Objectivist Ethics in Business

Posts 1-10 of 10

Cassandra Troy Group moderator
The company name is only visible to registered members.

Objectivity versus subjectivity
Rational people ponder questions on the basis of logic, integrating concepts and facts with existing knowledge. To the person of reason reality exists independently from his mind. They look to the outside world as a source of information. After thorough integration they try to persuade others of their point of view on the basis mature debate and valid argument.

This simple premise does not hold true for those who have rejected reason as their method to knowledge. They rather chose for their input emotion, intuition and various other means of revelation from within the depths of their own persons (why are we surprised we're breeding pocket versions of Narcissus, all vying for the position of Master of the Universe?).

Other than the rationalists, they cannot rely on facts, reason, debate, and arguments to convince us of their point of view: they hold that such objective information simply isn't available to humans. They therefore have two avenues open to them to enforce their standpoint on others. One way would be to forcibly suppress individual free will, making it subservient to the 'common will' of the collective, which was unsuccessfully practiced by a number of regimes, jointly responsible for over 100 million deaths over the course of just one century.

A less crude but trickier way is to try change people's way of looking at the world by adjusting their perception of reality. LSD in the public water supply would be one method. More refined is the application of rhetorical spin, re-framing, the use of certain idiom and redefining definitions of strategically chosen words; mind games, the dissemination of memes that may be triggered by symbolism, catch words or the use of images.

Alternatively they might look at the theatrical and artistic world for inspiration: it has expert experience of smoke and mirrors and knowledge how to harnass style, music, visual and audio effects to induce trance in crowds. These fake spiritual experiences induced in huge crowds of course convey no factual information at all, but they do reduce the participant to the state of a mindless savage, with the back-door of the subconscious wide open to the reception of perception adjusters.

- Dialog from Star Trek Next Generation:

Borg Hugh: You probably don't know what it's like to be lost and frightened. You will listen to any voice who promises change.
Commander Riker: Even if that voice insists on controlling you?
Borg Hugh: That's what we wanted. Someone to show us a way out of the confusion. He promised clarity and purpose; he seemed like a savior; promised to make us a superior, but he had no idea how to keep his promise. He began to ask for sacrifices for the sake of the greater good ...
- 31 Aug 2008, 12:46 am
Cassandra Troy wrote: > Rational people ponder questions on the basis of logic, integrating > concepts and facts with existing knowledge. To the person of reason > reality exists independently from his mind. They look to the outside > world as a source of information. After thorough integration they try > to persuade others of their point of view on the basis mature debate > and valid argument. > > This simple premise does not hold true for those who have rejected > reason as their method to knowledge. They rather chose for their > input emotion, intuition and various other means of revelation from > within the depths of their own persons (why are we surprised we're > breeding pocket versions of Narcissus, all vying for the position of > Master of the Universe?). > > Other than the rationalists, they cannot rely on facts, reason, > debate, and arguments to convince us of their point of view: they > hold that such objective information simply isn't available to > humans. They therefore have two avenues open to them to enforce their > standpoint on others. One way would be to forcibly suppress > individual free will, making it subservient to the 'common will' of > the collective, which was unsuccessfully practiced by a number of > regimes, jointly responsible for over 100 million deaths over the > course of just one century. > > A less crude but trickier way is to try change people's way of > looking at the world by adjusting their perception of reality. LSD in > the public water supply would be one method. More refined is the > application of rhetorical spin, re-framing, the use of certain idiom > and redefining definitions of strategically chosen words; mind games, > the dissemination of memes that may be triggered by symbolism, catch > words or the use of images. > > Alternatively they might look at the theatrical and artistic world > for inspiration: it has expert experience of smoke and mirrors and > knowledge how to harnass style, music, visual and audio effects to > induce trance in crowds. These fake spiritual experiences induced in > huge crowds of course convey no factual information at all, but they > do reduce the participant to the state of a mindless savage, with the > back-door of the subconscious wide open to the reception of > perception adjusters. > > - Dialog from Star Trek Next Generation: > > Borg Hugh: You probably don't know what it's like to be lost and > frightened. You will listen to any voice who promises change. > Commander Riker: Even if that voice insists on controlling you? > Borg Hugh: That's what we wanted. Someone to show us a way out of the > confusion. He promised clarity and purpose; he seemed like a savior; > promised to make us a superior, but he had no idea how to keep his > promise. He began to ask for sacrifices for the sake of the greater > good ...
Post visible to registered members
Cassandra Troy Group moderator
The company name is only visible to registered members.

Re^2: Objectivity versus subjectivity
Hi Frank, thanks for that. Yes, of course the separation of mind and reality was facilitated by Kant c.s. in our era and by Plato before him. Although I am always fulminating against the onslaughts the Frankfurt School has brought about us in our own time, I haven't studied the individual members' contribution to the destructive counter culture. If you happen to know more about Adorno, can I request you to write that down in a newsletter or article? Thanks.
- 02 Sep 2008, 11:24 am
Cassandra Troy wrote: > Hi Frank, thanks for that. Yes, of course the separation of mind and > reality was facilitated by Kant c.s. in our era and by Plato before > him. Although I am always fulminating against the onslaughts the > Frankfurt School has brought about us in our own time, I haven't > studied the individual members' contribution to the destructive > counter culture. If you happen to know more about Adorno, can I > request you to write that down in a newsletter or article? Thanks.
Post visible to registered members
Michael R. Grunenberg Premium Member Group moderator Xpert Ambassador
The company name is only visible to registered members.

