Mike82ARP

This is a thread from another place, but I thought I'd post it here and we could kick it around:

If you could ask God just one question, .... What would you ask?

.

How did you put up with so much?

As a former chiropractor and son of a chiropractor, I’ve had a decent amount of experience with non-allopathic methods of treatment. Headaches during fasting are a common occurrence since many environmental toxins are fat soluble and are therefore stored in adipose (fat) tissue. As one fasts, the fat stores are being metabolized and the toxins enter the bloodstream and can make one feel quite sick. The quickest way to clear this stuff out of your system is to continue drinking a lot of spiring/mineral water- not distilled. Liver detox with milk thistle is also beneficial in helping improve liver function which has a multitude of health benefits. If you’re over 30, I’d find a physician to supervise your fast as you may have some nascent metabolic problems emerging (hypoglycemia, ketosis-if you’re on the slim side).

Being a former chiropractor and son of a chiropractor, I’ve spent a good bit of time in the non-conventional medicine arena. I could tell stories like these. As such I am skeptical, but do not out of hand dismiss these reports. What is clear is that the incidence rates of many chronic illnesses is on the rise for whatever reason (environmental toxins/pesticides, electromagnetic pollution, vaccines, genetic degradation, etc). Fasting has been utilized for centuries as a treatment for illness with sufficient success to perpetuate its usage.

Thank you everyone for the advice. I’ll have several months to fine tune the class. Most of my students who have taken my intro logic/critical thinking class have been asking for a philosophy class.

What was unsatisfactory about the survey course you first had in mind? What was the purpose it didn't serve? What changes (Rand-related or not) would make it better?

Well, it was about 30 years ago. The teacher was a post-modern type who really didn’t think that philosophy was a path to truth- as if that could be known, but only an endless journey. So, I thought, what’s the point? Rand had at least reached her goal. Most of which comports with life.

IMO, post modernists are Objectivism’s and philosophy’s greatest adversaries.

Well, I suppose I meant to say I wanted to help the students develop a proper worldview through the use of philosophical inquiry. Since I view objectivism as a system which best permits one to achieve true happiness, that will be the destination.

My advice would be that you should consider slowing things down a bit, and remember that you're a teacher and not a preacher. You appear to have been bitten hard by the ObjectiVampire and you now want, if not need, to bite others. In your introductory post, you say that you hadn't read Rand until after seeing the film Atlas Shrugged, Part 1, and that you've since read many of her philosphical works. From the release of the film to today in not whole lot of time to critically absord and analyze an entire philosophy, let alone to conclude that it is the "system which best permits one to achieve true happiness."

J

If you think teachers aren't preachers, you're unaware of the indoctrination that is taking place in today's schools, e.g., environmentalism, multiculturalism, egalitarianism and yes, altruism. My purpose is to help the students recognize what is garbage.

Further, I am not a Randian and I am not in lock-step with all of her teaching therefore I would not be teaching pure "Objectivism", but only objectivist principles in contrast to other philosophical school and systems (empiricism, pragmatism, mysticism, etc.) As I noted to Reidy above, I already unknowing held many of Objectivism's tenets for years. Rand's writings will help me communicate them more effectively.

1. What would you teach if you'd never heard of Rand?

2. How can you teach this better for having read her? What special insights does she have on the material?

Q#1. I would have taught a survey course in philosophy which I viewed as insufficient for my purpose. I've been considering this for a few years, but haven't gone forward with it as I could not identify a final goal or purpose with which I was comfortable.

Q#2. Rand's philosophy was not something that changed my life as I unknowingly held most of her tenets for many years. Rand simply ordered the system in a way that I couldn't.

I’m new to this site and hope I am posting this in the proper forum. I am an open objectivist and will be teaching a one semester class on philosophy to 11th and 12th graders next fall. I want the class to be more than just the typical mundane "survey of philosophy” in that I want to incorporate objectivist principals as a proper worldview from which to evaluate other systems. Unfortunately, Rand was a firebrand and the mere mention of her name can invoke some unwarranted strong negative feelings mainly by parents, so I want to slowly incorporate Objectivism without the “in your face” presentation that Rand would likely have required.

