I noted, rather stupidly it turns out, in a thread called Shyness at Objectivism Online, that "evidence-based" psycholtherapy, such as CBT, DBT etc, was a testament to some of Rand's prescience (i.e., her insistence that the emotive-rational hinge was key to mental strength and moral compass).

In the back of my mind (on the old grey chesterfield with the aging fellow who does my research, watching Trailer Park Boys and eating Cheetos) was the voice saying, "Who was that guy that kinda agreed with Rand in the early days, but took a poke at her later on? Huh? Oh well. He he he. Bubbles. He He He."

Albert Ellis, the news tells us today, dead, the guy who grooved with and later pilloried Rand. I'm glad the old guy on the chesterfield didn't remember the name or I would have seemed pompous and ill-informed, instead of merely pompous. I had no idea.

I had no idea he was so SCATHING in his criticism of Rand's latter excesses, I had no idea he had debated Nathaniel Branden on stage regarding Objectivist psychology, nor that he had published a freely available 248 page clang!er against the 'religion' of Rand -- "Are Capitalism, Objectivism, and Libertarianism Religions? Yes!"**

How can I have missed the Ellis connection and its deeper ironies? In any case, I seem to have killed the thread over there at our sister site OO, not least because one of the self-identified shies there seemed to be saying that actually being with other human beings was necessitated but once a year, with the phrase, "So the question is rather: should I spend huge amounts of time and trouble so that I can enjoy a situation that confronts me maybe once a year? It's like curing your fear of bugs so that you can enjoy eating live spiders. What the heck for?"

Now, how can I answer that. Hard enough to post inoffensively at OO anyways.

Fans of Randiana will download the Ellis book, as I did, after registering at Lulu.com

Here's two brief snips from his introduction.

When I first read The Fountainhead in the early

1940’s I thought there was something compelling

about the philosophy of Ayn Randor what is now

called objectivism. Not that I didn’t have

misgivings; I did. [ . . . ] But her

individualistic outlook made some real sense to

me; and it influenced me somewhat as I developed

my method of rational emotive behavior therapy

(REBT).

Frankly, I enjoy polemics. Pitting my thinking

against that of other bright people is

challenging and rewarding. I trust that I do not like this

kind of thing for socalled egotistical reasons:

to knock my opponents down and impress others

with what a “worthwhile” person I am. But I do

enjoy a good, noholdsbarred discussion. I think

that people such as Ayn Rand and the Nathaniel

Branden are worthy, enjoyable opponents. So

lets zestfully get on to the fray!

. . . and on that cheery note, who else died of Randian note? Great friend of gays, old whatsername . . .

WSS

+++++++++++

** his chapter titles are, ahem, revealing:

Chapter 5: Assorted Evils of Ayn Rand’s Objectivism

Chapter 6: Why Objectivism is a Fanatical Religion

Chapter 7: Ayn Rand’s Religious Absolutism and Need for Certainty

Chapter 8: Definitional and Fanatically Religious Thinking

Chapter 9: Ayn Rand’s Intolerance of Opposing Philosophies

Chapter 10: Ayn Rand’s Deification and Hero Worhsip

Chapter 11: Objectivism’s Unrealism and AntiEmpiricism

Chapter 12: Ayn Rand’s Condemning and Damning Attitudes

Chapter 13: Other Fanatically Religious Characteristics of Ayn Rand and

Objectivism

Chapter 14: The Religiosity of Ayn Rand and Objectivists