| | I'm excited about seeing this movie. :-)
Lance asked about experiences with Rand-hating. I almost feel like coining a new term for it. How about Rand-phobia?
I have had a few experiences at university like this. (I've heard people say she's a novelist not a philosopher; I've heard people say she's a philosopher not a novelist.) But I've also found some of my lecturers to be very open to my discussion of Rand in essays. I've tried to keep pushing Rand, where appropriate, and think that I've broken some ice as a result. Where I've found this extraordinarily difficult to do, however, is any time I have taken a class in the analytic tradition of philosophy. Many in this tradition, I am convinced, privilege their own particular style of philosophy. Other philosophic styles tend to be marginalised and disparaged. I have found much more sympathy outside the realm of analytic philosophy, even from post-modernists.
Another phenomenon I've noticed from both intellectuals and, unfortunately, friends of mine is almost an Oedipus complex type reaction against Rand. After her methodologies have been grasped and understood, after many of her basic principles have been integrated into their thinking, I've noticed a number of people then turning against Rand with quite some vehemence and vitriol, even as they continue to use her methods and ideas. Convenient excuses lie in her views of a woman president, sexuality etc.. as if these were fundamental to her philosophy. She is derided for a few mistakes and errors, and rarely given credit for a brilliant methodology and system of ideas. This methodology continues to be used, without recognition, because other thinkers embraced subsequently don't have any thorough methodology. This attitude I find extremely odd, disappointing and unjust. (It's even more unfair from people who know just enough Objectivism to take its fruits, but not enough to comment with justification on whole areas of her thought, e.g. someone making a strawman attack on Objectivist aesthetic theory as though it's one and the same as Rand's forceful defense of her personal aesthetic tastes, while never bothering to grasp the theory itself.)
A basic intellectual principle should be: credit where credit's due.
|
|
