Binswanger on Rand's Break with Hospers

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Binswanger on Rand's Break with Hospers

I got an email from Neil Parille a few days ago pointing me to the following free post by Harry Binswanger on his list page.

Neil would have posted it here on OL himself, but he seems to have developed a disability on how to do it. He wrote that he doesn't know "how to start a topic" on OL. (If he reads this, I suggest he click on the button called... er... "Start New Topic." Seriously. Dayaamm! Of course, you have to sign in first...)

Ayn Rand's Break with John Hospers - A personal Recollection

by Harry Binswanger

In the post, HB strongly contests Jennifer Burns's recent comments in Harvard Magazine (November-December 2010 issue) on the famous Harvard lecture that made Rand mad at Hospers, cuz he was there, you know. He did his normal hagiographic Rand-thing we have come to expect--in this case saying how Hospers talked to the audience about Rand's ideas "in a really sneering way" while Rand replied "so gently and earnestly that I [HB[ was a little uncomfortable."

And, of course, there is the ah-ha! payoff where Hospers almost can't control his shame and humiliation:

Another thing struck me. During her response, Ayn Rand was looking straight at where Hospers was seated (in the front row on her far left). But I could see Hospers, and the whole time he was turned in his seat away from Ayn Rand, facing toward the wall, in an awkward pose that seemed to say, "I'm not interested in whatever you have to say." He wouldn't look at her; he stared at the wall. I'm not a great believer in "body language," but in this case, his was loud and clear.

I left the event surprised and bothered by Hospers' behavior. I concluded, immediately and without difficulty, that he had just sold her out in order to maintain "face" with his academic buddies.

These fundy dudes should stop the BS.

I don't even mind HB's groupie language, but there is something I strongly object to. He said he was not a big believer in body language and put the term in scare quotes.

Ah, me. Life is short and fundy BS is everlasting...

At the present, I am making my first steps in learning body language (I need this skill for my Internet marketing stuff as I will be doing videos and public presentations before too long). The man I am studying, Gregory Hartley, was a USA Army interrogator before he started writing books. I'm sure he would be able to learn a lot from Binswanger on interrogating dangerous enemies. (Seriously though, HB might be able to learn something from Hartley's book with Maryann Karinch, How to Spot a Liar. Or maybe he might want to take a pass on that one.)

I'm not even going to try to explain why body language is a valid category of human behavior science and how a highly skilled person in this area can produce consistent results. Granted, there's some snake oil being sold alongside the good stuff, but there's just too much out there that's well researched, repeatable and teachable to take someone "not being a big believer in it" seriously.

I know why HB is doubtful, too. It's because Ayn Rand didn't say it was OK to "believe" in body language. And who the hell needs to look at any hard evidence, anyway, if Rand didn't opine on it?

People complain about HB having a private list with a loyalty oath, etc. I think that's perfectly OK. More power to him. But he should keep to it and not come out. When he does appear in public, he embarrasses himself (although I imagine he is totally clueless about it).

Here's another example. On a recent debate between HB and Benjamin Barber posted here on OL (see here), one that I unfortunately listened to in its entirety, HB started as follows, and I kid you not:

I want to begin by doing something unusual. I want to define my terms.

Unusual?

Whaaaat?!

People start by defining their terms all the time.

And why does that tickle my memory so much?

Oh... right...

For those not all that familiar with Rand's work, here is a direct quote from her lecture, "The New Fascism: Rule By Consensus," presented at the Ford Hall Forum on April 18, 1965, and included in Captialism: The Unknown Ideal.

I shall begin by doing a very unpopular thing that does not fit today's intellectual fashions and is, therefore, "anti-concensus": I shall begin by defining my terms, so that you will know what I am talking about.

Somehow that line comes off a hell of a lot better the way Rand says it. But why would anyone copy something like that?

Come on, HB. Just a little originality when you start talking in an actual debate in public. You can ape Rand the rest of the time. Is that asking too much?

I want to wind this up by saying something clever or at least intelligent, but I've run plumb out.

I'm on empty.

No more gas and no more interest.

So I'll simply stop.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

I have never understood the appeal of HB to anybody. Maybe he's a good Scrabble partner.

I used to play Scrabble with my step-Mother and Father. She always came in first, he second and me third. It would have been just as excruciating if I had come in first.

--Brant

"Look, it's a beautiful day. I just don't understand."

