Harry Binswanger mocks Barbara Branden's passing. Despicable.


JamesShrugged

Recommended Posts

Typical true believer crap.

True believers have no sense of common decency with apostates.

I think Binswanger was happy Barbara died, except he wished it could have been agonizing for her.

Smutty little souls they are...

I will not feel like he does now with Barbara on his passing when his turn comes around, even though his attitude makes me royally pissed. I will not allow myself to stoop to that despicable level.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No doubt Binswanger thought that his flippant remark about Barbara's death was clever. But it is not surprising, considering the vindictive unrelenting hatred that the Peikovian wing of Objectivists still holds towards the Brandens. We don't need to imagine what his reaction would be if Nathaniel expires before he does.

Remember, this is the guy that demands a "loyalty oath" (his words) from would be subscribers to his blog, that they will only read and/or contribute writings that he approves of (for example if subscribers dare to contribute comments to OL or libertarian forums, they will be thrown out of his pristine group). The exception, of course, being Harry himself, who has appeared as a guest on libertarian TV shows.

As Rand has said in a different context, reality will be its own avenger.. The written and oral contributions of both Nathaniel and Barbara to the corpus of Objectivism will quite likely withstand the test of time and still be referenced long after some of the Peikovians' attempts at contributions are relegated to no more than footnotes in the history of Objectivism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No doubt Binswanger thought that his flippant remark about Barbara's death was clever. But it is not surprising, considering the vindictive unrelenting hatred that the Peikovian wing of Objectivists still holds towards the Brandens.

It's not really so much the Brandens which are hated, but the reality that they revealed about Rand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not worth the powder it'd take to blow him up. I could respect him not saying anything and be suspicious of any faint praise, but of all the Peikovians he's got the most crap in his head, which is not news. Objectivism a la Ayn Rand was ruined by these people, but it was inevitable considering Objectivism should have been something besides a string of all-over-the-map-sanctioned opinions off correct premises. They all add up to lack of critical thinking, true individualism and dogma.

--Brant

a top-down philosophy that had to start that way but with Objectivists allowed to grow up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No doubt Binswanger thought that his flippant remark about Barbara's death was clever. But it is not surprising, considering the vindictive unrelenting hatred that the Peikovian wing of Objectivists still holds towards the Brandens. We don't need to imagine what his reaction would be if Nathaniel expires before he does.

Remember, this is the guy that demands a "loyalty oath" (his words) from would be subscribers to his blog, that they will only read and/or contribute writings that he approves of (for example if subscribers dare to contribute comments to OL or libertarian forums, they will be thrown out of his pristine group). The exception, of course, being Harry himself, who has appeared as a guest on libertarian TV shows.

As Rand has said in a different context, reality will be its own avenger.. The written and oral contributions of both Nathaniel and Barbara to the corpus of Objectivism will quite likely withstand the test of time and still be referenced long after some of the Peikovians' attempts at contributions are relegated to no more than footnotes in the history of Objectivism.

Criminy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No doubt Binswanger thought that his flippant remark about Barbara's death was clever. But it is not surprising, considering the vindictive unrelenting hatred that the Peikovian wing of Objectivists still holds towards the Brandens.

It's not really so much the Brandens which are hated, but the reality that they revealed about Rand.

The reality of her humanity. Without Barbara's bio we'd have this terrible, unreal myth exploited to the max by the Orthodoxy. Instead, their airplane cannot get off the ground, which has its own problem of looking foolish and dying on the vine.

--Brant

two metaphors for the price of one! (mix 'em up; take your pick!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does Binswanger's remark really surprise anyone? The only surprise to me is how tame it was.

And it wouldn't surprise me to see an official release from ARI celebrating her death.

It's not as though modesty and respect for opposing view is the strong point of the orthodoxy. They feel she was one of the most vile people who ever lived (for reasons Jonathan and Brant have nailed on the head), and they dehumanized her to the point where they feel no need to speak of her as though she was a human being.

People get that way. I remember when Falwell died, Hitchens pulled no punches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Silence is golden...

'He raised his hand over the desolate...' [hulk of the rotted ARI] and '...je traced in space the sign of the dollar.'

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Today, Ayn Rand's birthday and Groundhog Day, is also the official day of publication of Harry Binswanger's How We Know: Epistemology on an Objectivist Foundation. I've just ordered a copy of this rather expensive book (just under $40 with a 5% discount from Amazon.com), for professional/intellectual reasons.

Mainly, I'm writing about theory of propositions, and I want to make sure my claims about the failure of the Objectivist Establishment to provide a valid and justified model remain accurate. His posted excerpts and table of contents suggest that he has something significant to say about propositions, but I'll believe it when I read it.

Also, I may write a review of it for The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies.

I have posted this notice of Harry's book here, because I think that whoever is interested in Objectivist epistemology ought to read this book, eventually if not immediately--but that also buys his book ought to ponder and weigh the trade-off in doing so for a person who says what he did about Barbara after her passing.

REB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today, Ayn Rand's birthday and Groundhog Day, is also the official day of publication of Harry Binswanger's How We Know: Epistemology on an Objectivist Foundation. I've just ordered a copy of this rather expensive book (just under $40 with a 5% discount from Amazon.com), for professional/intellectual reasons.

Mainly, I'm writing about theory of propositions, and I want to make sure my claims about the failure of the Objectivist Establishment to provide a valid and justified model remain accurate. His posted excerpts and table of contents suggest that he has something significant to say about propositions, but I'll believe it when I read it.

Also, I may write a review of it for The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies.

I have posted this notice of Harry's book here, because I think that whoever is interested in Objectivist epistemology ought to read this book, eventually if not immediately--but that also buys his book ought to ponder and weigh the trade-off in doing so for a person who says what he did about Barbara after her passing.

REB

I theory of propositions as in deductive, inductive or abductive logic? Interesting. When you are able to do so , can you post a thread given a brief outline of what you are developing. That would be interesting to read.

Back in the Day formal and applied logic used to be my thing. So what you have to say would be very interesting.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
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