Spreading a New Philosophy - The Founding of Christianity

[anthony]

Phil,

I don't think one could keep some horses away from water.

Whereas other horses won't drink if their lives depended on it.

None of us needed Objectivism promoted at us - the first words of Rand's got us going.

What has changed? What can change?

Except that the Web is now here, which strengthens my point :

it would be hard for any browser to not pick up at least a hint of Objectivism.

I don't think it would be right to make access to Objectivism difficult - but nor should it be too easy.*

Let each find out and judge for him or herself.

Tony

*Of course, 'reverse psychology' > "nah, you can't afford it, understand it, appreciate it" < is a powerful sales tool, too.

[Xray]

[to Xray and John42t]:

This thread is about -marketing and spreading and persuading the philosophy- for those who agree with it in whole or in large part. It's also about marketing complex ideas more broadly, including discussion of historical movements like Christianity.

I would -love- to hear from either of you your thoughts on spreading the philosophy, getting more people exposed to Rand, how that might be done in Germany (or elsewhere). For example, this would be fascinating:

Are there good German translations of Rand?

AS, TF and Anthem have been translated into German, but since I have read Rand only in English, I can't say anything about the quality of the German translations; maybe John knows more about it.

As for Rand's non-fiction work, I don't know whether German translations exist.

How did you get exposed to Rand or to Objectivism?

During an internet discussion with an American atheist, who mentioned her name. Before, I had never heard of Ayn Rand.

I have never been an Objectivst, but examining Rand's work has had an interesting 'catalystic' effect on my own thinking in that it got me to dig deeper into epistemology and ethics.

As an advocate of patchwork philosophy, I always look for the 'sparkling diamonds', as I call them, to put in my personal 'philosophical treasure chest.'

To me Objectivism's 'sparkling diamond' is "Check your premises". I have profited a lot from applying it.

Have you had access to the non-fiction, the Peikoff courses, the NBI courses?

I have TVOS, ITOE and Peikoff's book about the Objectivist philosophy.

I have not had access to NBI courses, or courses by Peikoff.

[Ellen Stuttle]

Bonus question:

3. Ellen -- where were you all this time, and why did you choose just now to come back?

See

I haven't "come back," in the sense I take you to mean. I happened to be looking at OL, doing a bit of catching up to what's been going on, just when PDS happened to post his comparison and Jonathan made his remark which I thought was claiming that I'd documented Phil's hypocrisy.

As to where I've been, busy. Which is where I'll soon, I hope, be again. I think I almost have the strength back. The last week has been a lull between the storm's aftermath and recovery.

(By "the storm" I mean the Nor'easter which hit this region October 29. The week following was a horrendous ordeal. Much of the rest of November I spent mostly in bed due to muscle and joint damage. There were several academic events, including a conference, I felt obligated to attend since Larry was presenting, but making it through those was further strain, and I was still in so much pain I could scarcely eat at our traditional "Thanksgiving seminar." A bummer of a month.)

Ellen

[Xray]

We all speak of Objectivism around here--glibly, forcefully and mostly in the abstract.

A useful reality check, I recently discovered quite by accident, is to go back and watch Rand's You Tube interviews with Donohue. Not sure why, but the sweet (and somewhat scared) person (old lady?) giving the interview puts a large dose of flesh and bones on Objectivism. She was just a person, after all. The interviews put me in a melancholy mood, and I'm not sure why.

Yes, a poignancy in the latter interview was apparent to me. I chose to excise the discursions on disagreement. I don't think the puzzle she raised has ever been successfully solved within Objectivism.

Rand's anger about being criticized is quite apparent. She has a real "How dare you criticize me!" look in her face.

Instead of addressing the critic's points, she rejects it all as 'nonsense'.

[Brant Gaede]

[to Xray and John42t]:

This thread is about -marketing and spreading and persuading the philosophy- for those who agree with it in whole or in large part. It's also about marketing complex ideas more broadly, including discussion of historical movements like Christianity.

