Almost An Objectivist :>

Introductions and Personal Notes
1

Salutations all. :smiley:

I’m fairly new to Objectivism, but have been told that my sense of life is fairly close to the philosophy. I’ve been reading articles here and there and recently purchased The Voice of Reason (currently about half-way through). So far, I seem to agree with ..oh.. maybe 90-95% of the philosophy. Many of my hang-ups deal with specific semantics as applied to Objectivism.

I have a strong interest in language and linguistics as it is, so finding the right words and understanding what specific words are supposed to mean are very important to me. I do not yet refer to myself as an Objectivist, as I have barely read most of the formal literature, much less Ms. Rand’s novels.

Within perhaps a year, maybe a bit more or less, the solid foundations that I have learned about Objectivism has helped me firmly orient my life towards a direction with which, I am much happier. Getting through high school, then very liberal colleges, I was bombarded with “you should accept other’s ideas no matter what” types of ideas. Through it all, I was able to hang on to some definite rationality, but after so many years, found that I was unable to clearly define my ideas to myself, much less others.

My life, I won’t say has turned 180° (it was never that bad)… but I think is now more purposefully defined. It took a while, but I am comfortable now with arguing for the rights of an individual and rational reality.

As for other things.. I live in Texas, but I’m not a cowgirl :stuck_out_tongue: I love everything here except the weather. I’m finishing up a degree in humanities and plan to go into teaching (possibly 5th grade). I was originally an education major, but became so sick of the tripe being lauded from those classes that I decided there must be a better route. (The vast majority.. 99.8%.. are seeped in socialist theories.. and for the most part, consist of “tips and tricks” classes. They are not content oriented. Many are just flat out opinions.) To clarify, the humanities major is based on literature (classical and modern) that have defined or altered societies, philosophy, history and art. (I’m also throwing some psychology and composition courses in there as electives)

So, hello :o I joined last night and stayed up past 5am reading posts! I think Objectivists are the most interesting people I have ever met and as such, I hope to be a thoughtful contributor to this forum.

2

So far, I seem to agree with ..oh.. maybe 90-95% of the philosophy.  Many of my hang-ups deal with specific semantics as applied to Objectivism. 

I have a strong interest in language and linguistics as it is, so finding the right words and understanding what specific words are supposed to mean are very important to me.

Welcome on both accounts. I have a general program going of trying to show that there aren’t any semantic problems in Objectivism, so if you find something puzzling or (horrors) questionable, bring it out and maybe we can see if there is a real problem.

3

I think Objectivists are the most interesting people I have ever met and as such,  I hope to be a thoughtful contributor to this forum.

Welcome to the forum!

I have to agree with your assessment. One of the things that drew me to Objectivism was the interesting nature of its adherents. Here were people that possessed a depth and breadth of knowledge on a huge spectrum of topics hitherto unknown to me. Every article and lecture that I worked through was written or presented by someone who had obviously applied every ounce of their rational faculty to the subject. Miss Rand especially blew me away with her acumen and her ability to express this trait in elegant prose.

I think there are many reasons for this but that’s a discussion onto itself. :o Here’s to hoping that you will continue to be interested in Objectivism and Objectivists!

4

I think it’s Nathaniel Branden.

something about that bee…

just kidding deedlebee, welcome.

5

Welcome! I think your "round-about’ approach to becoming an educator is probably a smart one. I would encourage you to study lots and LOTS of history as well to give yourself a sturdy foundation. Also, check out the Ayn Rand Bookstore for Leonard Peikoff’s lecture on Philosophy of Education to find out how to apply Objectivist principles to what you already know about teaching. Lisa Van Damme also has some excellent taped lectures on her experience with homeschooling.

Enjoy!

6

(I don’t understand the reference to Mr. Branden..)

But thank you all for your greetings. At least on the forum I have received a very cordial welcome. I can’t say the same about the chat room. It was not a pleasant experience for a first time user of IRC to be kicked and banned in the course of one conversation without provocation.. Nor was it pleasant to be insulted with demeaning comments, and be called a pragmatist, fascist and something like a “ketchup passer to murderers” :rolleyes: (This was after I made it clear that I do not fully understand the philosophy and am attempting to learn) Hopefully, whatever mistake I made there (I have absolutely no clue), won’t be repeated here.

I didn’t think I would need to state this (it seems understood from my point of view) .. but to the audience of the forum, should I make some logical blunder in my attempt to understand, please remember that I am not trying to offend. My questions are sincere.

PirateF, I have been told about the Van Damme Academy and have had the opportunity to listen to a few of her lectures. For myself, I hope at some point to also open a private school. While I come from a long line of education administrators, I’d certainly be the first in my family to have a school of my own. It’s definitely a goal to work towards in the best possible manner (with the best possible degree). The vast majority of students who seem to be in the education majors are sadly underqualified. Women who can’t write complete sentences, much less coherent thoughts, that want to be English teachers, or people who constantly complain about how school is “so boring the kids won’t like it” and then later moan and whine about why students don’t seem to know anything. :smiley:

DavidOdden, if I may ask, have you studied linguistics? (I saw a post the other day where you asked if a verb a person had used was of a specific type.)

