"The Age of Un-Reason"


Recommended Posts

Ever since I found out about this essay several years ago, I've continued to poke around on occasion, to see if someone had updated the archives of The Freeman to include the earliest issues. Yesterday I finally hit paydirt! The web site of the Von Mises Institute now has the June 1955 issue of The Freeman available as a downloadable PDF. Here is the URL: http://mises.org/document/4569/

I copied and pasted the essay, corrected errors from the PDF-construction process, reformatted the paragraphs and pages, and sent an e-copy to Leigh and Nathaniel. Leigh was delighted and said she was going to post it to Nathaniel's web site, along with his other essays. So, anyone who wants to read the essay now has *two* options.

If you *do* read the essay, then ponder please these thoughts, which I shared in my email to Leigh and Nathaniel...

Could you imagine a young college student reading this essay, perhaps after a couple of semesters of immersion in the (dominantly) leftist atmosphere of his humanities courses? Light-bulb time!

Or a college student's parent, who has the dull, nagging sense that something is wrong with what the student is being exposed to at college--then seeing all too clearly the propaganda and (nearly) child abuse that is going on? Time for the pitchfork!

And remember, when Nathaniel did his first college days, it was nearly a decade before Atlas Shrugged was published, and at least a full decade before Students for a Democratic Society and their radical leftist agenda oozed into the American scene.

Bad philosophy really *is* the driver of what happened then in the colleges, and is now happening in the media and the government. It's good that we still have strong, articulate, fully informed voices making the case against statism left and right.

The battle continues, and some days there's more reason for optimism than others. Have you been reading Forbes magazine lately? Great stuff in there by Harry Binswanger and the others. Like ARI or not, this is where they shine.

Seems like, the mopre things change, the more they remain the same...

Best to all,

REB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This would seem to be the first time the themes of Atlas Shrugged and of Rand's subsequent essays and speeches appeared in print. That gives it historical significance. I suspect that AR had a heavy editorial hand in it. I have my doubts about the extensive verbatim quotes. Does anybody here believe that Branden's profs were standing in line for their turn to talk just like Rand villains?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roger, thanks for the link! I also printed out Branden's article and saved the text for editing later. It was a fascinating read.

Peter, I agree that some of it sounds contrived. None of it was unbelievable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“There are, undoubtedly, educators who abhor the anti-mind assault dominating our universities—men who have no patience with the self-evident absurdity of those who proclaim that they think they cannot think, . . . .”

Undoubtedly. I began college in 1966. My university, a public one, was dominated by the pro-mind set in all my courses: philosophy, mathematics, physics, chemistry, genetics, history of science, . . . . I never took economics, but the introductory text was Samuelson and hardly irrational. (I studied Austrian economics later, but there is no reason to regard it alone as rational economics.) The connection of unreason to collectivism in this youthful piece is weak. The culture was philosophically dominated by the unreason of the fideism of Protestantism, and that was an individualistic outlook. Entry of the student into secular university often had the effect of rational liberation, of awakening to the power and glory of unaided human reason. That was the effect it was having on me, and prior to exposure to Rand.

(I just now got a banner ad at the top of this page "Seven Biblical insights into investing revealed.")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“There are, undoubtedly, educators who abhor the anti-mind assault dominating our universities—men who have no patience with the self-evident absurdity of those who proclaim that they think they cannot think, . . . .”

Undoubtedly. I began college in 1966. My university, a public one, was dominated by the pro-mind set in all my courses: philosophy, mathematics, physics, chemistry, genetics, history of science, . . . . I never took economics, but the introductory text was Samuelson and hardly irrational. (I studied Austrian economics later, but there is no reason to regard it alone as rational economics.) The connection of unreason to collectivism in this youthful piece is weak. The culture was philosophically dominated by the unreason of the fideism of Protestantism, and that was an individualistic outlook. Entry of the student into secular university often had the effect of rational liberation, of awakening to the power and glory of unaided human reason. That was the effect it was having on me, and prior to exposure to Rand.

(I just now got a banner ad at the top of this page "Seven Biblical insights into investing revealed.")

Similar, similar. I even used Samuelson's book in Economics and he was still teaching at Syracuse University at the time I was there. The intellectual and ethical scene was not nearly so dismal as Rand painted it in Atlas Shrugged. In fact it never was quite that bad (although it is bad enough). It it had been as bad as Rand painted it the country would not have lasted from the 1950s to now.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“There are, undoubtedly, educators who abhor the anti-mind assault dominating our universities—men who have no patience with the self-evident absurdity of those who proclaim that they think they cannot think, . . . .”

