Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Peikoff'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Objectivist Living Corner Office
    • Purpose of Objectivist Living and Legal Stuff (please read)
    • Selective Index and Updates
    • Tech Support / IPB Help Desk
    • Links
    • Web Stuff and Other Tech Issues (not OL specific)
  • Objectivist Philosophy
    • About Objectivism
    • 1 - Metaphysics
    • 2 - Epistemology
    • 3 - Ethics
    • 4 - Politics
    • 5 - Aesthetics
  • Objectivist Living
    • Meet and Greet
    • Objectivist Living Room
    • Art Gallery
    • Articles
    • Creative Writing
    • Writing Techniques
    • Persuasion Techniques
    • Psychology
    • Parenting
    • Humor - OL LOLOLOLOL
    • The Library
    • Quotes
    • Romance Room
    • Movies and Entertainment
    • Music
    • News and Interesting Articles
    • Events and Happenings
    • Tips for Everyday Living
    • Inky's Room
    • The Kitchen
    • Science & Mathematics
    • Sports and Recreation
    • Stumping in the Backyard
  • Objectivist Living Den
    • The Objectivist Living Den
    • Offers from OL Members
    • The Culture of Reason Center Corner
    • The Objectivist Living Boutique
  • Corners of Insight
    • Roger Bissell Corner
    • Stephen Boydstun Corner
    • Barbara Branden Corner
    • Nathaniel Branden Corner
    • Robert Campbell Corner
    • Ed Hudgins Corner
    • David Kelley Corner
    • Chris Sciabarra Corner
    • George H. Smith Corner
    • Corners of Further Insight
    • TAS Corner
    • ARI Corner
  • Outer Limits

Calendars

  • Objectivist Living Community Calendar
  • Self-Esteem Every Day

Blogs

  • Kat's Blog
  • wanderlustig
  • Hussein El-Gohary's Blog
  • CLASSical Liberalism
  • Ted Keer' Blog
  • RaviKissoon's Blog
  • hbar24's Blog
  • brucemajors' Blog
  • Ross Barlow's Blog
  • James Heaps-Nelson's Blog
  • Matus1976's Blog
  • X
  • Tee-Jay's Blog
  • Jeff Kremer's Blog
  • Mark Weiss' Blog
  • Etisoppa's Blog
  • Friends and Foes
  • neale's Blog
  • Better Living Thru Blogging!
  • Chris Grieb's Blog
  • Gay TOC
  • Sandra Rice's Blog
  • novus-vir's Blog
  • Neil Parille's Blog
  • Jody Gomez's Blog
  • George Donnelly
  • plnchannel
  • F L Light's Blog
  • Donovan A's Blog
  • Julian's Writings
  • Aspberger's World
  • The Naturalist
  • Broader than Measurement Omission
  • The Melinda's Blog
  • Benevolist Ponderings
  • Shane's Blog
  • On Creative Writing (Chrys Jordan)
  • Think's Blog
  • Kate Herrick's Blog
  • Rich Engle's Blog
  • thelema's Blog
  • cyber bullying
  • Shane's Blog
  • x
  • Mary Lee Harsha's Blog
  • Mary Lee Harsha's Blog
  • George H. Smith's Blog
  • Jim Henderson's Blog
  • Mike Hansen's Blog
  • Bruce's Blogations
  • Prometheus Fire
  • equality72521's Blog
  • Sum Ergo Cogitabo's Blog
  • Robert Bumbalough's Blog
  • Troll reads Atlas
  • dustt's Blog
  • dustt's Blog
  • Closed
  • Tim Hopkins' Blog
  • Objectivism 401
  • PDS' Blog
  • PDS' Blog
  • Rich Engle's Beyond Even Bat Country
  • Negative Meat Popsicle's Blog
  • politics and education
  • J.S. McGowan's Blog
  • Aeternitas
  • Shrinkiatrist
  • AnarchObjectivist
  • Brant Gaede's Blog

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


Full Name


Description


Articles


Favorite Music, Artworks, Movies, Shows, etc.

