, man. Yeah, you're special and often misunderstood -- get over it or change.

Ed

Post 11

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 5:39am

SOLOists have a remarkably keen sense of authenticity and, at the same time, a remarkable tolerance.
Dear Ed, tolerance? about me? why i cannot post anymore?

Sorry! I was wrong I can post now!
CD

(Edited by Ciro D'Agostino on 8/29, 3:32pm)

Post 12

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 3:43pm

Ed:

"If you get into the habit of always being sincere with people, then you will become moral. Think about it. Think about how people become better people."

That's a keeper. Might sanction that :-)

Can we find a way to link Atlas points to air points?

Ross

Post 13

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 4:44pm

Ed:

"If you get into the habit of always being sincere with people, then you will become moral. Think about it. Think about how people become better people."

Ed, Yes! I agree
we also become predictable though? Do you think it's safe to be like that with everybody?

Post 14

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 7:57pm

Ross, thanks (I think) for the acknowledgment and (possible) sanction.

p.s. What in the beegeezuss is an air point?

Ed

Post 15

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 8:22pm

Ciro,

No joking here, but whenever I see your picture -- I think: Mafioso. Yeah that's right, I think of horse's-head-in-the-bed, old-school Mafia stuff. It kind of scares me, actually, to see your picture -- and Italiano name -- staring back at me, like you are calculating my demise or something! Ciro, I'm not trying to joke around here, but the point is that, when you question whether it's safe to be predictable with everyone -- I envision a Mafia man saying that. A man who's learned some old ways to survive in some bad places.

Ciro, I like you. When I read your words and see that you feel -- and feel deeply -- then I am comforted that you are a decent man. Here is my answer:

There are places where even I don't reach out, or speak out. I once confronted (face-to-face) a high-level politician about government funding of education. Almost immediately, I could tell that this man was through-and-through evil -- I'm talking the scary kind. Which, of course, made me regret such a direct head-on approach. He said that he'd respond to me in more detail via email (and he gave me his card and urged me to contact him) -- but I was just too damned scared to follow through and unveil my email (and identity) to this man. In short, I felt that the less he knew about me -- the better. So ... when trust is low -- then predictability ought to remain low.

However, if building trust and relatedness is high on your hierarchy of values, then a certain measure of predictability (ie. always being yourself) -- is required. Think about people you either like or dislike. The reason that you either like (or dislike) them, is because of their characteristic tendencies to act a certain way, rather than other ways. You are what you (repeatedly) do. A man who repeatedly flys planes is a pilot, a man who repeatedly smokes is a smoker, and a man who repeatedly lies, cheats, and steals is a politician -- there is just no way around "being" THAT WHICH you repeatedly do. I guess the question is about whether you want someone to know you -- to really know you -- or not.

Ed

Post 16

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 11:15pm

Dear Ed, I like you too, especially for your professional conduct, and for the impeccable

Order you show, when you explain and discuss philosophy and life in general.

I admire you for the respect you have for people here on SOLO.

I have to say that you seem to be a good man! In addition, very intelligent too.

However, I can assure you that I am not a Mafioso. I will change my picture if the Admin.

Approves of it, thus you will not think of me that I am calculating your demise.

You write: A man who has learned some old ways to survive in some bad places.

Yes, I have! You read me well. I come to America as an immigrant when I was only sixteen years old, no family, no friends; no one cared if I lived or died .It has been hard Ed. I could not write or read English; Luckily, I had my second tong, my hands :) other wise I would have been doomed. I will write about my life one day, so you would have a chance to understand and know me better( if you wish of course.) I traveled long tortuous roads to get this far. The only reason that I won my battle with evil people,and business man in general is that they have always thought, luckily, that my sincerity was false, and that I was only after the money. They were wrong! They had never imagined that my life had a different theme than theirs. The theme of a man who wants live his life as an heroic being.

Ciro D'Agostino

(Edited by Ciro D'Agostino on 8/30, 7:53am)

(Edited by Ciro D'Agostino on 8/30, 8:06am)

Post 17

Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - 6:57am

Stroking is good, but bonking is better!

Post 18

Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - 7:51am

Linz,

I am very pleased with the announcement of the announcement that Joe Rowland's essay, All or Nothing, will be presented here on Solo. It deserves the widest readership possible

It is the best description I have come across of the principle false dichotomies that Objectivists and others interested in reason fall into - and why they do.

Michael

Post 19

Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - 10:13am