Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
logicalpath

Mises Institute Course on Ayn Rand & Objectivism

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

This morning I was checking the Mises Institute website and saw that they're offering a course on Objectivism & Ayn Rand. The lecturer is open to debate during the course and has invited Objectivists to do so. I was not sure if anyone here would be interested in taking the course, as well as possibly assisting them in understanding Objectivism.

Course Description Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good find. But the thing about Objectivism is that once you understand it, you realise it's not just an opinion, it's actually true - something she discovered.

But on that page he says he is not an Objectivist. So assuming he values truth, he mustn't have understood it yet. So he is teaching a course on something he doesn't understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good find. But the thing about Objectivism is that once you understand it, you realise it's not just an opinion, it's actually true - something she discovered.

But on that page he says he is not an Objectivist. So assuming he values truth, he mustn't have understood it yet. So he is teaching a course on something he doesn't understand.

Well that's why I was considering taking the course, not so I can learn from him but to see if I can help them understand it...lol. I guess that may be futile, I'd have to pay to take the course just to be able to tell them where they've gone array on the philosophy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good find. But the thing about Objectivism is that once you understand it, you realise it's not just an opinion, it's actually true - something she discovered.

But on that page he says he is not an Objectivist. So assuming he values truth, he mustn't have understood it yet. So he is teaching a course on something he doesn't understand.

Or he understands it fine and just doesn't think it's true. Come on now.

Edit:

Anyways, I guess the Mises Institute libertarians are aiming at increasing their followers' understanding of Rand's philosophical thought in order to contrast it with their preferred version of anarchy and politics-without-philosophy, obviously with a whole week focused on anarchy and intellectual property.

David Gordon has a good course on the history of political philosophy from Plato to Rothbard for free on iTunes U. He also reviews a lot of books. He reviewed OPAR quite unfavorably, which you can read here. OPAR isn't my favorite, but most of the guy's objections are just silly or plain dismissive. He has a problem with reducing everything back to the law of identity, seems to think the arbitrary should be taken as plausible until falsified, has trouble understanding the metaphysically given, and thinks Rand never proved any of her epistemology, and thinks that Rand thinks that we can only have concepts of what we directly perceive. Not promising for his Rand course.

I get the feeling that because of his relationship with Murray, he just doesn't like Rand and would like to see her diminished. He can present Aristotle's ethics respectably and accurately in one course, but when reviewing Peikoff's presentation he is derisive and mocking. "A is A, why, how naive of these Randians! They have made such a vital contribution to theology!"

Edited by 2046

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or he understands it fine and just doesn't think it's true. Come on now.

Well in his course description he does welcome Objectivists to participate in the course and it would appear he is open to debate. The Austrian School of Economics could be a strong ally if we could bridge the gap(the misconceptions they have of Objectivism) between it and Objectivism. I understand the obvious challenges there, maybe I'm being a bit naive but I did think this could be an opportunity.

Edited by logicalpath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading through an economics blog that I frequent and found this post. It seems they're trying to advertise this course outside of their regular channels. The lecturer writes this:

Writes David about the course:

I am not an Objectivist; but I'm not attempting in the course to advocate a competing philosophical theory of my own — though it is hardly a secret that my own political views are Rothbardian. Rather, I wish to evaluate the arguments that she presented. The course is primarily designed for those who would like to learn the essentials of Rand's thought; but I encourage Objectivists and others who already have strong opinions about Rand to enroll in the course and debate the issues with me. Few activities are as much fun as philosophical arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or he understands it fine and just doesn't think it's true. Come on now.

Edit:

Anyways, I guess the Mises Institute libertarians are aiming at increasing their followers' understanding of Rand's philosophical thought in order to contrast it with their preferred version of anarchy and politics-without-philosophy, obviously with a whole week focused on anarchy and intellectual property.

David Gordon has a good course on the history of political philosophy from Plato to Rothbard for free on iTunes U. He also reviews a lot of books. He reviewed OPAR quite unfavorably, which you can read here. OPAR isn't my favorite, but most of the guy's objections are just silly or plain dismissive. He has a problem with reducing everything back to the law of identity, seems to think the arbitrary should be taken as plausible until falsified, has trouble understanding the metaphysically given, and thinks Rand never proved any of her epistemology, and thinks that Rand thinks that we can only have concepts of what we directly perceive. Not promising for his Rand course.

I get the feeling that because of his relationship with Murray, he just doesn't like Rand and would like to see her diminished. He can present Aristotle's ethics respectably and accurately in one course, but when reviewing Peikoff's presentation he is derisive and mocking. "A is A, why, how naive of these Randians! They have made such a vital contribution to theology!"

Whoops, I did not see your edited post until now. Thanks for the information, I guess I was mistaken to think that they had good intentions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×