[Previous] | Home | [Next]

Elliot Temple on June 4, 2003

Comments (26)

last post is in March 2004.

Anonymous at 10:56 AM on February 2, 2016 | #4781
Yeah, it ended. Why write that in comments?

Anonymous at 11:02 AM on February 2, 2016 | #4782
Interesting (non sarcastic) that only Elliot and Alan are still pro-TCS.

Anonymous at 1:01 PM on February 2, 2016 | #4788
What do you mean only? From what list of people? For example, Justin old school guy who remains pro-TCS.

Anonymous at 1:06 PM on February 2, 2016 | #4789
from the names of people in that blog
i didn't see justin name in the blog you linked

why did others leave? any theories?

Anonymous at 5:36 PM on February 3, 2016 | #4822
one problem I remember was that Alice Bachini deleted one of my posts without any discussion and without saving a copy first.

it was not organized well.

curi at 5:44 PM on February 3, 2016 | #4824
I don't mean leave the blog, I mean leave TCS.
There was a group of people very fierce about TCS who completely disappeared.

I think it's because they never understood very well what TCS was all about. And when they discovered that it wasn't what it was what they thought it was, they dint't like to admit they were mistaken. They didn't like learning or philosophy that much.

Anonymous at 4:58 AM on February 5, 2016 | #4835
what do you mean "very fierce about TCS"?

i think not many people ever really cared that much.

how many of them wrote 500 or more total list emails? how many of them **really tried**? some people did that. many did not.

yeah, not liking philosophy is one of the big things. some people just wanna fancy themselves super nice parents. without bothering admit how hard that actually is and face the challenge.

---

Sue Cvach, for example, never seemed all that interested in philosophy.

I think the people who seemed more interested in philosophy, then quit, are more interesting. What happened there? Why did Woty quit? DD? Sarah? Brian Scurfield? Tom Robinson?

Anonymous at 11:13 AM on February 5, 2016 | #4852
> what do you mean "very fierce about TCS"?

talking a lot about it. blogging about it. going forums to spread it. tcs was above everything else for them.

> Why did Woty quit?

at one point she got more interested in judaism. i lost track after.

> DD?

defending tcs compromised his status.

> Sarah?

i thought she died to be honest. like for real. ppl were spreading rumours she was very ill.

probably forced to silence. tcs is very deviant. you don't live in a free world.

> Brian Scurfield?

vaguely remember the name but don't remember his posts much.

> Tom Robinson?

is that the guy who does cartoons?

what happened to Liberty? and Sierra?

Anonymous at 4:45 PM on February 5, 2016 | #4874
> Tom Robinson?

Tom Robinson isn't the cartoon guy. He's somebody else.

He's into scientism now, e.g. - he thinks that people being kept alive by technology might lead to a drop in the quality of genes and make people dumber.

Anonymous at 4:50 PM on February 5, 2016 | #4875
Liberty is doing academic philosophy and has a very poor understanding of Rand:

http://thetaintsofliberty.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/moral-freedom-and-misanthropic-bias-in.html

Anonymous at 4:52 PM on February 5, 2016 | #4876
i didn't know Tom was into that kinda scientism now. that's really dumb. I knew he had gotten into Eckhart Tolle (who is really awful).

he came back to FI a couple years ago briefly. he was extremely hostile and insulting to me (some of this was offlist). totally not at all a TCSer. basically spit in my face in reply to me saying the exact same kinda stuff I used to say that he used to like. he said something about how i couldn't possibly mean what i was saying – refusing to take me seriously at all. he was super condescending about it. all i said was typical TCS/FI stuff.


Brian Scurfield stood out for understanding Popper a lot better than most people in the community.

Sarah is alive.

curi at 5:19 PM on February 5, 2016 | #4881
> Tom Robinson isn't the cartoon guy. He's somebody else.
>
> He's into scientism now, e.g. - he thinks that people being kept alive by technology might lead to a drop in the quality of genes and make people dumber.

That sounds scary.

