How to Kill a Philosophy-A Review of The Passion of Ayn Rand's Critics

Oops! Double post. See below.
(Edited by The Magenta Hornet
on 7/30, 2:43pm)

Post 241

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 1:44pm

Mr. Campbell,

I think that I disagree with you about Rand's characters, but, in any event, ah... yours is an example of Mr. Branden using Rand's fictional characters as moral-psychological examples, not Rand.

In these notes, Rand does use characters from literature as metaphors for her own situation, but the first example that comes to my mind is from Somerset Maugham...

Post 242

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 3:34pm

Magenta Hornet,

Sure, in the passage on p. 326, Rand cites Nathaniel Branden comparing Patrecia to Eddie Willers--in a manner that indicates that she has no problem with using her characters as moral-psychological examples. She supplies a routine explication of the kind of person Eddie Willers was supposed to be.

I might add that when she wrote this, Rand apparently believed that Patrecia was in love with Nathaniel, but not vice versa.

Robert Campbell

Post 243

Saturday, August 6, 2005 - 12:06am

Robert, when I said that Ayn Rand was deficient in a liberal arts education, I really wasn't referring to what she did or did not study in college, but that it wasn't much of an ongoing thing with her through her life. I suspect she got much of her subsequent to college education by thinking and then in NYC reading The New York Times. Of the latter, I think this is true for there seems to me to be much stylistic similarity to her writing and the writing that was found in New York Times editorials (plus her brains and frequently unique perspectives). I would characterize it as speaking from on high, something I never liked.

She sometimes assumed she knew what she did not. For instance, in The Ayn Rand Letter she once wrote about the "missing link." For her the anti-conceptual mentality was the missing link, but this displayed a complete ignorance of the paleontology of man colliding with her brilliance.

I would like to point out that it would have been nice if not valuable to have known the complete inventory of her personal library. I believe her estate sold it off piece by piece. This would have included a list of books in storage and books at home, and maybe the magazines she subscribed to. Etc. If this information is available, I don't know about it.

--Brant

Post 244

Saturday, August 6, 2005 - 7:46am

The deficits in your own education being so noticeable, is there any reason why you should know about it, Brant?

Besides, what would it prove? I've given away most of the books I ever owned.
(Edited by The Magenta Hornet
on 8/06, 7:53am)

(Edited by The Magenta Hornet
on 8/06, 8:21am)

Post 245

Saturday, August 6, 2005 - 9:11am

Dear Hornet:

I have read all your posts. You are here to attack select people anonymously. I can't abide a coward.

--Brant

Post 246

Saturday, August 6, 2005 - 9:12am

Brant,

It isn't a catalog of her library, but there is a list of books that includes titles named in the online auction catalog, plus those she quoted or discussed in her various writings. The list is heavy on historical, political and philosophical works, plus a lot of books on architecture and railroading.

--
Richard Lawrence
Webmaster, Objectivism Reference Center

Post 247

Saturday, August 6, 2005 - 9:15am

Thanks, Richard. Btw, Born Free by Joy Adamson is non-fiction.

--Brant

(Edited by Brant Gaede on 8/06, 12:24pm)

Post 248

Saturday, August 6, 2005 - 9:49am

Always the purest motives exhibited on your part, Brant, no doubt.

Post 249

Saturday, August 6, 2005 - 5:20pm

Brant,

Good point about Ayn Rand's personal library. For years Doug Rasmussen has been saying that many mysteries about her intellectual development would be solved once it became known which books she owned. The list that Richard Lawrence has compiled is most helpful, but surely the Estate of Ayn Rand could have kept her library intact and encouraged scholars to examine it. Could it be that Peikoff et al. just aren't that interested in her development as a thinker?

I also agree with your point about Rand during her nonfiction period. An example that's long been notorious is her review of A Theory of Justice by John Rawls, a book that she proclaimed she had no intention of reading (!). There's no earthly reason that she couldn't have assimilated Rawls' book. And "The Missing Link" (as Neil Parille recently reminded us--I'd pretty much forgotten it after its original publication) is not only agnostic about evolution; it's grossly ignorant from an anthropological point of view.

