1. William O’Neill’s 1971 book With Charity Toward None: An Analysis of the Philosophy of Ayn Rand was recently re-published. It was probably the first critique of Rand’s philosophy published. It’s been years since I read it, but my recollection was that it was hit-or-miss.
[O'Neill's book was the first philosophical critique from an academically trained savant. Albert Ellis had a few years earlier written a book length critique of Objectivism (i.e., Is Objectivism a Religion?) focusing on psychology, politics and economics.]
2. Carl Barney, the multi-millionaire ex-donor to the Ayn Rand Institute, and head of the Prometheus Foundation, recently posted a curious blog entry, Who Represents Objectivism. He writes:
“There have been many alleged spokespersons for Objectivism—Mike Berliner, Harry Binswanger, John Ridpath, Peter Schwartz, Yaron Brook—and we’re now told of a “Chief Philosophy Officer,” Onkar Ghate. There’s something we should not forget.”
I’m wondering if there is a back story here. With the occasional exception of Binswanger, I’m not sure if any of these have ever claimed to be a spokesperson for Objectivism. Barney then goes on to sing the praises of Leonard Peikoff, who claims to quite literally speak in the name of Ayn Rand.
This is something I didn’t know:
“Much of Leonard’s clarity and conviction undoubtedly was influenced by his 30-year close relationship with Ms. Rand—thousands of hours of discussion (from which he took careful notes), and the Q&As, and the collaboration undoubtedly enabled him to speak with such clarity and conviction.”
Can the publication of Leonard Peikoff’s Journals and Marginalia be far off?
3. Long-time Objectivist author Andy Bernstein has a new Kindle book on racism called American Racism: Its Decline, Its Baleful Influence, and Our Looming Race War.
4. Speaking of Bernstein, Yaron Brook wasn’t pleased to be asked why he isn’t teaching at Ayn Rand University. Brook claimed not to know. I certainly don’t know but considering that he writes for Craig Biddle’s The Objective Standard I doubt he will be teaching at ARU any time soon.
5. Speaking of Brook, he is scheduled to appear on January 12, 2024 in Centennial, Colorado. For a mere $400 you can sit next to him at the post-speech dinner.
No one has yet posted "2024 will be the year Objectivism goes mainstream".
ReplyDeleteNo one has yet posted "2024 will be the year Objectivism goes mainstream".
ReplyDeleteAnyone want to go out on limb and predict this will happen? And does anyone know the Las Vegas odds on this happening?
Predict that someone will predict this? Or that the prediction will come true?
ReplyDeleteAs for the Vegas odds on this, try the ARI, they have the answers to everything.
Ellis debated Branden on Objectivist psychology in 1967. Around 1,100 people were in attendance, most of whom were Objectivists. Accounts indicate that the crowd was quite animated against Ellis.
ReplyDeleteNP
Ellis wrote to Branden after the debate. Here is his long letter.
ReplyDeletehttps://blogs.cul.columbia.edu/archivingalbertellis/2011/03/23/rebt-vs-objectivism/
Too bad the recoding of the debate has never been made public.
"For a mere $400 you can sit next to him at the post-speech dinner."
ReplyDeletePresumably it costs double to sit further away from him?
Never forget that Carl Barney was an entrepreneur within Scientology, running a number of Missions (Scientology bookstores that also do lower-level auditing) in Los Angeles in the 1970s. Those Missions would be taken from Barney due to his financial schemes and his willingness to break away from the Scientology mothership. Hubbard would tolerate the first, but loathed the second (he hated competition on the cult front*), so Barney was out before 1980.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.xenu.net/archive/personal_story/cheryl_s/cheryl02a.html <--- a client of Barney's tells anti-Scientology website "Xenu dot net" what she knew.
* In the late 1960s while running from the IRS and British Inland Revenue, Scientology founder and Grand Poobah L. Ron Hubbard wrote a letter somewhere in the Mediterranean Sea to his "Church" listing a number of "squirrel" organizations that he claimed were using his "technology" (possibly the e-meter, possibly some of the basic training routines). I've looked at this list, and the Church of Satan (Anton Szandor LaVey's group in San Francisco) had nothing to do with Scientology, while the Process Church of the Final Judgement, which had been started by ex-Scientologists in Britain and no longer used anything from Scientology (they had been using an e-meter when the group was called "Compulsions Analysis") is broken in two ("the Process" and "Church of the Final Judgement"). Many other groups are listed, and you get the feeling that Hubbard was working off rumors, which makes sense because he was aboard ship in the Atlantic Ocean or Mediterranean Sea for nearly a year at that point, and only making port in countries that knew nothing about Scientology.
Regarding point 2:
ReplyDeleteDo you think he managed to keep a straight face when he wrote this (about Leonard Peikoff)
"I wish there were other teachers close to his clarity, his scholarship, his emphasis, his humor."