Found 9 results

  1. Yes, you read that right. The "Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights" - the Washington voice of ARI, is exhibiting at CPAC2013. This is a complete change for ARI to take in its relationship of Objectivism to conservatism. And just who and what is CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference)? CPAC is a yearly conference started by the American Conservative Union (primarily composed of Young Americans for Freedom - YAF retirees).They attract several thousand conservatives every year with multiple speakers - usually highly prominent nationally known conservatives (examples: Limbaugh, Gingrich, Santorum, Pat Buchanan, Sarah Palin, and in the 1980's even President Ronald Reagan). Many organizations of a conservative bent pay handsomely to have display tables to hand out their literature or attract new followers. However, ACU screens exhibitors - and Birchites, radical libertarians, any type of atheists, are not permitted. Except for a few years when the Atlas Society had a table, Objectivism was not represented at CPAC. Lately, TAS has not displayed (or were not allowed to). Now, certainly, the orthodox Objectivists as personified in Leonard Peikoff and in ARI have never been represented. And never wanted to, until now. For all the reasons given by Rand in her many non-fiction books. She hated Buckleyite/National Review-type conservatives (and with very good reasons). CPAC is the creation and personification of Buckleyites. They run it. In the past, and I'm sure now, many religious-oriented conservatives have had booths and many speakers at CPAC. In fact, the issue of legalized abortion is by far the most represented topic of interest at CPAC. In fact, they are over-represented. Now, we have a problem here. Ayn Rand made her view of religious-oriented conservatives quite clear. And her views on abortion are best represented by her essays in Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal (see "Of Living Death'). In the past, Leonard would not touch these people with a ten-foot pole. Wanted nothing to do with them. ARI has essays on its web sites condemning conservatism. And yet, now we find ARI (thru its Washington office) participating. Ayn Rand must be revolving in her grave. I'm surprised that Peikoff would allow this. Is he on life-support or something? If he did not know about this, and he finds out, he will need life support. Or somebody will. Wow,...
  2. Where Ayn Rand Learned a Lot of Philosophy I just came across a very interesting tidbit. According to Leonard Peikoff in a podcast, Ayn Rand got a lot of her notions of philosophy from a text he used when he was in college. He claimed she read the thing cover to cover. The podcast: Is It Necessary To Read Kant In Order To Denounce Him? btw - He says the requirement is different (I think he means something like common sense requirement). He says reading Rand is a breeze and reading Kant is excruciating, so if you get a fair overview of Kant's thinking, that works. He claims when he was younger, he followed Kant's reasoning from sentence-by-sentence commentary by Peyton, however, I don't know who that particular Peyton is. The passage from the podcast where he talked about the book Rand read: If you are interested, you can still get this book, but it looks like it's out of print: A History of Philosophy by B. A. G Fuller. For those who criticize Rand's knowledge of philosophy and the history of philosophy, I wonder what ideas she got from this book. Michael
  3. Confirming the new status of the Ayn Rand Society of the American Philosophical Association as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Leonard Peikoff Institute, a new blog ("Check Your Premises") has been launched, with turns by reliable junior affiliates of the Institute, such as Ben Bayer and Greg Salmieri. There is value in some of the posts, if only to clarify what the official line is today, and what the official line regarding defenses of the official line might be. So Greg Salmieri's entry and the accompanying comments http://www.checkyourpremises.org/2016/03/15/the-meaninglessness-of-arbitrary-propositions/ have proven most informative. In his Ayn Rand Companion chapter on epistemology, Salmieri hewed closely to Rand's theory of concepts. This could be defended on the grounds that the book is an Ayn Rand companion, not a Leonard Peikoff companion, so the chapter should confine itself to issues about which Rand herself published. But of course an ARIan philosopher is still required to subscribe to Peikoff's doctrine of the arbitrary assertion, to treat it as indispensable, and to be prepared to defend it. So now the obligation is being made good on. Much should be of interest to participants here. For instance, Donald J. Trump gets Salmieri's nomination as a serial generator of arbitrary assertions (which, in turn, implies that most of Mr. Trump's functioning, in any walk of life, is wholly noncognitive, and the product of "arbitrary internal monologues"). Here's another item. In a response to a comment, Salmieri writes: This reads to me like a reaffirmation of Peikovian proof, tracking relentlessly from one truth to the next. And, like Peikovian proof, it doesn't seem to allow for the method of hypothesis (even in highly restricted ways) as part of "normal cognition," because in testing a hypothesis, one generally comes up with a proposition without already having on hand all of the evidence necessary to show that is true (or false), one then looks for further evidence (sometimes, for scads of further evidence), and occasionally one has to try to figure out what the evidence might be like before going in search of it. It also doesn't seem to allow for modus tollens or reductio ab absurdum. Perhaps BaalChatzaf, Roger Bissell, or M. Guyau will have some ideas here. Of possible further interest is the fact that Salmieri is responding to Chris Cathcart. On the one hand, Cathcart gives an excellent example of a proposition some have claimed was asserted arbitrarily, but anyone else has for many years thought is true: "Rand and Branden had a romantic affair." Salmieri refuses to consider the example, complaining that it's hurtful to him and all. With the step-aside, he gets to avoid defending various things that Peter Schwartz, Leonard Peikoff, and Jim Valiant have said about that proposition. On the other hand, Cathcart refers to a certain article of mine as proof that someone "has a hobby-horse." He then proceeds to guess its contents, admitting in the process that he hasn't read the article. Salmieri could use Cathcart's statements about my article as examples of arbitrary assertions. I doubt he will. Robert Campbell PS. If Mr. Cathcart wants to read my article—I recall that he reached the second word, "Peikovian," in the title, underwent a dreadful attack of Peikovian paralysis, and could go no further, but this had to be 7 or 8 years ago—he is welcome to contact me (we academics are never hard to find) and request a copy.