[Guyau]

.

Hospers’ Recollection

Brant, I like that film and that line in its moment.

I have appreciated Harry Binswanger’s work on biology and Rand’s value theory,* his transcription and organization of Rand’s epistemology seminar, and his compilation of the Lexicon. I saw him speak a couple of times in the early 90’s. He was fine. The Q&A’s were especially good. Special appreciation for speaking up here.

[Neil Parille]

Can anyone verify the following claims of Binswanger:

I knew from The Objectivist Newsletter that Hospers was supposed to be very friendly to Objectivism--I think he even gave part of a lecture once in the NBI series "Basic Principles of Objectivism."

-Neil Parille

[anthony]

Can anyone verify the following claims of Binswanger:

I knew from The Objectivist Newsletter that Hospers was supposed to be very friendly to Objectivism--I think he even gave part of a lecture once in the NBI series "Basic Principles of Objectivism."

-Neil Parille

Neil,

Not much to point to, except that long ago a girlfriend had a copy of his (I think) "Philosophical Analysis", in which there was a substantial portion on Objectivism - I was pleased to see.

I since read somewhere that he was much taken with the O'ist morality and politics, but differed on Rand's epistemology. She eventually broke with him after long correspondence. (I'll check my Ayn Rand Letters.)

Tony

[Neil Parille]

Tony,

The book you are probably thinking of is Human Conduct: Problems of Ethics.

-Neil Parille

[Jerry Biggers]

Tony,

The book you are probably thinking of is Human Conduct: Problems of Ethics.

-Neil Parille

Hospers' college textbook, "Introduction To Philosophical Analysis," starting with the second edition (I think, I don't have the book in front of me to check the edition, but it is in editions published after 1967, because the book references Rand's Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, citing its first appearance in The Objectivist in 1967) listed Rand for recommended readings on her theory of concept formation.

I do not know if he elaborated on Rand in later editions of the book. Tibor Machan often cited Rand in his many books on philosophy (e.g., Objectivity, 2004; and, of course, Ayn Rand, 1999).

[Brant Gaede]

.

Hospers' Recollection

Brant, I like that film and that line in its moment.

I have appreciated Harry Binswanger's work on biology and Rand's value theory,* his transcription and organization of Rand's epistemology seminar, and his compilation of the Lexicon. I saw him speak a couple of times in the early 90's. He was fine. The Q&A's were especially good. Special appreciation for speaking up here.

Thanks. I liked the Lexicon. I'll go to storage and see if I can find it. I have no real interest in epistemology except for basic philosophical lucidity unless it directly informs or improves upon scientific methodology. I never read any of his work on biology and I doubt if many biologists have either, as he's not one. Appreciate your way-back link.

--Brant

[Greybird]

[...] I liked the Lexicon. I'll go to storage and see if I can find it.

Save your time, and do something far more interesting than rummaging through the locker on a lovely Saturday — the Lexicon is on line. Complete with libertarian-trashing. For newcomers, don't give the supercilious BinswangerTwit any more royalties, I beg of you.

(I'll always remember the shabbily printed hardcover edition, long since sold to one of those oh-so-horrid libertarians at the Karl Hess [supper] Club, for its using a paper stock of the texture, thickness, and color of East German toilet paper. And, yes, I actually used East German toilet paper.)

[Brant Gaede]

[...] I liked the Lexicon. I'll go to storage and see if I can find it.

Save your time, and do something far more interesting than rummaging through the locker on a lovely Saturday — the Lexicon is on line. Complete with libertarian-trashing. For newcomers, don't give the supercilious BinswangerTwit any more royalties, I beg of you.

(I'll always remember the shabbily printed hardcover edition, long since sold to one of those oh-so-horrid libertarians at the Karl Hess [supper] Club, for its using a paper stock of the texture, thickness, and color of East German toilet paper. And, yes, I actually used East German toilet paper.)

My storage shed is right out front. I was able to easily find the book. I've got over 1,000 books in there so I guess I was lucky. I haven't held it or opned it in years. I've never seen such shitty paper in a hardcover book before.

(Did the East German toilet paper work?)

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Stephen,

I'm glad you mentioned some of Binswanger's work, since I don't believe it is fair to mock the boneheaded part without giving due to the actual value.

