Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

What order should the O'ism books be read in?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

I suggest Logic as a good subject for a 14-year-old student. 

The Leonard Peikoff lecture series "Introduction to Logic" is very good, although it does assume some familiarity with Objectivism.

These points raise questions that deserve discussion. (I don't have certainty here.)

First, based on introspection -- back to when I was 14 -- I would say a study of logic, at the level Dr. Peikoff presents it, is much too advanced for a typical 14-year old. On the other hand, I can say as a matter of fact that I know Josh is far more intelligent than I am. (I have met Josh.)

Second, the more general question is this: What is the age of philosophy? My conclusion is that a person has to be a certain age before he can philosophize. (I vaguely remember Dr. Peikoff making a comment on this in one of his lectures, possibly the one on the roles of philosophy and psychology in history.)

The reason is that philosophy involves the widest abstractions. To form them requires a lot of concretes from which to induce. The wider the abstractions, the more concretes are required. On the other hand, intelligence plays a big role. Intelligence, in my use of the term/idea, means the ability to make connections between things. A more intelligent person can reach an objective conclusion faster, that is, with perhaps less data -- all other factors being equal.

For most people, that age is around 16-20, though there are some strikingly younger exceptions on this board. Of course some individuals are too unintelligent to ever be philosophical.

My summary point is that learning is largely inductive. Starting with the widest abstractions is backwards. This does not mean that one can't start with a few simple concepts in any field -- philosophy, physics, or history -- as an introduction at a relatively early age. I do think that only a much simplified version of Dr. Peikoff's excellent course would be appropriate for a typical 14-year old. Possibly the introductory lecture, for example, would be suitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

I am also wondering if anyone knows of good books appropriate for his age and low reading level purely for reading. My wish is that they are written by people who are Objectivists or have a mind bend in that direction.

...

Thank you,

Lyn

I highly recommend the Sparrowhawk series of novels. They are written by Edward Cline, who is an Objectivist, and are set in the period of history of the events leading up to and including the American Revolution. While they are fictional, they are historically accurate, with some excellent background historical information. There will eventually be a total of six novels, the fourth was just released in December.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I suggest that you start with her non-fiction before you read her fiction.

The purpose of artwork (a novel) is not to teach. The purpose of artwork is to turn metaphysical concepts into perceptual concretes. Although Atlas Shrugged was the first of her books I read, I now realize that I would have enjoyed it so much more had my value-judgements aligned more closely with those that she was selectively re-creating in the book. I plan on re-reading her fiction after I finish reading all of her non-fiction, for this very purpose.

I recommend that you start with "Philosophy: Who Needs It," for the proper motivation to carry you through your studying. Then you should read the remainder of her non-fiction books in the order that they most interest you (you may want to save "Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology" for last). You should sum all that up by reading "Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand" by Leonard Peikoff. The Ayn Rand Institute sells a study-guide for this book. After you've read all of that, then you should move on to her fiction- and you'll completely understand why she was the greatest artist to ever live.

And definitely pick up a copy of The Ayn Rand Lexicon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, I am in the process of educating myself about Objectivism. I've already read Philosophy: Who Needs It, The Virtue of Selfishness, We The Living, Anthem, Atlas Shrugged, and I've been working on the Ominous Parallels since some time in October...I know how pathetic that is, but I keep going for weeks without even looking at it. I just can't seem to get into it, the way I expected to. Anyway, I'm going to try and finish it pretty soon. I have the Voice of Reason that I'd like to start reading, and I'd also like to re-read PWNI and VoS, since I understand Objectivism a little better now than I did when I read them. What would be your suggestions about my next readings? Please list them in the order that you would read them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would be your suggestions about my next readings?

Your viewer profile contains no information to help me make a recommendation.

Are you 16 or 96?

Have you picked your central purpose in life, the career you love?

Why do you have an interest in Objectivism?

Do you intend to be a professional intellectual?

Which part of Objectivism so far intrigues you the most? Why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am 22.

To start my career, I hope to be an analyst with the FBI or some kind of similar state agency. After that, I'd like to get a PhD and be a college professor until the day I die.

I'm interested in Objectivism, because I've always been one of the most individualistic people I know, and it lets me know that I'm not evil for it, the way people tend to think I am.

Yes, I intend to be a professional intellectual, maybe even an author.

The moral defense of Capitalism interests me the most. As for why...well, the first words that I ever spoke were "I need some money."

Having said that, I'm looking to study Objectivism as a whole, not just certain parts. So, take that for what you will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am 22.

To start my career, I hope to be an analyst with the FBI or some kind of similar state agency.  After that, I'd like to get a PhD and be a college professor until the day I die.

I'm interested in Objectivism, because I've always been one of the most individualistic people I know, and it lets me know that I'm not evil for it, the way people tend to think I am.

Yes, I intend to be a professional intellectual, maybe even an author.

The moral defense of Capitalism interests me the most.  As for why...well, the first words that I ever spoke were "I need some money."

Having said that, I'm looking to study Objectivism as a whole, not just certain parts.  So, take that for what you will.