  4. Understanding Objectivism Tests 03-05 are now complete! Understanding Objectivism Test (03) Understanding Objectivism Test (04) Understanding Objectivism Test (05)
  5. Click here to take the test! This test has been designed to assess your comprehension of Understanding Objectivism: A Guide to Learning Ayn Rand’s Philosophy (UO) Lectures by Dr. Leonard Peikoff (Book Edited by Michael S. Berliner). Questions have been formed from the book version, chapters (lectures) 5 – 6 only. Subsequent tests will cover additional chapters of the book. It is not intended to be an open book test. There are 25 questions – each is worth 4 points. This test can be taken by students before and after reading UO (as a pre and/or post-test). Only reading Ayn Rand’s fictional work will not be sufficient preparation to excel on this test. This assessment can help students of Objectivism and study-group organizers determine the ideal study materials and is not intended to evaluate one’s agreement with Objectivism. Note: All questions are formed from assertions and arguments made by the author of the book/material. When answering test questions, please keep in mind that the “correct” answer is based on those assertions. The Culture of Reason Center does not necessarily endorse the positions articulated in the subject material. Test Score Range: 0-60: Minimal understanding (Low) – Basic study needed 65-70: Moderate understanding (Low-Mid) – Basic study needed 75-80: Good understanding (Intermediate) – Basic study review needed 85-90: Competent (High-Mid) – Proceed to more technical studies 95-100: Advanced (High) - Proceed to more technical studies In order to receive your test score, you will be asked to provide your name and email address. Your test score will be emailed to you. Your name and email address will be added to our general contact mailing list. Your name and test scores will not be published. All marketing emails sent from The Culture of Reason Center include the option to unsubscribe. Like this Test? Please Make a Donation to The Culture of Reason Center Constructive feedback is welcome Email: cultureofreasoncenter@gmail.com Other CRC Tests Include: Objectivism: General Knowledge (01) Objectivism: General Knowledge (02) Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology Test (Introduction, Chapters 1-8, Summary) The Virtue of Selfishness Test 01 The Virtue of Selfishness Test 02 The Virtue of Selfishness Test 03 The Virtue of Selfishness Test 04 The Ominous Parallels Test 01 The Ominous Parallels Test 02 Understanding Objectivism Test (01)
  6. Click here to take the test! This test has been designed to assess your comprehension of Understanding Objectivism: A Guide to Learning Ayn Rand’s Philosophy (UO) Lectures by Dr. Leonard Peikoff (Book Edited by Michael S. Berliner). Questions have been formed from the book version, chapters (lectures) 1 – 4 only. Subsequent tests will cover additional chapters of the book. It is not intended to be an open book test. There are 25 questions – each is worth 4 points. This test can be taken by students before and after reading UO (as a pre and/or post-test). Only reading Ayn Rand’s fictional work will not be sufficient preparation to excel on this test. This assessment can help students of Objectivism and study-group organizers determine the ideal study materials and is not intended to evaluate one’s agreement with Objectivism. Note: All questions are formed from assertions and arguments made by the author of the book/material. When answering test questions, please keep in mind that the “correct” answer is based on those assertions. The Culture of Reason Center does not necessarily endorse the positions articulated in the subject material. Test Score Range: 0-60: Minimal understanding (Low) – Basic study needed 65-70: Moderate understanding (Low-Mid) – Basic study needed 75-80: Good understanding (Intermediate) – Basic study review needed 85-90: Competent (High-Mid) – Proceed to more technical studies 95-100: Advanced (High) - Proceed to more technical studies In order to receive your test score, you will be asked to provide your name and email address. Your test score will be emailed to you. Your name and email address will be added to our general contact mailing list. Your name and test scores will not be published. All marketing emails sent from The Culture of Reason Center include the option to unsubscribe. Like this Test? Please Make a Donation to The Culture of Reason Center Constructive feedback is welcome Email: cultureofreasoncenter@gmail.com Other CRC Tests Include: Objectivism: General Knowledge (01) Objectivism: General Knowledge (02) Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology Test (Introduction, Chapters 1-8, Summary) The Virtue of Selfishness Test 01 The Virtue of Selfishness Test 02 The Virtue of Selfishness Test 03 The Virtue of Selfishness Test 04 The Ominous Parallels Test 01 The Ominous Parallels Test 02
  7. Click here to take the test! This test has been designed to assess your comprehension of The Ominous Parallels (TOP). Questions have been formed from Chapter 1 and 2 only. Subsequent tests will cover additional chapters of the book. It is not intended to be an open book test. There are 20 questions – each is worth 5 points. This test can be taken by students before and after reading TOP (as a pre and/or post-test). Only reading Ayn Rand’s fictional work will not be sufficient preparation to excel on this test. This assessment can help students of Objectivism and study-group organizers determine the ideal study materials and is not intended to evaluate one’s agreement with Objectivism. Test Score Range: 0-60: Minimal understanding (Low) – Basic study needed 65-70: Moderate understanding (Low-Mid) – Basic study needed 75-80: Good understanding (Intermediate) – Basic study review needed 85-90: Competent (High-Mid) – Proceed to more technical studies 95-100: Advanced (High) - Proceed to more technical studies In order to receive your test score, you will be asked to provide your name and email address. Your test score will be emailed to you. Your name and email address will be added to our general contact mailing list. Your name and test scores will not be published. All marketing emails sent from The Culture of Reason Center include the option to unsubscribe. Like this Test? Please Make a Donation to The Culture of Reason Center Constructive feedback is welcome Email: cultureofreasoncenter@gmail.com Other CRC Tests Include: Objectivism: General Knowledge (01) Objectivism: General Knowledge (02) Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology Test (Introduction, Chapters 1-8, Summary) The Virtue of Selfishness Test 01
  8. lcsusa

