RoR: Forum

Post 0

Thursday, January 17 - 1:28pm

Link

Edit

Good luck...

Post 1

Thursday, January 17 - 3:44pm

Link

Edit

Ed - this is a very thoughtful and thorough post. It will be interesting to see what happens next.

Post 2

Friday, January 18 - 12:47pm

Link

Edit

��one might have personal issues with Nathaniel Branden while acknowledging his pioneering work on the psychology of self-esteem��

Given the context of this remark, I assume this means TAS has no problem with a book that argues that the founder of the Objectivist movement has the �soul of a rapist?�

��While some might argue that the posters on other discussion boards started the current controversy, those posters have also dredged up many of the past insults by Lindsay, many of which I and certainly Will Thomas probably missed��

Yeah. Sure. Uh-huh.

��I do not expect [Perigo] to feign friendship with individuals with whom he has had personal fallings-out. I do not expect that he will make up with Nathaniel Branden and Barbara Branden, Sciabarra or others ..�

�Personal fallings-out?� He has attacked and demeaned these individuals in terms that defecate on the very concept of civility. Do words mean anything to this person?

Do moral standards mean anything to TAS?

"He would not permit himself to know that what he felt was self-loathing; he identified the emotion, but not its object; it was loathing for the men around him, he thought; it was they who were forcing him to go through this shameful performance. What can you do�he thought�when you have to deal with people?� Atlas Shrugged

Post 3

Friday, January 18 - 4:17pm

Link

Edit

Lindsay has posted a response to Ed's message on SOLOP. Read it if you care, but it says exactly what you expect it would.

Personally, I don't really care if Lindsay speaks at the Summer Seminar or not. If he's there, however, I certainly will not be attending any of his talks. So, whether he's there or not, he won't be there for me - I will ignore him which is what he deserves.

Post 4

Saturday, January 19 - 7:46am

Link

Edit

Dennis Hardin says Nathaniel Branden wrote

...a book that argues that the founder of the Objectivist movement has the �soul of a rapist.�

I'm not familiar with this. In what book did he write this, and in what context?

Post 5

Saturday, January 19 - 10:03am

Link

Edit

Outstandingly well-reasoned and well-written article, Ed! Wise, insightful, well-tempered, and good-natured. It sets a kind of standard for civility, reasoned discourse, and even personal nobility.

I can't comment too much on the "controversy" over on Objectivist Living or SOLO since I haven't read it. Those discussions are amazingly boring, and fill me with ennui. Moreover I condemn the Objectivist movement for even having them. Proper, healthy, enjoyable, and informative discussions involve much less personal nonsense, and many more philosophical issues and matters of substance, in my judgment.

My view of Perigo is he's a genuinely decent and good person, who's a fairly good thinker, and a very good speaker. But considerably less so when he's unjustifiably cultivating the cultists, or engaging in one of his very many personal vendettas, or both. So you probably just have to make a judgment call on this.

But the SOLO ideal of "passionate rationality and rational passion" is a genuinely good one, if adhered to.

Post 6

Saturday, January 19 - 11:42am

Link

Edit

Kyrel Zantonavitch misreads Dennis Hardin's comment referring to the Passion of Ayn Rand's Critics -- "a book that argues that the founder of the Objectivist movement has the �soul of a rapist.�

Chris Sciabarra quotes from Valliant's charge against Branden in his review 'Reason, Passion, And History,' here.

"He asserts that Branden�s �psychology shows a striking similarity to the psychology of a rapist,� one who used �sex as his chosen instrument of coercion and terror� (382). Branden, who �had written on the relationship between force and fraud as means of manipulation,� committed a moral crime against Rand, Valliant argues, and what �his crime lacked in violence, it made up for in prolonged psychological torment and deception� (383). Through deception, Branden �enjoyed and prolonged this kind of domination for years. ... Branden was not only able to exploit Rand�intellectually, psychologically, emotionally, professionally and financially�he could do so with an erection. ... While his behavior was not, technically, rape, Branden�s was nothing less than the soul of a rapist� and his memoir constitutes �the concealment of an act of spiritual rape� (383-84)."

So, Lindsay Perigo has noted in his first conditions: "And the Valliant/Branden matter is apt to flare up again at any time [ . . . ] : I remain resoundingly on Valliant's side in the matter of the Rand-diminishers."

Which seems to imply that Lindsay will not call names attached to real persons (if he did, that would be contra TAS guidelines for presentations), but will, if questioned, give a reasoned, rational explanation of previous bouts of name-calling: 'Scumbarra,' 'Evul Scum Bitch,' etcetera.

Post 7

Saturday, January 19 - 12:05pm

Link

Edit

Apologies to Hardin and thanks to Scherk!

Post 8

Saturday, January 19 - 3:25pm

Link

Edit

Excellent post, Mr. Scherk. I assumed readers would be familiar with the source of the quote. I am pleasantly surprised to know that's not the case. But for the current controversy, I would prefer to see it banished (along with that ghastly book) to the oblivion it so richly deserves.

Thank you for adding that clarification.