Undoubtedly. I began college in 1966. My university, a public one, was dominated by the pro-mind set in all my courses: philosophy, mathematics, physics, chemistry, genetics, history of science, . . . . I never took economics, but the introductory text was Samuelson and hardly irrational. (I studied Austrian economics later, but there is no reason to regard it alone as rational economics.) The connection of unreason to collectivism in this youthful piece is weak. The culture was philosophically dominated by the unreason of the fideism of Protestantism, and that was an individualistic outlook. Entry of the student into secular university often had the effect of rational liberation, of awakening to the power and glory of unaided human reason. That was the effect it was having on me, and prior to exposure to Rand.

(I just now got a banner ad at the top of this page "Seven Biblical insights into investing revealed.")

Similar, similar. I even used Samuelson's book in Economics and he was still teaching at Syracuse University at the time I was there. The intellectual and ethical scene was not nearly so dismal as Rand painted it in Atlas Shrugged. In fact it never was quite that bad (although it is bad enough). It it had been as bad as Rand painted it the country would not have lasted from the 1950s to now.

Ba'al Chatzaf

You thought it was that bad at the time? If so you were the only one. AS is predictive off the extant operative principles. What you see today is realized prescience.

--Brant

work of genius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“There are, undoubtedly, educators who abhor the anti-mind assault dominating our universities—men who have no patience with the self-evident absurdity of those who proclaim that they think they cannot think, . . . .”

Undoubtedly. I began college in 1966. My university, a public one, was dominated by the pro-mind set in all my courses: philosophy, mathematics, physics, chemistry, genetics, history of science, . . . . I never took economics, but the introductory text was Samuelson and hardly irrational. (I studied Austrian economics later, but there is no reason to regard it alone as rational economics.) The connection of unreason to collectivism in this youthful piece is weak. The culture was philosophically dominated by the unreason of the fideism of Protestantism, and that was an individualistic outlook. Entry of the student into secular university often had the effect of rational liberation, of awakening to the power and glory of unaided human reason. That was the effect it was having on me, and prior to exposure to Rand.

(I just now got a banner ad at the top of this page "Seven Biblical insights into investing revealed.")

In fact it never was quite that bad (although it is bad enough). It it had been as bad as Rand painted it the country would not have lasted from the 1950s to now.

Bob, did you attend college before 1965, or, after?

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One important constructive thing about the philosophy set out in Atlas Shrugged, two years after Branden's Freeman piece, is that Rand did not delineate and counter only mysticism of muscle, but mysticism of spirit as well. The exclusive focus on the former in the Branden piece was perhaps a tailor to the sort fellows running Freeman.

One historical insight I gather from the Branden piece is that when Rand put queries like "Why do you think you think?" into sayings of Prof. Pritchett in Atlas, it was not a transcript of what was being said by any professor in real life. Rather, as in Branden's report of his exchange with his professor, it was only psychological determinism that was embraced and espoused by the real-life professor, and it was thinkers like Branden and Rand who transmuted that into the assertion that we cannot think, because they saw free volition as necessary to thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great comments and insights, everybody. I enjoyed hearing little tidbits of various people's educational background and experience.

I agree that Branden's "dialogues" are contrived, and that he was preaching for or to the choir. However, I also agree that the various "comments by professors" were very believable. It is certainly true that "it wasn't like that" in the 50s (and late 40s) in many universities. But bear in mind that Branden's college experience was in Los Angeles and New York. These places were relative hotbeds of liberal/collectivist thought and avant-garde flirtations with skepticism and nihilism -- more so than someplace like Chicago, Syracuse, or elsewhere in "flyover territory."

A scant decade later (early 60s), the infection was spreading rapidly. The "Free Speech Movement" and the SDS campus crusade was well under way, and Marcuse and Sartre and Camus and the like were very much in vogue. By 1966-69 at Iowa State University (Ames) and 1969-71 at University of Iowa (Iowa City), my fellow students and I were encountering a lot of collectivism and skepticism, much more of it than of the traditionalist religious conservative pressures you might expect to encounter in Cow Country. The Student Rebellion had definitely "trickled down" to the cornfields by that time, and traditionalism was in retreat.