I used to wonder, during the early 1970s, why she so often restricted her reading to the New York Times and the New York Review of Books. Didn't such material just encourage her pessimism about the fate of Western civilization?

Robert

Post 250

Saturday, August 6, 2005 - 6:41pm

Robert, Ayn Rand read The New York Review of Books? If you read that publication a few years after it first comes out you'll be struck by how often wrong-headed it can be for current events as proved by what had since happened.

--Brant

Post 251

Tuesday, August 9, 2005 - 6:35am

[Rich Engle wrote: It was nice to see Walter here.]

I should like to thank several people. [For some reason I have an image of myself on a podium accepting an award. For what, I'm not sure.]

First, to Rich, thanks for the kind words. Sorry to all about the confusion in my post on personality types. I should have included quotations from the post I was responding to. Thanks to Robert for clarifying this point. Next, thanks to Bill for posting a mini-bio of me. Finally, thanks to Sarah for her apology. If I have missed anyone, please take it up with my speech writer.

To be consistent with the thread, my own two bits is that I didn't think anything less of Rand or her philosophy after reading the books by the Brandens. My own "take-home" message after these books was that mistakes were being made left, right, and centre, and everyone suffered for them.

To be clear, I have not read Vaillant's book. After reading the reviews, I have some doubts as to whether I'll buy it. But then again, reading Rand's own notes on what she was going through has some appeal.

Walter

Post 252

Tuesday, August 9, 2005 - 7:12am

Evasion, that's e-v-a-s-i-o-n, won't make it go away. Sorry.

Post 253

Tuesday, August 9, 2005 - 8:34am

Magenta:

Are you replying to my post? If you are, please elaborate. I have no idea what you are referring to.

Thanks,

Walter

Post 254

Tuesday, August 9, 2005 - 8:45am

Somebody call an exterminator! Damn bugs are always coming back, no matter how many time you spray.

It's called trolling. t-r-o-l-l-i-n-g

c) This digital image was created by Sam Fentress, 3 May, 2005. This image is dual-licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License,^[1] Version 1.2 or later, and the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license version 2.0.^[2]. Attribution is required.

Post 255

Tuesday, August 9, 2005 - 5:55pm

Ethan,

LOLOLOLOL...

Where did you get that? I love it!

Oh MagHorny! Where is thy sting?

***

Walter,

As regards your last post where you are perplexed, that is sort of what I felt like when I read your first post. Sorry if I came off as brusk, but I didn't know if your post was in earnest or was one of those first time spoofs that crop up on Solo from time to time.

Anyway, it is a little late (I have been extremely busy with other matters since then), but let me be one to warmly welcome you to Solo. I hope you enjoy yourself here and I look forward to your comments.

btw - Keeping a mind to skim through a friend's copy of the Valliant book if you ever get the chance should take care of any buzzing from tergiversator drones. Not buying the book is definitely not evasion, though. It is simply not buying the book.

***

A special note to William Nevin III. You wrote (Post 171):

Michael,

Sorry to jump down your throat.

I'll echo that from my end for off-line. My manners have been relapse and I should have responded to your post sooner. As I said, I have been swamped. Peace pipe time. Tobacco or you want something else?

//;-)

Michael

Post 256

Tuesday, August 9, 2005 - 6:28pm

Mr. Foddis,

The note was to anyone who has given convoluted explanations for why they won't be reading Valliant's analysis--explanations of the sort one read from others about the Brandens' books some years back. If this wasn't your gist, I happily stand corrected.

Also, stings are not cured by silly pictures (which, as we all know, are not arguments.) Some around here are even having allergic reactions, so serious medical attention may even be required at this point.

Post 257

Tuesday, August 9, 2005 - 9:34pm

(yawn...)

MagHorny, ya gotta be able to sting first. And that you ain't doing.

Michael

Post 258

Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 6:16am

I don't argue with insects. No value to me. I just swat them as I see them.

Ethan

Post 259

Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 11:27am