Here were people that possessed a depth and breadth of knowledge on a huge spectrum of topics hitherto unknown to me. Every article and lecture that I worked through was written or presented by someone who had obviously applied every ounce of their rational faculty to the subject.

I couldn’t agree more! Many Objectivists I have met, or known about, seem to be modern Reniassance men who thouroughly enjoy a wide range of interests. This would be a point of Objectivism that I highly respect. Answering questions or explaining points to the absolute breadth of their knowledge and never letting points just dangle aimlessly… it’s a skill to admire and model.

7

DavidOdden, if I may ask, have you studied linguistics?  (I saw a post the other day where you asked if a verb a person had used was of a specific type.)

They pay me money to teach it, at Ohio State. (home page). Where in Texas, if you don’t mind?

8

They pay me money to teach it, at Ohio State. (home page). Where in Texas, if you don’t mind?

Oh fantastic! The university I’m attending does not have a linguistics major (or even classes) but the more I read about language structures and such, the more interesting it becomes. As a part time job for the past 2 years, I’ve been working as a private tutor with Autistic children. (Modified ABA style) Their language progression is sometimes so slow that it forces me (and other therapists) to rethink the process of acquisition. Perhaps in the future I’ll have a structured opportunity to study linguistics, but are there any “beginner” books you would recommend?

I basically live in Houston, though the area is so large, I don’t feel that is an adequately clear answer. My residence is actually 30 minutes NE of the downtown area, and my university and the families I work with are about 30 minutes SE of downtown (right next door to NASA). Horray for 2 hours of commuting per day :slight_smile:

9

But thank you all for your greetings.  At least on the forum I have received a very cordial welcome. I can’t say the same about the chat room.  It was not a pleasant experience for a first time user of IRC to be kicked and banned in the course of one conversation without provocation.. Nor was it pleasant to be insulted with demeaning comments, and be called a pragmatist, fascist and something like a “ketchup passer to murderers” :smiley:

Well, join the crowd. As a first-time IRC user I too was kicked and banned in a single conversation, and also labeled as a “sneering whim-worshipper.” As you might surmise, it takes more than just acquiring a name for a channel in order to understand Objectivism, and even more to actually be an Objectivist. The really sad part is one wonders how many young people are turned away from Objectivism because of such shabby treatment on that channel.

10

Well, join the crowd. As a first-time IRC user I too was kicked and banned in a single conversation, and also labeled as a “sneering whim-worshipper.” As you might surmise, it takes more than just acquiring a name for a channel in order to understand Objectivism, and even more to actually be an Objectivist. The really sad part is one wonders how many young people are turned away from Objectivism because of such shabby treatment on that channel.

If the behaviour that I witnessed is an everyday occurance, I’m sure that would be a depressing statistic. As much as I like forums, I have to admit that I “grew up” online at talker communities (similar to MUDS but without any roleplaying). I greatly enjoy real-time conversations, especially on topics with participants who have a great deal of knowledge. I don’t believe that anyone should be forced to put up with purposeful insanity or rudeness, but as I don’t believe that was the case, the experience left a sour taste in my mouth.

The forum and the chat channel have been my first experience to speak with Objectivists outside my personal relationship. No one in my family has even heard of Ms. Rand*, and some of my friends have had such horrible experiences with self-proclaimed hedonistic “objectivists”** that they have no interest in studying the subject further. At any rate, I’m not about to let power-mongering rudeness shun me away from a topic I desire to learn. :slight_smile: Mr. Speicher, thank you for your comment. It has certainly improved my disposition!

Cheers!

*Knowing it would be a subject of controversy, I decided not to get into conflicts with my parents with my reading material. However, one weekend we went to the beach, and as I was greatly enjoying The Voice of Reason, I took it along as my book of choice. During the afternoon, my mother saw me reading it and said, “Doesn’t she write dirty books?” … It couldn’t have been possible for her to be suggesting that the philosophy was “dirty”, since in a prior conversation, she had stated that she never heard of Ms. Rand. A moment’s reflection popped out a rebuttal that I almost regret. “No, that’s Anne Rice” :smiley: (“Almost”, because I don’t really have a problem discussing sexuality with mature adults.. then again, she is my mother :stuck_out_tongue: )

**One of my friends in particular seems to have a bad track record of running into (and occassionally dating) these folks. Even with my limited knowledge of the philosophy, it seems that anyone who uses the justification of “I’m going to do whatever makes me happy” to explain Objectivism and excuse atrocious behaviour (such as sleeping with people outside an exclusive relationship), hasn’t thought much about it.

11

Mr.  Speicher, thank you for your comment.  It has certainly improved my disposition!

You’re welcome.