Since your central purpose in life is to be a professional intellectual engaged specifically in the defense of capitalism, and you want and need a knowledge of the philosophy overall, then I would recommend this order:

1. Buy The Ayn Rand Lexicon. Initially peruse it only for subjects of interest. Later use it as a reference and lead to specialized works. This is the single most important volume for the study of Objectivism.

2. Buy Ayn Rand's Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology. Philosophically speaking, this is the most important work that Ayn Rand wrote. Study it slowly, carefully, and expect to come back to it again and again. The very long appendix (a transcript of Ayn Rand discussing epistemology with other philosophers) is important, but the key part is the part that Ayn Rand wrote. That is the short but packed part, the actual "Introduction."

3. Buy For the New Intellectual. Read the long introductory essay. It is addressed to individuals like you who want to be defenders of a rational society.

4. Buy and slowly study (perhaps over a period of 6 months to a year) Leonard Peikoff's Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand. It is a masterful integration, in hierarchical order, of all of Ayn Rand's philosophy. (Ayn Rand, like most primary philosophers, never wrote a single-volume presentation of her philosophy as a whole.) Dr. Peikoff worked closely with Ayn Rand for 30 years. He was her foremost "student," and is now the world's greatest living philosopher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um...any reason why you only recommend 2 books?

Sorry, it wasn't an exhaustive list. I could continue with more if you'd like. ITOE; OPAR; ITOE; OPAR; Fountainhead; CUI; FTNI. I'd suggest Phil Oliver's CD because apart from getting a vast amount of material (in addition to the aforementioned there's the letters, journals, The Art of Fiction, The Art of Nonfiction, etc), you can search things so if you wonder what she means by "existent", you can read it yourself. NB this is not a plug for Phil, just a recognition that he has marketed a superior product at an excelent price. The preceding statement is not a plug, either, if you were wondering.

If I were to have your goal in life, I would recommend to myself those two books, in that iterated reading pattern. In my opinion, ITOE is the most important piece of "pure" Objectivist philosophy, because it bridges the hellish gap between existence and consciousness. My top 3 pick would be ITOE, OPAR and Galt's speech. But don't stop after 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am 22.

The moral defense of Capitalism interests me the most.  As for why...well, the first words that I ever spoke were "I need some money."

If Capitalism is your thing, I would suggest Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.

For those interested in defending capitalism, it will be riveting :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That isn't true at all. It may be true of Anthem, but that's because it's sort of science fiction work, in the same tradition as 1984 (I know, Anthem was first). You're right when you say that most people will be unable to duplicate the acheivements of the heroes of Atlas Shrugged, but they are meant to be models for everyone to strive to be. And the heroine of We the Living is about as realistic as it gets since, you know, it's based on life in Communist Russia.

[This was in response to a deleted post by a troll - CF]

Edited by Capitalism Forever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will argue to a point but when when its clear to me that there is impassible dishonesty, that's where I draw the line.  I do not draw the line at the first hint of dishonesty, without any attempt to resolve it.

"Impassible" means being incapable of suffering pain. (The "passion of Christ," for example, was his suffering, according to Christian legends.) What is the connection between impassibility and dishonesty?

Dishonesty means evading reality. How can you "resolve" dishonesty if the person you are talking to is evading reality -- including your own words?

Or do you mean that sometimes you see some evidence (a "hint," as you said) suggesting the possibility of dishonesty but you, rightly, choose to gather more evidence, one way or the other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably everybody thinks that the order they read Rand is the best order, myself not excluded.

With nonfiction, I started with Virtue of Selfishness. It was a good start. Not too technical. I would not have survived ITOE at that stage; it would have been too dry, too abstract.

I continued with CUI. Very much the same value as VOS, only with the economic/political emphasis.

Of course, the very best order to read them is the order that interests you most. Motivation is crucial to integration. I got through IOE once very early, but got very little out of it. I hit it again much later; it was like reading a brand new book. I absorbed the information at a whole new level.

OPAR is excellent too, but, having read it already knowing Objectivism very well, I am unable to say how appropriate it is for the layman.

One lesson I've learned with books: if you're having trouble getting through one, just put it away, get back to it some time in the future (the exception being books you're about to be tested on!). Enjoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone who is himself just starting out (I read Atlas Shrugged in December, and that was when I started looking into philosophy, let alone Objectivism), I have to agree that Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology was absolutely riveting. It's unlike anything else; you can put into practice what is being said in the book while you're reading it, becoming conscious of exactly how the methods of concept-formation and definition are working in your own mind at the same time they're being described on the page.

Let me tell you -- it's a trip :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dishonesty means evading reality. How can you "resolve" dishonesty if the person you are talking to is evading reality -- including your own words?

Evasion is not a permanent condition. Thanks to volition, one can always choose to stop evading and grasp the truth instead.

What I'm talking about is someone who has given up on trying to grasp the truth, because they do not see a need for the effort.

Often, someone will appear to give up, or give up explicitly, when implicitly they are still interested in the problem. I've seen it, and I've seen people change their minds even after emphatically stating they would not.

People who are not yet Objectivists cannot always be taken at face value for their words. That has to come later, after they've accepted Objectivism and have begun to integrate it into their daily lives. Until then, you have to analyze what they are saying and figure out what they really mean.

Edited by TomL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...