Re^4: Objectivity versus subjectivity
Hi Frank,

thanks for outlining the desaster of 68.

I still think he really didn't want to be understood but took more pleasure in communicating widely incomprehensible literature supported by his (unbelievable strong) charisma.
One of the means of 68 was the cloudy and unintelligible language.
But make no mistake about it, don´t place it into the 68s.
These structures are transferred in business language nowadays.
So we should try to reconstruct the reasonable language of the pre-68-times - as far as it did exist, anyway.

They were highly successful. Today, someone who talks about traditional values and virtues in Germany looks automatically like a complete fool.
Just eliminate the adjective "traditional" and you describes one of the most essential problems of todays business and political ethics.

Yours
Michael
- 03 Sep 2008, 12:35 pm
Michael R. Grunenberg wrote: > Hi Frank, > > thanks for outlining the desaster of 68. > > > I still think he really didn't want to be understood but took more > > pleasure in communicating widely incomprehensible literature > > supported by his (unbelievable strong) charisma. > > One of the means of 68 was the cloudy and unintelligible language. > But make no mistake about it, don´t place it into the 68s. > These structures are transferred in business language nowadays. > So we should try to reconstruct the reasonable language of the > pre-68-times - as far as it did exist, anyway. > > > They were highly successful. Today, someone who talks about > > traditional values and virtues in Germany looks automatically like a > > complete fool. > > Just eliminate the adjective "traditional" and you describes one of > the most essential problems of todays business and political ethics. > > Yours > Michael
Post visible to registered members
Cassandra Troy Group moderator
The company name is only visible to registered members.

Re^6: Objectivity versus subjectivity
I thank you both for the contribution. I am currently residing in Holland, a country almost totally deconstructed, perhaps even worse than Germany is. All ties with the past have been cut, and all 'traditional' has been identified as the source of all evil. The amount of confusion is simply jawdropping, ethics are non-existent or a result of Pragmatism. I yet have to meet the first person who has escaped the onslaught unscathed. The clever thing of "the long march through the institutions" was that strategically important fields were perverted: all ranks of education, journalism, governmental institutions, NGOs, you name it. Today it is business that has fallen as well (as you say, the adoption of 'liberated' words, as well as voodoo promotion campaigns, designed to instill emotion. The disseminating effect is horrendous! It affects the entire society and new generations as well. This was the strategy as set out by the Frankfurt School. And let's not forget this, of which we soon might get a second instalment: http://vodpod.com/watch/180945-just-doing-his-job-draft
- 03 Sep 2008, 1:30 pm
Cassandra Troy wrote: > I thank you both for the contribution. I am currently residing in > Holland, a country almost totally deconstructed, perhaps even worse > than Germany is. All ties with the past have been cut, and all > 'traditional' has been identified as the source of all evil. The > amount of confusion is simply jawdropping, ethics are non-existent or > a result of Pragmatism. I yet have to meet the first person who has > escaped the onslaught unscathed. The clever thing of "the long march > through the institutions" was that strategically important fields > were perverted: all ranks of education, journalism, governmental > institutions, NGOs, you name it. Today it is business that has fallen > as well (as you say, the adoption of 'liberated' words, as well as > voodoo promotion campaigns, designed to instill emotion. The > disseminating effect is horrendous! It affects the entire society and > new generations as well. This was the strategy as set out by the > Frankfurt School. And let's not forget this, of which we soon might > get a second instalment: > http://vodpod.com/watch/180945-just-doing-his-job-draft
Post visible to registered members
Cassandra Troy Group moderator
The company name is only visible to registered members.

Re^8: Objectivity versus subjectivity
Clearly you believe ties with the past were cut because of the Nazi past. Considering the same process has taken place in other countries - perhaps to a lesser extent, but I beg to differ where Holland is concerned - some other factors may be at work as well. I need to give this some further thought. I have written about it here. I would appreciate your view: http://newcitizenship.blogspot.com/2007/11/enter-cabal-ii-tr...
- 03 Sep 2008, 11:27 pm
Cassandra Troy wrote: > Clearly you believe ties with the past were cut because of the Nazi > past. Considering the same process has taken place in other countries > - perhaps to a lesser extent, but I beg to differ where Holland is > concerned - some other factors may be at work as well. I need to give > this some further thought. I have written about it here. I would > appreciate your view: > http://newcitizenship.blogspot.com/2007/11/enter-cabal-ii-transnationa > l.html
Post visible to registered members

Objectivist Ethics in Business

Objectivity versus subjectivity

Re^2: Objectivity versus subjectivity

Re^4: Objectivity versus subjectivity

Re^6: Objectivity versus subjectivity

Re^8: Objectivity versus subjectivity