Incidentally, Ayn Rand seems to have preferred being referenced as “Ayn Rand” or “Miss Rand,” so by way of showing respect we likewise dispense with the modern feminist-inspired “Ms.”

12

… we likewise dispense with the modern feminist-inspired “Ms.”

I’ll keep that in mind, but my usage is technically correct. I used it only as a title of courtesy, not to infer girlish or neo-feminist ideas. As per the etiquette of respecting one’s wishes, that will certainly be kept in mind.

Usage Note : Many of us think of Ms. or Ms as a fairly recent invention of the women’s movement, but in fact the term was first suggested as a convenience to writers of business letters by such publications as the Bulletin of the American Business Writing Association (1951) and The Simplified Letter, issued by the National Office Management Association (1952). Ms. is now widely used in both professional and social contexts. As a courtesy title Ms. serves exactly the same function that Mr. does for men, and like Mr. it may be used with a last name alone or with a full name. Furthermore, Ms. is correct regardless of a woman’s marital status, thus relegating that information to the realm of private life, where many feel it belongs anyway. Some women prefer Miss or Mrs., however, and courtesy requires that their wishes be respected.

dictionary.com “Ms”

13

In the usage note to the American Heritage definition: “Some women prefer Miss or Mrs., however, and courtesy requires that their wishes be respected.”

14

Not to belabor the issue but I think it’s clear what Miss Rand’s wishes were: .

15

Well, join the crowd. As a first-time IRC user I too was kicked and banned in a single conversation, and also labeled as a “sneering whim-worshipper.” As you might surmise, it takes more than just acquiring a name for a channel in order to understand Objectivism, and even more to actually be an Objectivist. The really sad part is one wonders how many young people are turned away from Objectivism because of such shabby treatment on that channel.

Even though there may be horrors going on in a place like the mentioned channel, in my experience, when people are turned away from Objectivism because of, real or fake, Obectivists’ treatment of them, the problem, in this respect, is 100% with the those who are “turned away”.

Those with a sincere interest in understanding the Objectivist philosophy, and applying it to their own lives, will not be deterred by other people’s hostility. Instead, they will try to seek a first hand understanding of Ayn Rand’s ideas (particularly by reading *her* writings), and go from there.

Those who are indeed turned away from *Objectivism* (not from certain Objectivists), are in my opinion most likely out to join a group or clique, and not to seek the truth.

(This is not to imply in any way that the newly introduced member is such a person – Hi, BTW! I just think this is an important issue, because I have seen it come up again and again over the years I have been participating in Objectivist activities.)

16

Even though there may be horrors going on in a place like the mentioned channel, in my experience, when people are turned away from Objectivism because of, real or fake, Obectivists’ treatment of them, the problem, in this respect, is 100% with the those who are “turned away”.

Those with a sincere interest in understanding the Objectivist philosophy, and applying it to their own lives, will not be deterred by other people’s hostility. Instead, they will try to seek a first hand understanding of Ayn Rand’s ideas (particularly by reading *her* writings), and go from there.

I agree with the overall sentiment of your remarks, in that a first-hander who is seeking the ideas of Objectivism will not mistake the philosophy for that which is evinced by those who claim to support it. But many young people simply go exploring, far from the stage of having a “sincere interest in understanding the Objectivist philosophy, and applying it to their own lives.” It is easy to see, at least for me, how a young person could be turned off from the philosophy by those who mistreat him, while only knocking on the door. The horrible experiences I have heard from many, many others are, just as occurred with deedlebee and me, on their very first visit there. Granted for us such an experience is distasteful but does not reflect on the philosophy at all, but other more exploratory young people, at a much more basic stage of intellectual curiosity and development, may not be motivated to explore much further based on what they have seen. I cannot say I would blame them.

17

Granted for us such an experience is distasteful but does not reflect on the philosophy at all, but other more exploratory young people, at a much more basic stage of intellectual curiosity and development, may not be motivated to explore much further based on what they have seen. I cannot say I would blame them.

To me the key words here are “young” and “basic stage”, and if that is the category we are discussing, yes, then I agree.

18

Holy moly,

Who labeled Dr. Speicher and deedlebee as “whim worshippers” and all that in the IRC room? I visited it once, and all looked rather quiet and stale, so I left. But I had no idea it was filled with pseudo-Objectivists.

19

Holy moly,

Who labeled Dr. Speicher and deedlebee as “whim worshippers” and all that in the IRC room? I visited it once, and all looked rather quiet and stale, so I left. But I had no idea it was filled with pseudo-Objectivists.

I do not know specifically who banned deedlebee, but I was banned as a “sneering whim-worshipper” by the channel owner, Keith Weiner (who goes by the name of Bearster, both there and here). He did not know at the time that it was me.

20

I learned a long time ago never to allow personalities to define anything for me. The world is full of people who think that a smart mouth equates with intelligence.

Welcome to the forum, deedlebee! You said that you are going to school in Texas. Are you from Texas? I was born there, but raised in Japan (and throughout Asia), and later in Oklahoma. Talk about culture clash!