Objectivism; the corruption of rationality

Has anyone read this book?
http://home.att.net/~sandgryan/essays_on_objectivism/ (click on the cover art and then scroll down and click on 'browse this book' to read the book)

His critque seems to be based on Rand's view of her philosophy being closed to modification and her texts as the official Objectivist position. The modified Objectivist fundamentals found in Logical structure Beta at objecttivistcenter.org seems to have already addressed most of his objections.

What are others' views on the book?

Post 1

Sunday, December 7, 2003 - 9:11am

I'm familiar with Scott Ryan, and I applaud him for getting his book published. However, he (like most "critics of Objectivism") fails to understand the philosophy fully. Nor will most of the critics actually LOOK at any Objectivist sources (other than ARI, maybe).

Rand was a genius, but she was also arrogant, to some degree. We perpetuate her arrogance, to some degree, with this fiction that Objectivism is "Ayn Rand's philosophy". If our philosophy is indeed based on discoveries and truths about Existence, and human nature, then it can no more be considered to BELONG to Ayn Rand ('her' philosophy), than one could logically speak of "Newton's gravity" or "einstein's relativity."
(One CAN of course use those terms, but ONLY in relation to the INDIVIDUAL interpretations put forth by those people.
We need, as Objectivists, to more fully integrate our philosophy into the larger philosophical context. Which philosophies are we similar to?, and which ones do we oppose, on fundamental points.

I hope I answered your question.

Post 2

Monday, December 8, 2003 - 12:40pm

I've had the unpleasant chance of discussing with Mr. Ryan on a few occasions. He thinks he is close to Objectivism, but his web site tells a different story. He's an outright Christian mystic.

Henry Emrich, I hear you about the Rand confusion. People seem to treat Objectivism as some kind of monster : no one would claim that other philosophies or religion "stop at their founder". It's pure cultist thinking.

Post 3

Tuesday, December 9, 2003 - 5:58am

Francois, now HERE'S somewhere we agree!

The whole "Rand fetish" thing -- where the philosophy of objectivism gets confused with her fiction writing abilities and personal style -- is pretty cheesy. I personally find Rand's EARLIER work (Anthem and "we the living") to be in many ways SUPERIOR to her later works: maybe the philosophy wasn't presented in as much detail, but the earlier books are FAR BETTER to read. (I just nerved myself up yesterday, to finally finish The Fountainhead. I had to put it down for a few weeks. It's a heavy read!)

Have you ever noticed that "critics of objectivism" like Mr. Ryan, have almost NO familiarity with the philosophy, at all?

Some of Mr. Ryan's criticism DO seem to apply to ARI, but then again, ARI (as an organization) acts almost totally counter to Objectivist principles.

Post 4

Tuesday, December 9, 2003 - 7:30am