Branden's piece is very much in what my wife and I call "Boy Objectivist" style. I wouldn't be surprised if he was not only channeling Rand, but that she was critiquing his rough drafts rather energetically, before he submitted it to The Freeman. It's VERY Randish, very stereotypical stuff. Yet, I think it's very well written, and it certainly captures the idealism and outrage at what was happening to our culture, and what would continue to happen and get worse if "the adults" didn't wake up and do something about it. Unfortunately most of the "adults" didn't get the message, and we are now reaping the results of 60 years of a steadily rotting culture.

REB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever since I found out about this essay several years ago, I've continued to poke around on occasion, to see if someone had updated the archives of The Freeman to include the earliest issues. Yesterday I finally hit paydirt!

What about his piece for The Personalist, from the early 70's? I'd like to see that again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“There are, undoubtedly, educators who abhor the anti-mind assault dominating our universities—men who have no patience with the self-evident absurdity of those who proclaim that they think they cannot think, . . . .”

Undoubtedly. I began college in 1966. My university, a public one, was dominated by the pro-mind set in all my courses: philosophy, mathematics, physics, chemistry, genetics, history of science, . . . . I never took economics, but the introductory text was Samuelson and hardly irrational. (I studied Austrian economics later, but there is no reason to regard it alone as rational economics.) The connection of unreason to collectivism in this youthful piece is weak. The culture was philosophically dominated by the unreason of the fideism of Protestantism, and that was an individualistic outlook. Entry of the student into secular university often had the effect of rational liberation, of awakening to the power and glory of unaided human reason. That was the effect it was having on me, and prior to exposure to Rand.

(I just now got a banner ad at the top of this page "Seven Biblical insights into investing revealed.")

In fact it never was quite that bad (although it is bad enough). It it had been as bad as Rand painted it the country would not have lasted from the 1950s to now.

Bob, did you attend college before 1965, or, after?

A...

Before. My kids attended after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“There are, undoubtedly, educators who abhor the anti-mind assault dominating our universities—men who have no patience with the self-evident absurdity of those who proclaim that they think they cannot think, . . . .”

Undoubtedly. I began college in 1966. My university, a public one, was dominated by the pro-mind set in all my courses: philosophy, mathematics, physics, chemistry, genetics, history of science, . . . . I never took economics, but the introductory text was Samuelson and hardly irrational. (I studied Austrian economics later, but there is no reason to regard it alone as rational economics.) The connection of unreason to collectivism in this youthful piece is weak. The culture was philosophically dominated by the unreason of the fideism of Protestantism, and that was an individualistic outlook. Entry of the student into secular university often had the effect of rational liberation, of awakening to the power and glory of unaided human reason. That was the effect it was having on me, and prior to exposure to Rand.

(I just now got a banner ad at the top of this page "Seven Biblical insights into investing revealed.")

In fact it never was quite that bad (although it is bad enough). It it had been as bad as Rand painted it the country would not have lasted from the 1950s to now.

Bob, did you attend college before 1965, or, after?

A...

Before. My kids attended after.

The usual sequence.

--Brant

but hard to understand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob, did you attend college before 1965, or, after?

A...

Before. My kids attended after.

Based on what I can be somewhat certain of your age, and, I know mine, you "missed" the transition to the Stalinist takeover of the University.

It exploded as I entered the system...I was astounded because, at the age of 16, walking into one of the top ten (10) Rhetoric/Speech, or, solid, scientific departments [remember I was not sure which path I was going to pursue] in the nation, I could not compute intellectual repression.

Therefore, I will offer you the following:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your thesis adviser informs you that, in his "opinion," Ayn Rand, and, Objectivism is a "cult" and not a "movement."

Your response in 1968 would have been...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your thesis adviser informs you that, in his "opinion," Ayn Rand, and, Objectivism is a "cult" and not a "movement."

Your response in 1968 would have been...?

My college prof 1968: "No Ayn Rand."

--Brant

Rand was hot enough on campuses in the mid to late 1960s to drive many faculty nuts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great comments and insights, everybody. I enjoyed hearing little tidbits of various people's educational background and experience.