    DIM Hypothesis

    Is the free DIM course still available somewhere? The link doesn't go there and I'm already registered on that site. Thanx.
  9. Peikoff says he smoked 3 packs a day. Here is the podcast where he says he smoked 3 packs a day. 3 packs a day Being a nonsmoker all my life I was clueless about the price of smokes. I did a little search and came up with a price of approximately $20 a pack. 3 packs a day is $60 a day on smokes. In a 30 day month that is $1800 a month on smokes. For what? Symbol of controlled fire? He says at that time there was no evidence that smoking is bad for health. He did not count statistics as evidence. But the truth is doctors knew at least as far back as the 1800s that smoking is bad for health. I present the following book as evidence that doctors knew that smoking is bad for health as far back as 1889 and before. This is a very well written book and you can read it by clicking on it. Tobacco: Its Use and Abuse by Rev. John B. Wight Of the South Georgia Conference (Columbia, South Carolina: L. L. Pickett Pub Co, 1889) This book is well worth reading. Now I will do a bit of a rant. Ayn Rand defines 'value' as what one acts to gain and/or keep. To value something is to act to gain and/or keep it. The word 'value' can be used as a noun or as a verb. Health qualifies as a value, that is, as something one can act to gain and/or keep. Furthermore health is a rational value, something that is worth acting to gain and/or keep. Money is a value as a means to other things. We value money because we can buy goods and services with it. If you were on an island all by your lonesome with a billion $ and you couldn't get off the island and you couldn't buy anything with the money, you would find that money is of little or no value for itself but mainly or only of value as a means to other things. Health is a value both for itself and as a means to other things. Perhaps most people don't much value health until after they lose it. Dr. Burton said in a speech that most health minded people are either very sick or very intelligent. Perhaps one must be exceptionally intelligent to value health -before- losing it. What do you value? Whatever you value, you probably can gain and/or keep it better with health than without health. If you want to make money, you can make more money with health than without health; besides sickness tends to be expensive. If you want to excel at anything, physical or mental, you can do it better with health than without health. If you want to be a world chess champion like Fischer or Kasparov, you better maintain a high level of health. If you want to enjoy anything (sports, music, food, whatever), your capacity to enjoy it probably will be enhanced by health. Health is sort of the foundation of everything else. Furthermore health once lost in a serious way tends to be difficult to get back. If you lose money but have everything else going for you, you probably can make a comeback, like Donald Trump. But losing health in a serious way tends to be a bit like moving pawns in chess, you can't move them back. Sometimes you can regain health from a serious disease, but it would have been easier and better to not get the serious disease. For reasons stated above, I am puzzled that Peikoff, the foremost Objectivist, would value health (a rational value) so little as to smoke 3 packs a day and spend $1800 or so per month in today's money wrecking his health.