I would -love- to hear from either of you your thoughts on spreading the philosophy, getting more people exposed to Rand, how that might be done in Germany (or elsewhere). For example, this would be fascinating:

Are there good German translations of Rand?

AS, TF and Anthem have been translated into German, but since I have read Rand only in English, I can't say anything about the quality of the German translations; maybe John knows more about it.

As for Rand's non-fiction work, I don't know whether German translations exist.

How did you get exposed to Rand or to Objectivism?

During an internet discussion with an American atheist, who mentioned her name. Before, I had never heard of Ayn Rand.

I have never been an Objectivst, but examining Rand's work has an interesting 'catalystic' effect on my own thinking in that it got me to dig deeper into epistemology and ethics.

As an advocate of patchwork philosophy, I always look for the 'sparkling diamonds', as I call them, to put in my personal 'philosophical treasure chest.'

To me Objectivism's 'sparkling diamond' is "Check your premises". I have profited a lot from applying it.

Have you had access to the non-fiction, the Peikoff courses, the NBI courses?

I have TVOS, ITOE and Peikoff's book about the Objectivist philosophy.

I have not had access to NBI courses, or courses by Peikoff.

"The Legacy of Ayn Rand" is a transcription of NB's "Basic Principles of Objectivism."

--Brant

the index is suspect

[9thdoctor]

1. > OK, now, will you acknowledge that in discussing the “founding of Christianity”, you’re talking about one of many, many cults?

--Already done so, if you've read my previous posts.

2. > why talk about Christianity, as opposed to Scientology or Mormonism?

--Already explained: 1/3 of the world's population are Christians.

3A. > If you’re looking to learn lessons on how to build a cult.

--I'm not.

3B. > lessons to be learned from what Christian apologists portray their history to have been?

--Already explained that I'm not suggesting we learn to lie or learn how to distort history.

ND, My writing is not all that unclear. If you read my posts carefully, you'd see I said all this - in fact on multiple posts.

So you acknowledge that the founding of Christianity was not recorded in a historically reliable way, and that the nature of its “success” is irrelevant to the prospective spread of Objectivism? Or have you actually answered these points in other posts? If you’ve offered a refutation, I’d like to read it. If you’re not going to list post numbers, why not repeat your points, since I’ve now repeated mine for the fourth time on this thread?

BTW, Eric Hoffer, The True Believer, great book, have you read it? No need to build a case from scratch.

There’s plenty more Theodosius I can cite, may as well keep this going:

"It is Our will that all the peoples who are ruled by the administration of Our Clemency shall practice that religion which the divine Peter the Apostle transmitted to the Romans. According to the apostolic teaching and the doctrine of the Gospel, let us believe in the one deity of the father, Son and Holy Spirit, in equal majesty and in a holy Trinity. ... The rest, whom We adjudge demented and insane, shall sustain the infamy of heretical dogmas, their meeting places shall not receive the name of churches, and they shall be smitten first by divine vengeance and secondly by the retribution of Our own initiative." -- Codex Theodosianus, XVI.1.2.

This brought about a hell of a lot more conversions than any of the magic shows described in the New Testament or by Eusebius.

[9thdoctor]

I'm trying to come up with the O'ist cultist version of the Theodosius decree. Suggestions welcome, it's not quite there yet.

"It is Our will that all the peoples who are ruled by the administration of Our Rational Faculty shall practice that philosophy which the enlightened Peikoff the Intellectual Heir transmitted to the ARIans. According to the apostolic teaching and the doctrine of OPAR, let us believe in Objective Reality, Reason, Self-Interest, and Capitalism ... The rest, whom We adjudge evaders and immoral, shall sustain the infamy of heretical dogmas, their meeting places shall be subject to bombing and they shall be smitten first by shunning and secondly by personal betrayal and other retributions of Comrade Sonia’s initiative." -- Codex Binswangeranus

I'd like to swap out the Rand on one foot stuff for more distinctly Peikovian material, like the doctrine of the arbitrary assertion, knee-jerk denunciations of libertarians, etc., to keep it silly from start to finish.