I agree that Branden's "dialogues" are contrived, and that he was preaching for or to the choir. However, I also agree that the various "comments by professors" were very believable. It is certainly true that "it wasn't like that" in the 50s (and late 40s) in many universities. But bear in mind that Branden's college experience was in Los Angeles and New York. These places were relative hotbeds of liberal/collectivist thought and avant-garde flirtations with skepticism and nihilism -- more so than someplace like Chicago, Syracuse, or elsewhere in "flyover territory."

A scant decade later (early 60s), the infection was spreading rapidly. The "Free Speech Movement" and the SDS campus crusade was well under way, and Marcuse and Sartre and Camus and the like were very much in vogue. By 1966-69 at Iowa State University (Ames) and 1969-71 at University of Iowa (Iowa City), my fellow students and I were encountering a lot of collectivism and skepticism, much more of it than of the traditionalist religious conservative pressures you might expect to encounter in Cow Country. The Student Rebellion had definitely "trickled down" to the cornfields by that time, and traditionalism was in retreat.

Branden's piece is very much in what my wife and I call "Boy Objectivist" style. I wouldn't be surprised if he was not only channeling Rand, but that she was critiquing his rough drafts rather energetically, before he submitted it to The Freeman. It's VERY Randish, very stereotypical stuff. Yet, I think it's very well written, and it certainly captures the idealism and outrage at what was happening to our culture, and what would continue to happen and get worse if "the adults" didn't wake up and do something about it. Unfortunately most of the "adults" didn't get the message, and we are now reaping the results of 60 years of a steadily rotting culture.

REB

Roger,

As a curiosity, my (step)daughter, Tina, is at Iowa State right now. That's where she is going to college. In fact, just this morning Kat and I dropped her off at the bus to go back from vacation.

Michael

Roger,

Thanks for the link. It is a great essay though I hope Branden's "personal experiences" were not contrived.

Wow! As an Iowa boy and a graduate of Iowa State University, I'm surprised that more than one person on this list has an association with ISU or the University of Iowa, for that matter. My grandfather and my grandmother on my Dad's side attended Iowa State University as did my father, my brother and myself from 1978 to 1982. My parents are currently living in Ames. The father of my roommate in college was a professor at the University of Iowa, so Roger, you might have met him. His last name is Chin, he is Chinese, and a professor in the College of Medicine, I think. None of my kids attended Iowa State, but my daughter's friend just graduated from ISU.

Michael, if your daughter is ever in need of anything, just let me know and I'll contact my parents to see what they can do.

Darrell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow! As an Iowa boy and a graduate of Iowa State University, I'm surprised that more than one person on this list has an association with ISU or the University of Iowa, for that matter. My grandfather and my grandmother on my Dad's side attended Iowa State University as did my father, my brother and myself from 1978 to 1982. My parents are currently living in Ames. The father of my roommate in college was a professor at the University of Iowa, so Roger, you might have met him. His last name is Chin, he is Chinese, and a professor in the College of Medicine, I think. None of my kids attended Iowa State, but my daughter's friend just graduated from ISU.

Michael, if your daughter is ever in need of anything, just let me know and I'll contact my parents to see what they can do.

Darrell

My maternal grandfather graduated from one of those. His family was deep into Iowa. His father was almost made governor in the late 19th century--yep, made by the powers that be back then, but they changed their minds. My Mother was born in Clinton.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another little-known Branden piece was a defense of free will in the USC Law Review in 1969. Apart from quoting Clarence Darrow it's nothing he didn't say elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Brant, those would be the following ones. This journal was titled The Personalist at the time, and as I recall, the editor at that time was John Hospers.

“Rational Egoism: A Reply to Professor Emmons”

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly V51N2

(1970)

“Rational Egoism—Continued”

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly V51N3

(1970)

These issues are available in the main library at UA, should you ever want to get hold of these papers.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Roger, the link you placed in the initial post of this thread no longer works. Can you point us to another place where we can access the article online?

Going to the site for The Freeman, that early article of Branden’s does not come up, although the following one is available:

Reflections on Self-Responsibility and Libertarianism

(2001)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. I missed those issues back then. I do have two or three years worth from the early 1970s including Jack Wheeler's defense of limited government. Dr. Wheeler got his PhD from USC in philosophy under Dr. Hospers. Barbara Branden told me in an email that Hospers was forced into retirement from his beloved teaching when he reached his 65th birthday, even though many others were allowed to continue after that age. It was because of the ideas he championed.

--Brant

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