Nathaniel Branden

[Eiuol]

2 hours ago, KorbenDallas said:

Though you have TWO correct statements in there, how you arrived at them is wrong.  I am finished here.

I really don't think your thoughts are clear, so I was just adding some ideas that you can agree with or dispute. I think the point of the thread is to say what makes for a healthy mindset, and if Branden diverges from or contributes to the Objectivist point of view.

So, to get at your thought, Tenderly, we can talk about what emotions indicate a healthy mindset. What suggests a virtuous frame of mind? Rational thought is crucial, fundamental even. This isn't to say babies lack emotion, but that as adults, we are especially able to self-reflect and alter emotions. A few emotions may be just pre-cognitive, but as adults, I'd say all emotions are a consequence of thought. Not sure if that addresses things.

[Harrison Danneskjold]

On 10/20/2015 at 8:54 PM, Collectivist said:

Nathaneil Branden often spoke and wrote about intergrating some "positive psychological ideals (read emotions )" into Objectivist actions, theory and thought. Was he right or wrong-What do you think?.

According to Wikipedia:

Quote

[Nathaniel Branden] offered criticisms of aspects of [Ayn Rand's] work, naming as problems a tendency to encourage emotional repression and moralizing, a failure to understand psychology beyond its cognitive aspects, and a failure to appreciate adequately the importance of kindness in human relationships.

 

If these are the sort of criticisms we're discussing (as I'm going to assume) then I'd say that some of them are valid and probably ought to be reexamined, while some of them are hogwash.

 

Emotional repression does seem to be an issue among novice Objectivists. I don't believe it's an actual component of Objectivism per se, but definitely something its practitioners run into.

For example, I've enjoyed video games for my whole life. I love them. About two years ago (which was a few months after I started trying to live Objectivism) I found myself wondering whether it was moral for me to play them; even though I enjoyed them immensely, they didn't serve any practical purpose, which left me wondering what the purpose of playing them was (since the worst thing a man can be is purposeless).

Now, clearly, it is moral to enjoy myself; according to Objectivism, the purpose of life is to enjoy it. However, this is a subtle point which seems to be lost on many who try to apply the philosophy to their own lives.

 

Objectivism's alleged lack of appreciation for kindness is hogwash.

 

I have to go now but I'll elaborate in a few hours.