HB tries, I suppose, but I just find him so... er... derivative... that I wonder if there is even a person residing under his skin. (That's a rhetorical exaggeration, of course, but it aptly transmits my emotional reaction to him.)

Also, if someone spends his time emphasizing his derogatory opinions about good, productive people like (in this case) Jennifer Burns, Anne Heller and John Hospers--all because this fits some kind of cultish agenda he blindly follows, he should expect to be mocked.

Let's use his language and values just to keep it fair. Ayn Rand said, "Judge and be prepared to be judged." So he has made no bones about judging. Wonderful. Following suit, I merely judge the judger, just as others do. There's no reason for anyone to feel this is unfair on that score. (I'm not saying you do. I'm just making a point.)

HB has produced some semi-decent derivative works within the Objectivist orbit (he does know the canon), but nothing really original as far as I am familiar with his work. And he actively promotes a strong cult-like attitude, especially when worshiping Ayn Rand and demonizing those who she did not like.

I gotta give him one thing. He sewed up his own little corner pretty tight, checked out in terms of the world, and has made a living out of this. He shows his face once in a while--now more often than before--but, in my opinion, it ain't working.

I see a a highly intelligent, second-hand soul who is meek except when he is aping Rand and scapegoating those he perceives to be her enemies.

That's my honest appraisal.

(The meek shall inherit the Peikoff. )

Michael

[Reidy]

My old newsletters are in storage, but I believe the story about Hospers at NBI is accurate. He's on at least one of the programs Rand taped for the Columbia University radio station in the early 60s. He said in a memoir that he helped to pick the programs's theme music by finding candidates and letting her make the final choice (Rachmanninoff's second symphony).

The Objectivists have long been touchy, in an uncool way, about academic prestige. The to-do they made of Hospers while he lasted is a case in point. He was never an Objectivist, and they never would have tolerated his positions from a student at an NBI q&a session.

[Brant Gaede]

My old newsletters are in storage, but I believe the story about Hospers at NBI is accurate. He's on at least one of the programs Rand taped for the Columbia University radio station in the early 60s. He said in a memoir that he helped to pick the programs's theme music by finding candidates and letting her make the final choice (Rachmanninoff's second symphony).

The Objectivists have long been touchy, in an uncool way, about academic prestige. The to-do they made of Hospers while he lasted is a case in point. He was never an Objectivist, and they never would have tolerated his positions from a student at an NBI q&a session.

? Now what does this mean? Hospers asks a question at NBI and gets the door? But Hospers asks Ayn a question in private and they have a lengthy discussion!

--Brant

[Neil Parille]

Michael,

One of these years Binswanger's book on consciousness is going to appear. I think Binswanger has more on the stick philosophically than Leonard Peikoff, so his book might be interesting.

-Neil Parille

[caroljane]

I have never understood the appeal of HB to anybody. Maybe he's a good Scrabble partner.

I used to play Scrabble with my step-Mother and Father. She always came in first, he second and me third. It would have been just as excruciating if I had come in first.

--Brant

"Look, it's a beautiful day. I just don't understand."

Brant,

This Scrabble post makes no sense, let alone the inane postscript.

Why is it that I feel I totally understand it then? You trying to be smart or something?

[Brant Gaede]

You trying to be smart or something?

I tried, but when I smelt the burning insulation I had to stop.

--Brant

[9thdoctor]

This Scrabble post makes no sense, let alone the inane postscript.

One of Binswanger’s tales, I don’t recall where I read or heard it, is that he used to play Scrabble with Ayn Rand late in her life. He says that she was completely uncompetitive, and that she would play in a kind of collaborative way, making suggestions to her opponent, and not trying to win.

[Brant Gaede]

This Scrabble post makes no sense, let alone the inane postscript.

One of Binswanger's tales, I don't recall where I read or heard it, is that he used to play Scrabble with Ayn Rand late in her life. He says that she was completely uncompetitive, and that she would play in a kind of collaborative way, making suggestions to her opponent, and not trying to win.

Oops! I simply assumed this was common knowledge and without reason.

--Brant

Edited May 30, 2011 by Brant Gaede

[caroljane]

This Scrabble post makes no sense, let alone the inane postscript.

One of Binswanger’s tales, I don’t recall where I read or heard it, is that he used to play Scrabble with Ayn Rand late in her life. He says that she was completely uncompetitive, and that she would play in a kind of collaborative way, making suggestions to her opponent, and not trying to win.