> Liberty is doing academic philosophy and has a very poor understanding of Rand:
>
> http://thetaintsofliberty.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/moral-freedom-and-misanthropic-bias-in.html

so liberty is kinda anti-Rand now?
how weird
everybody breaks

something interesting i noticed from skimming the reply to her post:

>> And as for prima facie self-interest, I don't need morality to tell me to follow it any more than I need morality to tell me to eat when I'm hungry.
>
> Lots of people do need that sort of guidance, e.g. - many of the people who are deemed anorexic.

some anorexics feel hunger but don't eat when hungry because it conflicts with wanting to be thinner.

Anonymous at 5:38 PM on February 5, 2016 | #4885
Liberty never even appeared to be any good. She never accomplished anything. She never participated much or had much interest in TCS.

Anonymous at 5:48 PM on February 5, 2016 | #4887
what do you mean by "she never accomplished anything". sounds mean. she's very young. it also sounds like you know what she is doing with her life. she might be pursuing other interests.

she was raised tcs, how can she not be interested in it?

Anonymous at 6:11 PM on February 5, 2016 | #4890
For example, Liberty never once wrote a good essay or significant post about TCS. At the awesomeness level that, say, Justin and Alan have written a bunch of.

> she was raised tcs, how can she not be interested in it?

1) don't assume stuff you don't know.

2) she could easily pick up some irrationality from her culture, misunderstand some things about TCS, get stuck, etc, etc. why not?

Anonymous at 6:18 PM on February 5, 2016 | #4892
Has there ever been any public evidence that Liberty knows much about TCS?

Anonymous at 6:19 PM on February 5, 2016 | #4893
if liberty fell into disgreace
isn't it your fault?
doesn't it mean you were bad friends to her?

she sounds like she was bullied
by commoners
and gave in

liberty is two steps away
of becoming a social worker
with that kind of thinking

Anonymous at 12:49 AM on February 6, 2016 | #4898
i find it strange that liberty makes the mistake of saying
that selfishness is easy
when ayn rand already had a criticism of this
i mean, she wrote a whole book called The Fountainhead
to explain why it's not easy
through a character who appears selfish
but is not

also, what did you mean by "academic philosophy"?
what i saw was a personal blog
you mean she is studying at uni?

Anonymous at 12:53 AM on February 6, 2016 | #4899
The meaning of selfishness is not restricted to Rand's. she could've been using another meaning.

She might have been brought up TCS in intention but not in reality. people get things wrong and make big mistakes, even people who have v. good ideas. they don't always apply them

Anonymous at 2:25 AM on February 6, 2016 | #4903
> The meaning of selfishness is not restricted to Rand's. she could've been using another meaning.

This was in reference of the post quoted. She was criticizing Rand.

> She might have been brought up TCS in intention but not in reality. people get things wrong and make big mistakes, even people who have v. good ideas. they don't always apply them

It still seems that having the intention adds knew knowledge that the average parent would not have, so the parenting would still be better in comparison.

Or maybe you are wrong that everyone, if only raised TCS, would be super smart or care for philosophy. If it's about helping people pursuit their own interests they might end fishermen.

Anonymous at 4:16 AM on February 6, 2016 | #4905
> also, what did you mean by "academic philosophy"? what i saw was a personal blog you mean she is studying at uni?

The blog was about her being anti-Rand.

She has mentioned a lot of stuff about studying at uni, going to academic philosophy conferences, asking about how to write academic papers and stuff like that on Facebook.

Anonymous at 7:13 AM on February 6, 2016 | #4907
> if liberty fell into disgreace
> isn't it your fault?
> doesn't it mean you were bad friends to her?

dunno where this is coming from. I was never friends with Liberty.

too many assumptions. check your premises!

Anonymous at 10:23 AM on February 6, 2016 | #4909
speaking of "I" and signing anonymous is useless.
i don't know who you are.

i'm talking of the people who were friends with her.

Anonymous at 11:17 AM on February 6, 2016 | #4917
> isn't it your fault?

you said "your" but didn't say who you're talking about.

you still haven't said anyone.

Anonymous at 11:18 AM on February 6, 2016 | #4918
> i'm talking of the people who were friends with her.

Anonymous at 11:20 AM on February 6, 2016 | #4919

What do you think?

(This is a free speech zone!)