Jmpo, but I would not teach "proper worldview" in a philosophy class. Philosophizing about the world does not necessarily mean that one will arrive at definite answers.

The process of philopsophical question-asking can be very productive and dynamic; the journey is its own reward.

Well, I suppose I meant to say I wanted to help the students develop a proper worldview through the use of philosophical inquiry. Since I view objectivism as a system which best permits one to achieve true happiness, that will be the destination.

The need for philosophy comes first. People need philosophy, not cows, ducks, dogs and cats. Then, what philosophy? Go into science and critical thinking. This sets up Objectivism in its simplest for the metaphysics and epistemology are the same as with science. While the next logical step is ethics you can go to the politics by discussing the founding of the country and individual rights (see, the Declaration of Independence). "The pursuit of happiness" dovetails neatly with rational self-interest and you're off to the races. Then you can go to the philosophy as a whole by referencing the four basic principles and how one leads to another--this does not include esthetics--and you put Rand's name on it. Then you can explain in a summing up how there are two Objectivisms, one cultural/intellectual (hers) and the other--intellectual (as explained so far)--and that to get into her philosophy as she explicated it you have to read the novels and her non-fiction, etc. Objectivism, the philosophy of Ayn Rand, is centered on her idea the ideal man and the sanction of the victim (and probably beyond the purview of your course for there's too much material). One great virtue of this philosophy is its integration across parts of philosophical discourse and its emphasis on living on earth. Then there's the contrast with other philosophies and studying philosophy in college which is mostly a bunch of continuing, ungrounded intellectualizations and a worthless way to acquire more student loan debt.

--Brant

nothing wrong with her being a "firebrand"--you might play a DVD of her so they can get the flavor

is this social studies?

I've been surreptitiously priming the students this year. I have a "Who is John Galt?" decal on my vehicle and have discussed the Atlas Shrugged movies with several of my students, most who have viewed the film and many who plan to tackle the book this summer. I loan my DVD to others and they love it, especially given today's political climate. No grief from parents so far = no grief from the principal.

Take a look at David Norton's Personal Destinies, and otherwise focus on ethics, not the fancy or esoteric stuff.

Also--especially around 11th and 12th graders-- don't forget the difference between principals, and principles, which you appear to have done in the haste of typing your opening post.

Well, I wish the principal subscribed to objectivist principles!! LOL!! I was in a rush when typing this earlier.

Thanks for the advice everyone.

I’m new to this site and hope I am posting this in the proper forum. I am an open objectivist and will be teaching a one semester class on philosophy to 11th and 12th graders next fall. I want the class to be more than just the typical mundane "survey of philosophy” in that I want to incorporate objectivist principals as a proper worldview from which to evaluate other systems. Unfortunately, Rand was a firebrand and the mere mention of her name can invoke some unwarranted strong negative feelings mainly by parents, so I want to slowly incorporate Objectivism without the “in your face” presentation that Rand would likely have required.

Can anyone recommend, if there is any, source material that presents Objectivist principles without being overtly Objectivist? I’m just trying to avoid potential problems.

Thanks.

Hi: My name’s Mike Masztal. I am a married (33 yrs) 58 year-old currently employed teaching biology and chemistry to high school students. I also teach a class on critical thinking and basic logic. I recall seeing Rand’s books in the stores through the years, but never read any of them. After seeing Atlas Shrugged, Part 1, I was drawn to read the novel. The novel validated, for the most part, my personal philosophy more completely than anything had up to that time. I can honestly say it was an epiphany! I’ve since read many of Rand’s philosophical works. I would have to place myself in the Kelley camp rather than the Peikoff camp due to their parochial adherence to “closed” Objectivism.

While I now view objectivism as the most correct view of life, there are some tenets I have not reconciled and hopefully, after some reading and time, will be able to clear up some of them.