Ninth, I was assuming the scrabble reference was a lead-in for his vignette on family dynamic which followed. The postscript was obviously a quote, which I didn't happen to recognize. In translation my post reads "Brant, I don't know the context here, but this is a fine post which I enjoyed reading." His reply about the burning insulation I took to mean "Thanks".

[Brant Gaede]

This Scrabble post makes no sense, let alone the inane postscript.

One of Binswanger's tales, I don't recall where I read or heard it, is that he used to play Scrabble with Ayn Rand late in her life. He says that she was completely uncompetitive, and that she would play in a kind of collaborative way, making suggestions to her opponent, and not trying to win.

Ninth, I was assuming the scrabble reference was a lead-in for his vignette on family dynamic which followed. The postscript was obviously a quote, which I didn't happen to recognize. In translation my post reads "Brant, I don't know the context here, but this is a fine post which I enjoyed reading." His reply about the burning insulation I took to mean "Thanks".

The quote is a quote or close paraphrase for one of the closing lines in Fargo in which the one-step behind but persistent female cop is expositioning to her prisoner whom she had shot in the leg.

In other words, rather than play Ayn Rand (or anybody, but especially her) Scrabble, I'd take a walk in the park--or the subway to The Cloisters.

--Brant

[caroljane]

This Scrabble post makes no sense, let alone the inane postscript.

One of Binswanger's tales, I don't recall where I read or heard it, is that he used to play Scrabble with Ayn Rand late in her life. He says that she was completely uncompetitive, and that she would play in a kind of collaborative way, making suggestions to her opponent, and not trying to win.

Ninth, I was assuming the scrabble reference was a lead-in for his vignette on family dynamic which followed. The postscript was obviously a quote, which I didn't happen to recognize. In translation my post reads "Brant, I don't know the context here, but this is a fine post which I enjoyed reading." His reply about the burning insulation I took to mean "Thanks".

The quote is a quote or close paraphrase for one of the closing lines in Fargo in which the one-step behind but persistent female cop is expositioning to her prisoner whom she had shot in the leg.

In other words, rather than play Ayn Rand (or anybody, but especially her) Scrabble, I'd take a walk in the park--or the subway to The Cloisters.

--Brant

It's getting like Rashomon around here.

[Selene]

Carol:

Truth be told, it always is...

Adam

where the hell is that medium?

[caroljane]

Carol:

Truth be told, it always is...

Adam

where the hell is that medium?

Over on another thread, misspelled.

I think I remember which thread, but I probably don't.

[9thdoctor]

This Scrabble post makes no sense, let alone the inane postscript.

One of Binswanger’s tales, I don’t recall where I read or heard it, is that he used to play Scrabble with Ayn Rand late in her life. He says that she was completely uncompetitive, and that she would play in a kind of collaborative way, making suggestions to her opponent, and not trying to win.

Ninth, I was assuming the scrabble reference was a lead-in for his vignette on family dynamic which followed. The postscript was obviously a quote, which I didn't happen to recognize. In translation my post reads "Brant, I don't know the context here, but this is a fine post which I enjoyed reading." His reply about the burning insulation I took to mean "Thanks".

Sorry if I pitched a cropper here, and mucked up your pleasant little chat. I was just trying to help out a bit, but you know what they say, no good deed goes unpunished. I'll just slink away now, with an upbeat what ho!

[caroljane]

This Scrabble post makes no sense, let alone the inane postscript.

One of Binswanger’s tales, I don’t recall where I read or heard it, is that he used to play Scrabble with Ayn Rand late in her life. He says that she was completely uncompetitive, and that she would play in a kind of collaborative way, making suggestions to her opponent, and not trying to win.

Ninth, I was assuming the scrabble reference was a lead-in for his vignette on family dynamic which followed. The postscript was obviously a quote, which I didn't happen to recognize. In translation my post reads "Brant, I don't know the context here, but this is a fine post which I enjoyed reading." His reply about the burning insulation I took to mean "Thanks".

Sorry if I pitched a cropper here, and mucked up your pleasant little chat. I was just trying to help out a bit, but you know what they say, no good deed goes unpunished. I'll just slink away now, with an upbeat what ho!

I should certainly think you would. Get yourself to the Manor before cocktails, and for heaven's sake change that shirt, what is Jeeves thinking of?

--Aunt Agatha