Wednesday, 30 September 2009

Objectivism for fun & non-profit – Wikipedia founder explains

A while back I posted a presentation by BB&T banker John Allison in which he explained how his bank uses Objectivist values to make enormous profits.  (Watch here if you haven’t seen it before, or watch it again, but with a pen and paper this time to take notes. :-)  )

Anyway, by way of “contrast,” here’s a snippet of an interview with Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales – with whom I used to engage on the old Atlantis email list back in the early days of email – addressing how Objectivist philosophy guides his non-profit work.

If you think those two views represent a contradiction, then you really haven’t understood much about Objectivism.  Watch and see why.

Labels: ,


Anonymous Monsieur said...

This might be sidetracking, but I think it might interest you
(Don't post it if it distracts).

I'm interested in Wikipedia as a postmodernist phenomenon.

The following link is to an item about that, which includes a response by Jimmy Wales.
Enlightened doubt : Wikipedia’s postmodern search for truth

I think Wales' final statement reveals a Pragmatic position:
"a tool to allow for common cultural understanding to help us sidestep sticky philosophical arguments about truth vs. Truth vs. situatedness, etc"

But if Pragmatic Jimmy identifies himself as an Objectivist, then he is one.

30 Sep 2009, 13:57:00  
Anonymous Falafulu Fisi said...

Obviously, commentators on this Benard Hickey's blog thread need to be educated in objectivism.

I am amazed at the number of commentators that direct ill wishes towards the farmer Alan Crafar (for his supposedly animal negligence), where Hickey broke the story into TV1 close-up program.

I think that Alan Crafar needs Tim Wikiriwhi and the Libz here to support his rights to enjoy his property.

30 Sep 2009, 14:34:00  
Blogger mexaguil said...

I can't find the presentation, the post just links to articles.

1 Oct 2009, 13:27:00  
Blogger Gregory Kohs said...

When did Jimmy Wales become "founder" of Wikipedia?

It is a serious question, and one whose answer will reveal an exercise in revisionism.

2 Oct 2009, 04:59:00  

Post a Comment

Respond with a polite and intelligent comment. (Both will be applauded.)

Say what you mean, and mean what you say. (Do others the courtesy of being honest.)

Please put a name to your comments. (If you're prepared to give voice, then back it up with a name.)

And don't troll. Please. (Contemplate doing something more productive with your time, and ours.)

<< Home