Yaron Brook
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaron_BrookYaron Brook (Hebrew: ירון ברוק; born May 23, 1961)[1] is an Israeli-American entrepreneur and writer. He is an Objectivist and the current chairman of the board at the Ayn Rand Institute, where he was executive director from 2000 to 2017. He is also the co-founder of BH Equity Research and the author of several books, in which he analyzes a variety of topics from an Objectivist perspective.
@khcs
Brook has stated that he does not believe regulation has any role to play in protecting the environment and believes human-originated climate change to be a doomsday scenario propagated by environmentalists. He has indicated that as an ideological iteration it goes back decades, and that he believes global warming is "another in a line of failed scare stories," with preferential funding given to researchers promoting it.
Clearly not some wise man.
By the way, explanation is very simple. Corporations want more money and they will push all limits to get them. This includes environment. To prevent this, there are regulations, and also other government efforts to make clean energy affordable. This is basic understanding of main humanity issue and how to deal with it. Real world 101.
He thinks that climate researchers are spreading false information because they are paid for it. This sounds like a projection and in fact he seems to be paid for spreading such rubbish.
And it seems to be true, as such stance is being taken by Ayn Rand Institute where he is chairman. So this is a type of guy, who just says what his organisation has to say, and he does it because they are paying him for it, and also thinks that everyone else must be acting the same way including guys who have opposite stance.
And that's supposed to be objectivism? What a nonsense!
Last edited by falsehope; 04-11-2018 at 05:55 PM.
@falsehope
Do you have an opinion on Yaron Brook's type?
Last edited by WVBRY; 07-02-2018 at 04:42 AM.
Some delusional LIE
I think LIE is very unlikely.
His thinking is very much like Ayn Rand's and I think they are bothdoms. Ayn Rand should be the stereotype of LSI btw. I don't get where people get LIE for her. Objectivism is basically a theoretical understanding of reality based on a few axioms, once one accepts those axioms, the rest of the points basically follow like in an arborescence. You have the idea of reason, supreme means of understanding the outside world, and once you accept that "reason is man's only absolute", the rest follows. It's a very binary, dualistic way of looking at the world, you have the good and the bad people. It is very white logic thinking, at least when white logic is mixed with E1 average to possibly low levels of mental equilibrium.
When I listen to Yaron Brook, I get the impression he follows doctrine. Doctrine can be defined as system of prescriptive statements or prinicples about reality, again, the realm of
Personally, as an LIE I tend to lose interest in theoretical principles over time. I've tried to get into this type of system but it just doesn't click with me, I consider it too cut off from reality.
Ya but he does seem like an LIE who has something wrong with him
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
I'm seeing a LIE sp/sx 6, it's kind of interesting that Rubin is likely sp/sx 6 himself and there are some similarities in their mannerisms.
The alternative typing for her was SLE-Se, which by VI certainly seems possible.Originally Posted by Avebury
His thinking is very much like Ayn Rand's and I think they are both
I..j typing is rather doubtful for her. A common criticism of her works is that she wasn't great at building up arguments and having follow-through to her conclusions, which is not what you'd expect from a causal-determinst Ti-leading type like LSI.
In his essay 'On the Randian Argument' libertarian philosopher Robert Nozick pointed out that Rand's meta-ethical arguments were unsound and didn't resolve the is-ought problem as she'd hoped. Libertarian philosopher Michael Huemer has suggested that her ethics are incoherent. Her arguments for what the chief goal of human life is all use changing definitions constantly and seem to drive towards three incompatible ends rather than the one she said she was driving at.
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy argues that her arguments so often fail to support her conclusions that, “It is not surprising, then, that she is either mentioned in passing, or not mentioned at all, in the entries that discuss current philosophical thought about virtue ethics, egoism, rights, libertarianism, or markets.”
What is the argument for LIE? (Yaron)
I mean, three people stated LIE without making a single argument and I expect more will.
Well I just VI'ed him, he looks extroverted and thinking, and seems to belong to gamma, so I thought LIE. He is also very similar to other LIE like Bill Gates. His interest are also matching LIE like finance, distance-learning. He is also "a little" out of reality with this environmental agenda.
Yaron Brook:
Bill Gates:
I type Bill Gates as ILI but I do see the resemblance.
mb LSI
Wrt to @falsehope's comment, I think this is Yaron Brook's current views on climate change:
I've changed my mind about Bill Gates, who I think is LIE.
Still not sure about Yaron Brook. They do look similar, yes.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote