Dave, I would think the infamous TV ad depicting Willie Horton might be a useful artifact. The ad was done by the campaign of GHW Bush in 1988 for the Presidential race against Dukakis.

The ad was very controversial, but very effective. It criticized Dukakis for a prison furlough program that had released Horton and others, after which Horton committed more crimes (recounted in the ad).

The tone and look of the ad are very scary and make you think about all the things you put on the triad above.

regards, John

Snowden is apparently unaware that Ayn Rand has broken the cognitive puzzle that has blocked philosophers for over two millennia. Ironically, on a site named "Cognitive Edge", he gratuitously dismisses her via a pointless smear. His remark contributes nothing to his post, revealing a failure of proper application of cognitive skills to stick to the rationale for his post.

The philosophical puzzle Rand resolved is referred to as The Problem of Universals. Her "Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology" explains, in remarkable detail, the manner by which the human mind is capable of forming concepts, by abstracting from the observable world. She also shows how higher level concepts are abstractions from groups of lower level concepts. Without a proper understanding and usage of concepts, and their hierarchical relationships, all sorts of thinking errors are made possible. Her other non-fiction works expose many of the more important errors that negatively influence the ethics, politics and even aesthetics of Men.

In fact, the application of such poor epistemological approaches in the Public Education systems and Universities renders minds, even of multiple degree holders, unable to read abstract ideas effectively. Thus their common reaction is to smear that which they do not understand, in order to pretend to a higher intellectual level they have not actually earned.

Indigenous Australians see the legal system in quite a different light to those who have come here more recently. And they find themselves entangled in it and incarcerated by it more often than the rest of the population.

A suggestive artefact for the this might be a picture of the police arresting, or just talking to, someone who quite obviously lives on the street. This could provoke reflections on the indigenous situation as well as that of the homeless generally.

Groups of separated fathers and mothers might also be a rich vein of anecdotes. In Australia, at least, legal settlements of child custody and support seem to leave only one side, if that, satisfied that justice has been done.

Thanks guys (and for all the emails).

Richard I thought at first you were being ironic, but then I found a quote from someone with the same name as you on Greg Nyquist's anti-Rand blog ARCHIN namely ARCHN is the work of a despicable mind"- R Bramwell. I then wondered if you were one of the Ayn Rand Robots advertised here for $50K. However I realise that is probably a mistake too and you may actually be genuine in what you say. Unfortunately, with the exception of a coupe of "funded" programmes at a very small number of US Universities no philosopher takes her seriously and she is largely ignored. Even Objectivist Philosophers who like her politics like Nozick and others who like her politics dismiss her as a serious philosopher.

Of course for her fans (and for herself) she is one of the three great philosophers, the three As (Aristotle, Aquinas and Ayn Rand), and her comparison of her own work with the Bible (when the publishers asked to cut some pretty dire stuff to make it readable) results in admiration. My response is more despair for the products of what is meant to be an advanced education system. I assume you are one of the Wikipedia Randinistas (care to tell us your ID there?).

For other readers, Rand is the one who believes that self-interest is everything and her follows have some wonderful arguments at the moment. Things like the reason for the current financial crisis is that we had too much regulation of the banks not enough. One of them also believes that the US should Nuke Iran in its own self interest and we won't even get onto Rand's view of the "justice" of genocide on native Americans revealed in her West Point lectures.

She and her views are the antithesis of justice and humanity, and my side swipe was highly relevant. How a turgid writer, whose understanding of logic would not get her through the first year of University course has become popular or attracted a cult like following I will never know. I'll put it up there with human behaviour like genocide, environmental exploitation and the like as the downside of the human race. A lot of people read Atlas Shrugged as teenagers and then grow out of it .....

The U.S. employed pictures of Taliban operatives flogging Afghan women to reinforce a message of liberation rather than imperial invasion following 9/11. We aimed to convey to the Afghan people that we now shared a common enemy; and their cooperation with American forces would help speed the end of repressive Taliban rule. The use of an artefact to delegitimize a standing government - does this fit your need?

Responding to Dr. Snowden, noting that the issue is germane to the purpose and premise of this site, if not the immediate topic of the above post:

After a dozen years of University Education (mainly biology), it was achingly clear to me that a University academic's accreditations, publications, citations and distinctions were in no way indicative of how correct his ideas were or, and more importantly, how honest his intellect. Revered academics in every field I touched upon were using awful methods, putting marvelous language on unjustifiable achievements or grant applications, even admitting that it was part of 'the game'. It was nearly twenty years later that I encountered Rand, and she was exactly right! That was twenty years ago.

Cognition through rationalization is a contradiction, as is cognition by assumption or by echoing others. I think you can see that the greater part of your response to my comment was spent
a) making assumptions about me and my background (with obvious ad hominem intention) or
b) echoing common smears promoted by those who were unable to understand, or hold some prejudice against, strict reasoning (see above link).

Some of your remarks suggest you have spent more time reading Rand's inept critics than reading Rand herself. Refuting them point by point would be to treat you as a child ——you can discover their nature for yourself if you care to look. Until you have, it would be dishonest of you to continue simply echoing them. I suggest Rand's Epistemological discoveries and their application to academia & business would enable you to dramatically enhance the effectiveness of your Cynefin Model (the premises for which I do not fully understand)

You speak of Ayn Rand's insignificance. An intelligent and honest academic in 0100 CE might argue that Aristotle was insignificant. It took 1.5 millennia befor his better ideas were recognized. Of course, in hindsight we can recognize how hostile an intellectual environment his views had to break into. Rand's ideas face a similarly hostile intellectual environment. Her ideas are confronted by a culture in which every major Academic Institution, particularly in Philosophy, is actively undermining and rejecting Reason, Science, Technological Progress, Individual Rights, Capitalism, and even Mankind, all in the name of Reason (see Kant's A Critique of Pure Reason) ——their cries to the contrary notwithstanding.

In this negative culture, Objectivism's growing acceptance is remarkable. Perhaps a hundred million people have at least heard her name. In the last decade or so, she has received increasingly positive mention in the media. Each year over a million students read and study Atlas Shrugged in school or university. Leading Objectivists appear frequently (several times a week) on Regional or National Television and in other media. There are some fifty graduates of the Objectivist Academic Center's Graduate Program who are now teaching in various Universities across America. One such teacher, Tara Smith, has published on Objectivist Ethics via the respectable Cambridge University Press (other titles are of course available, but my focus here is with respect toacademic publication). The American Philosophy Association has a work group for Objectivism.

Objectivism also has real life practicality, unlike other philosophies. An outstanding example is one of the very few banks who came through the mortgage crisis unscathed, BB&T. It was guided by CEO John Allison, a life long Objectivist. He recognized how the acronym-soup of government regulations, quangos and false money (via the Federal Reserve under non-Objectivist Greenspan and the Treasury) were influencing the financial industry. He kept his clients' wealth secure where others risked their clients wealth to absurd degrees. You may get a different sense of what self-interest means if you examine the BB&T Values page. Most importantly, please note how self-interest benefits BB&T's clientele. Their site also provides .pdf files presenting the Employee and Directors Code of Ethics.

Uninformed prejudice, smear tactics and reliance on others' uninformed opinions are not academic virtues. However readily academia accepts such vices they do nothing for cognition. A more careful investigation of Ayn Rand's ideas will, assuredly, provide a dramatic cognitive edge to those cautious enough to distinguish fact from hearsay, intellectual honesty from academic posturing, and civilized progress from cultural status quo.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say of Ayn Rand that "No one takes her seriously and she is largely ignored."

For decades, the American Philosophical Association, which is the main professional organization for working philosophers in the United States, has had an active Ayn Rand Society. Objectivist philosophers teach philosophy at major American universities, and two top philosophy departments have tenured full professors who are Objectivists. Two years ago, Cambridge University Press, not normally known as a vanity publisher, published a scholarly exposition of Ayn Rand's ethics.

I'm curious how all this happens if, as you say, no one takes Rand seriously. Certainly BB&T has funded certain programs, but I was not aware that top philosophy departments were in the habit of selling tenured professorships. I imagine that those that do so shortly thereafter cease to be regarded as top departments. Yet Brian Leiter's 2009 survey ranks one of the top departments I referred to, the University of Pittsburgh, at #4 and the other, the University of Texas, at #20.

You have every right to disagree with Rand and to believe that her ideas do not merit serious study. But your sneers do not refute her, and your assertion that no one takes her seriously is just wrong.

After "Richard"s first comment, I had really thought that he was just making fun, teasing David. But it looks like he really means what he writes. Poor Dave.

Right, so the Randinistas are real, rather than rather good examples of irony. I'll post a response as a main entry over the weekend. I can't see any uninformed prejudice or smear tactics by the way, or reliance on the "uninformed" views of others. But there again cultists don't like criticism.

This is quite entertaining but a long way from your original post. What are the best ideas you ahve received ?

I wonder if the narratives of jury members would be illuminating (and, if they are legally accessible in all jurisdictions).

I remember a wonderful cartoon from about 25 years ago, in which a be-wigged judge is shown peer down his nose at someone and declaring something along the lines of... "Before i pass sentence, i would like to indulge in some character assassination, racial stereotyping, and right-wing foaming at the mouth."

Are you interested in exploring indigenous peoples' conceptions of justice as recalled from pre-colonial times?

I don’t see how to add pictures to this post, but images are part of this story. To see the first, please acquire Google Earth at http://earth.google.com. When you have the Earth browser up, search for Butte Montana. You will see a town that is built at the edge of a massive hole that was once a pit mine and is now a 1,800-foot deep flooded pond. More about that place in a moment.

This is a story that asks: what will people tolerate as a price of progress and exploitation of our planet?

For reference, I add this url as more about the Berkley Pit in Butte. It is clearly a very slanted article; but if the reader glosses it, the history and the size of pit are easily found. http://socialismandliberation.org/mag/index.php?aid=339

As a Canadian, I know that many people immigrated here from Europe for the free lands. People also came for the free fish to catch, and the free trees to harvest.

With the price of real estate, everyone knows that the days of free land is gone.

Canadians speak proudly of building this country by ‘breaking the soil,’ and ‘taming the wilderness.’ Today the once-sweeping biome of tall-grass prairie exists in only a few protected sites.

Here on the west coast, the wild salmon fishery is seriously threatened by aquaculture (fish farms). I live in Howe Sound, which is North America’s most southerly fjord. A century ago there were orcas (killer whales) and humpbacked whales here. The orcas are still spotted occasionally, but it has been generations since there were any krill for the humpbacks.

As for the fisheries in general, the condition of this industry that supported generations of maritime Canadians is reflected eloquently in the music of Stan Rogers (a song that he wrote about 30 years ago) http://www.truveo.com/Happy-Adventure/id/3895273242. The pictures and the song is another of my images for this story, so please watch and listen.

Resource extraction normally takes place at wilderness sites where the owners of the resource, who are ‘we, the people,’ cannot see what is happening to the wealth that we inherited, and may or may not pass on to our children.

And that brings me back to the vision of Butte, Montana. One could argue that urban America is not aware of the forests that our governments are selling to the mills, or the situation with the fisheries. But the people of Butte watched and participated as the landscape that was only blocks from their homes was devastated.

Today the free lands are gone, the fisheries are impoverished, and our lumber mills are closing. Yet the miners still talk about their, ‘Right to mine.’

Is it possible, even when the community knows the consequences of the public policy that we sanction, to come to any rational conclusions that will allow our next and future generations to enjoy some of the bounty of this planet that we inherited?

Is this what you meant Robert? Bute is a name associated with exploitation in South Wales by the way. My Gt. Grandfather's family were evicted by the Marquis of Bute after years of service and ended up in the slums of Cardiff in consequence. They made a fortune at the expense of humanity in the coal fields at the turn of the last century.

Richard writes:
>Snowden is apparently unaware that Ayn Rand has broken the cognitive puzzle that has blocked philosophers for over two millennia...The philosophical puzzle Rand resolved is referred to as The Problem of Universals. Her "Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology" explains, in remarkable detail, the manner by which the human mind is capable of forming concepts, by abstracting from the observable world.

Richard is apparently unaware that Rand solved no such puzzle. In fact it is doubtful she understood the Problem of Universals (for example it is clear she did not understand other major philosophical problems such as "is/ought" and "the problem of induction"). What is certain is that her "Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology" does not explain the manner by which the human mind forms concepts, and that it is instead remarkable for its lack of detail, being a scant 90 or so pages of large print filled mostly with vague jargon and cryptic utterances. Also remarkable about the ITOE is its total disregard for argument (Rand simply asserts her theories), and its total disregard for the need for any sort of empirical evidence (none is supplied). When studied in any detail, it quickly becomes obvious that Rand's allegedly millennial intellectual breakthroughs are simple fallacies or even mere word-games - oxymorons like "contextual certainty" or even "contextual absolute" (!) That's about it. (By coincidence over at the ARCHNblog we are discussing whether Rand's theory of concept formation even is empirically testable).

What Richard is mouthing is the standard Randian boilerplate - that she is "misunderstood" and "distorted" by biased critics who for their own malign purposes refuse to see the self-evident truth of her greatness. Actually, the real problem is that, as David Ramsay Steele puts it, Rand's arguments (where they even exist) are so feeble. In his memorable turn of phrase, Randian doctrine is "bluff, buttressed by abuse of all critics."

On the plus side, however, it is kinda fun to dismantle....;-)

Dave, you've found Butte! I preferred Google Earth to Google maps for my image because the viewer might be tempted to see the town with the Berkley Pit in the context of the surrounding landscape and our whole, beautiful, globe. The still image is shocking enough, but by containing it in the frame of an image it seems to remove it from the world of the viewer.

There is a sense, in our society, that these resources belong to the local community, and that they are managed fairly by our governments. Somehow, we, the people, have yet to realize that we are the legal owners of the resource. And when it is gone, that which was once ours will never be available for our children.

Here are some pictures that merely open the door to a huge story that lurks beside the highway to the town of Whistler (and the site of next year's Olympics). The issue is probably too complex to be useful for your model - and these images illustrate only one aspect of the situation. http://www.ballantyne.com/Mount_Sheer/index.html

Be sure to click on the pictures. The story is told in the popups. That mine bleeds into Howe Sound, the fjord that includes Bowen Island, which is my home.

How do the resource owners -- mainly the urban public -- even come to learn about 'acid mine drainage,' and why should they care? BTW, Jane creek does not look like that now. A cleanup process has begun. The public has taken some comfort in that. However what is not discussed in the press releases is that acid mine drainage is like atomic waste... that mine will be producing a toxic outflow for more than 20,000 years. Does anyone believe that the cleanup has been funded for all time?

Dave, the visual thinking/graphic recording/facilitation community would have LOTS of rich ideas for this. For example:

http://www.christinemartell.com/

Or many of the people involved with http://www.ifvp.org

Dang, one of these days I will get my timing right to take the CE training. This work with visuals and stories DEEPLY resonates with the most exciting bits of my work using visuals both online and offline. Cool beans, as they say.

This image would have to be sketched. It’s simple: a Canadian military sniper and his spotter. They are attending to a distant target high in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan.

The issue is: war heros or assassins?

There is a fascinating story here that Canadians should know, and most do not. In 2002 Cpl. Rob Furlong, a Newfoundlander and an expert sniper, was high in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan. The enemy was was exactly 2,430 meters away (7,677 feet or 1.45 miles). Furlong’s third shot was successful, and it stands as the world’s record for the most distant kill by a sniper.

When the Americans wanted to award this team of snipers the highest medals that can be granted to foreigners, the Bronze Star, the Canadian government refused. Instead of treating these people as heros for executing Canadian public policy, and and doing it with distinction, our government seems to be queasy about admitting that our soldiers kill. There were no parades, no ceremony, and no American medals. The story was told in military circles, and I first heard about it from a soldier. That year the only reference I could find on the web was at a snipers’ site. Eventually the tale, and the sad aftermath, emerged and you can read about it here in this 2006 article: http://snipurl.com/i0go0 [www_macleans_ca] Still, in this country, it is not widely known.

I'd suggest this "Wanted:" picture with the word "Plutocrats" found at http://bajan.wordpress.com/2008/06/17/hans-kristian-rausing-tetra-pak/

I collected this story of the Rausing billionaires when it came out in 2008. The focus for me was on the British "Ministry of Justice guidelines" (mentioned below) which state "that the value of drug possessed by an offender should be considered in relation to their own wealth." ... and one copper trying to stand up for the rule of law (perhaps). I'm sure many simpler and poorer people will be scratching their heads and trying to understand how this relates to justice and the rule of law. And I'm making no comment here on whether it should or should not be legal -- just the inconsistency implied by the system's operation based on parameters associated with wealth (and privilege). Any number of pictures of non-billionaires in prison cells for similar 'crimes' would suffice for contrast. I'd headline it something like "Crime and Time?"
---

By Charlotte Gill
Last updated at 9:53 AM on 31st July 2008

Britain's most senior policeman yesterday criticised the decision to drop drugs charges against a super-rich husband and wife.

Sir Ian Blair said he was 'very surprised' that Hans Kristian Rausing, who is heir to a £5billion fortune, and his wife Eva would escape prosecution. He said the sentence sent out the wrong message about drug use.

The Metropolitan Police Commissioner has ordered an urgent review into his force's charging practices after it emerged that the pair will now receive only a caution.

A source said that officers advised the Crown Prosecution Service that the billionaire couple should be given only cautions, in accordance with Ministry of Justice guidelines.

Usually, addicts caught with such huge quantities of drugs will face a prison sentence. But according to the source, the guidelines state that the value of drug possessed by an offender should be considered in relation to their own wealth.

In the Rausings' case, £2,000 of drugs is tiny compared to their vast riches. However, the CPS decided to press charges for possession of Class A drugs, but it is understood these were dropped when the defence argued the case.

Sir Ian Blair has criticised the decision to only give the Rausings a caution.

Instead, the couple will accept formal cautions and are expected to agree to attend drug rehabilitation programmes. "
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1039896/Sir-Ian-Blair-blasts-decision-drop-drugs-charges-Tetra-Pak-heir.html