Neil Parille

Members
  • Posts

    961
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Neil Parille

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    Neil Parille
  • Favorite Music, Artworks, Movies, Shows, etc.
    Yes Rudyard Kipling
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://objectiblog.blogspot.com/
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    New England
  • Interests
    History Philosophy Theology Literature

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Neil Parille's Achievements

Apprentice

Apprentice (3/14)

  • Conversation Starter Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare
  • Posting Machine Rare

Recent Badges

6

Reputation

  1. He says that he was on the board of a small Objectivist publication and Bob Bidinotto published a positive review of The Passion of Ayn Rand. He said he knew that was the end of it with LP. He asked Peikoff if he thought that Barbara was making up the idea of an affait and LP said it was possible and that the claim was "an arbitrary assertion." Kelley says he knew of the affair in the 70s.
  2. According to Kelley, he read "When Earth's Last Picture is Painted" at a memorial for Frank and "If" at Rand's funeral.
  3. This is a recent interview with David Kelley. He talks about his break with Leonard and The Passion of Ayn Rand during the first 8 minutes or so. I don't know, or had forgotten, that he read a Kipling poem during a small memorial for Frank. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VZAz5gYRbU
  4. PARC was a nasty attack when it came out. I imagine one of the reasons Valliant hates me is that it hasn't stood the test of time. In 2009, two biographies came out and pretty much confirmed Barbara's book. The 100 Voices (an ARI Archive project) came out It doesn't support Valliant on any of the issues he made a big deal out of (the typewriter, etc). I can't imagine Milgram's biography, if it is every published, siding with Valliant.
  5. If anyone wants the PDF of my critique of Creating Christ, just email me at neil.parille@aol.com Valliant said in the interview that he's been "overwhelmed" by the support has has received for the book. He then mentions all of two people with relevant degrees in the field (Robert Price and Robert Eisenman). The book, best I can tell, hasn't been reviewed in any journal of religion, history or theology. Valliant once claimed that he sent drafts of the book to "all the experts in the relevant fields." Serioursly, all 9000 members of the Society for Biblical Literature? None of the experts I've contacted ever heard of the book. Valliant boasted of his supposedly great memory. As I may have mentioned, when I was working on my critique of PARC, it occurred to me that Valliant wrote the quotes from memory and then later inserted the page numbers without checking them. Take for example Valliant's claim that Barbara insinuates that Rand's amphetamine use interfered with her mental state. That's something that you could easily misremember. In fact when I read Valliant's book I thought "yeah that wasn't fair of Barbara." Here is Jim's mangling of what Barbara said: http://www.solopassion.com/node/2877
  6. I listened to the interviews with Valliant. 1. Valliant was more aggressive than normal. It doesn't appear that our hosts knew that there have been two biographies of the Brandens that have more or less confirmed the Branden accounts. Since Valliant constantly called called the Brandens "liars" it would have been good for our hosts to ask him if he thinks Burns and Heller are liars as well. 2. Valliant claimed all the bad stuff in the 60s was due to Branden and Rand didn't know about it. Is this believable? 3. Valliant brought up Hessen. Hessen said Barbara went to easy on Rand. 4. Our guests didn't ask Valliant why he approves of the ARI's re writing of Rand's posthumously published material. 5. No hard questions on Valliant's nutty Creating Christ. I'm listening now to the first episode ("I don't care if I'm an Objectivist, I'm a fan") and I think there is promise to the show.
  7. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIwnFth-NfBpdMjrvNFKVyA
  8. It was a one of a kind site. It's too bad that Richard decided not to keep it update. If I recall it was around 2009 that he stopped which was when the biographies came out. There has been a lot since then.
  9. Lawrence still seems active on wikipedia. Years ago I contacted him with links to recent O'ist books and thought that would keep his site current. He never got back to me or it was non-commital.
  10. Valliant also claims (around 14 mins) that Rand quite smoking because she became convinced that the science indicated it was dangerous. Of course she quite smoking because her physician showed her an x-ray of her lungs inidcating that she likely had cancer, She put her cigarette out and never smoked again. This account is not only in Barbara's bio but in 100 Voices (which has an interview with Dr. Dwortezky). Valliant is lying.
  11. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEcJXomQ4eU According to James, he and Rothbard were "good friends." This seems to be the first he's ever said that.
  12. Michael, I listened to it because I was curious how the dynamic duo would explain why disagreeing with Rand (if they did) was not a version of "open Objectivism." Here is my takeaway: 1. Valliant pretty much admits he's bisexual. Binswanger is mildly critical of homosexuality and says its hard to integrate with Rand's views of masculinity and femininity. 2. They both imply that Rand's comments on homosexuality were limited to her Q and A. I don't think that's true. They mention Branden's early views of the psychology of homosexuality but don't say he presented his theory in The Objectivist, which Rand approved of. 3. Binswanger says he discussed the topic with Rand and she "walked back" her harsh criticism of homosexuality. I don't trust Binswanger, but who knows. 4. They had almost a complete separation between psychology and philosophy which seems un-Objectivist to me. However, I haven't read the relevant essays in a long time. 5. When the moderator introduced Valliant, he didn't mention that he was the author of PARC. There was no mention of the book, the diaries published in it, or the Rand/Branden affair (which might have been relevant to the viability of a person being bisexual). I recall that the gossip was Binswanger didn't like the fact that Valliant published the diaries. I can't imagine that he's a fan of the book.
  13. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfPoEtRJ5UA&fbclid=IwAR2j-lQNihJYISdsuvFtgRgNk6dvc1fA2PO0VSEBqZQJKQsp-R-Y-AsfWFQ
  14. Dr. Jill Biden's craptastic EDD thesis is even worse. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20407226/bidens-dissertation.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1zqZTUE6hyU7KkvfFU6qt2c7osyWMc9gihlCuJ99nwbc9HHLcW7erUkgA