Yaron Brook was scheduled to speak at an Ayn Rand Society session

[Guyau]

Prof. Robert Campbell, of Clemson Psychology, has moved beyond his more usual Psychologist-Superior line of personal attack, writing to me:

. . . up your fundamental aperture . . .

Right. Under cover of Tom Wolfe’s phrase, let’s start attacking Stephen Boydstun (well-known homosexual) by mentioning his anus and equating him to it.

. . . My "fundamental aperture" would be my eyes and the mind behind them. . . .

Prof. Campbell, we’re through from my quarter.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Except for one ex post bit

including you, for a nobler

win than shutting me up.

[Robert Campbell]

Dial back on the spital, Mr. Boydstun.

You would benefit, and so would the rest of us.

Dr. Campbell

[Guyau]

One bit more:

In January 2010, the owner of SOLO called me an obscene name, and I quit his site. That was when he conceived and announced banning from reentry anyone who quit. His invective toward me on that occasion was moderate compared to yours, but he was the owner, and I didn’t want to be using his site when it became clear he was upset over my being out of step with his agenda for it. You are not the owner of this site, so I’m inclined to stay. On the other hand, you are called a VIP of the site, so perhaps I should go. This much at least, Prof. Campbell, discussion with you is ended from me.

[Robert Campbell]

Uh huh.

Mr. Boydstun has proven remarkably selective in his indignation.

But does he really believe "No shit, Sherlock" is worse than anything in the Perigonian repertoire?

Mr. Boydstun must really not have been reading Mr. Perigo too closely.

And he must have worked overtime pretending not to notice what Mr. Perigo was routinely saying about Barbara Branden, Chris Sciabarra, Neil Parille—or even about members of his own crew who he thought might be crossing him.

I guess I shall never find out what my nefarious politicking consisted of, in the days after Carolyn Ray's one-shot attempt to edit and publish Objectivity.

Then again, it may be that Mr. Boydstun hasn't found out either.

I rather doubt that MSK will be asking Mr. Boydstun to leave, but that's his call, very definitely not mine.

Dr. Campbell

PS added September 22, 2012. Since Mr. Boydstun has now edited his post, upthread, to allege that I indulge in anti-gay slurs, let me remind him that Tom Wolfe's original phrase, about a guy who eventually "disappears up his fundamental aperture," was directed at overly rationalistic French philosophers, of unspecified sexual orientation.

My previous allusion to it online (on that occasion, it was "talking out your fundamental aperature") was directed at one Chris Cathcart, who, from his online remarks about Jenna Jameson and Ann Coulter, I infer is heterosexual.

On this occasion, I was paraphrasing another vernacular expression, "getting a bug up your ass."

I don't employ anti-gay slurs, either in conversation or in writing.

Mr. Boydstun may search this site to his heart's content. He will find no such language in any of my posts.

Let me add that Lindsay Perigo almost constantly employ anti-gay slurs online, a detail that Mr. Boydstun managed to ignore for—what?—three years, before finally exercising his option to take umbrage.

[Brant Gaede]

"Spital." What a great word! I see "spit spittle" in one word or spit in motion yet to land.

This great language continues to evolve/devolve!

--Brant

there at the beginning--well, almost

it's hard to get involved: no spite, no spit, no spital, no spittle

the Eskimos probably did better with 40 different words for "snow"

[caroljane]

"Spital." What a great word! I see "spit spittle" in one word or spit in motion yet to land.

This great language continues to evolve/devolve!

--Brant

there at the beginning--well, almost

it's hard to get involved: no spite, no spit, no spital, no spittle

the Eskimos probably did better with 40 different words for "snow"

Spital was a common term for hospital in 18th century England.

Let us hope some healing ensues.

[Robert Campbell]

Well, I've learned not to post on any threads in Mr. Boydstun's corner.

I tried yesterday with what were brief and, I thought, polite points, and his response was to delete the entire thread, including his essay on the Objectivist theory of truth, Part 1.

That Mr. Boydstun's call. But I've never deleted any threads in my corner because he posted on them (or because anyone else did), and I don't plan to start now.

Robert Campbell

[Robert Campbell]

Now, on to something more substantive.

The actual series of events, I have now learned from a source who knows the Ayn Rand Society a lot better than Mr. Boydstun does, went like this:

— Allan Gotthelf announces (February 26) that Yaron Brook and James Otteson would be the speakers at an upcoming ARS event.

— He subsequently announces, on March 13, that Dr. Otteson is pulling out "for family reasons" (from an event taking place 9 months in the future; OK, it can happen).

— At this point, the event is not called off. Dr. Gotthelf and the ARS Steering Committee could find someone else to take the other side regarding the morality of capitalism, and he says they are looking for a replacement.

— On April 30, Dr. Gotthelf announces that the event has been cancelled.

Instead of "unspecified," I should have described the reasons for the cancellation as unclear.

On account, among other things, of Dr. Otteson's rapid withdrawal, and the failure to find a replacement by the end of April for an event scheduled for the end of December.

Robert Campbell

[Robert Campbell]

I surely do suppose David Kelley might be invited to deliver a paper or a response at a session of ARS.

. . . You think Allan Gotthelf might invite David Kelley to deliver a paper or a response at an ARS session. I think no way in hell is Dr. Gotthelf going to do that. . . .

Concerning ARS programs, check out here 1988, 1992, 1995, 1996, 2000, 2007, and 2012, for which last the speaker was a public supporter of McCaskey in the dispute with Peikoff. The speculations you put forth tend to be more simple than is plausible, but then maybe you don’t actually believe their simplicity and are only baiting for some opposition and increase of attention to your latest round of spital on Gotthelf, Peikoff, Mayhew, . . . .

Contrary to Mr. Boydstun's ignorant and prejudicial but loudly voiced suppositions, it's eminently clear that Allan Gotthelf has no intention of ever inviting David Kelley to speak at an Ayn Rand Society event.

Irfan Khawaja once asked Dr. Gotthelf whether he would invite Dr. Kelley to speak at an ARS event.

The answer was no. The stated reason was Dr. Kelley's having given his sanction to Nathaniel Branden.

"He's got to behave before I consider him," said Dr. Gotthelf.

In this context, "behave" meant, at a minimum, publicly repudiating Dr. Branden and his works.

Allan Gotthelf has good reason to believe that David Kelley will never repudiate Nathaniel Branden.

From this point, I think we are all competent to work out the rest.

Dr. Campbell

[Brant Gaede]

Well, I've learned not to post on any threads in Mr. Boydstun's corner.

I tried yesterday with what were brief and, I thought, polite points, and his response was to delete the entire thread, including his essay on the Objectivist theory of truth, Part 1.

That Mr. Boydstun's call, but I've never deleted any threads in my corner because he posted on them (or because anyone else did), and I don't plan to start now.

Robert Campbell

I-I would have just cut your face!

--Brant

(retired gentleman of leisure--I run the Acuna Boys)

I will tell you how to find him--why?--because he would have wanted me to

[9thdoctor]

Irfan Khawaja once asked Dr. Gotthelf whether he would invite Dr. Kelley to speak at an ARS event.

The answer was no. The stated reason was Dr. Kelley's having given his sanction to Nathaniel Branden.

"He's got to behave before I consider him," said Dr. Gotthelf.

This sounds like progress. No reference to "Fact and Value". And here I thought you had to agree about Galileo and the typewriter story.

Is imminent theocracy subject to dispute?

[Robert Campbell]

ND,

I'm not sure whether "behaving" included wearing a hair shirt and kneeling in the snow for several hours

Robert Campbell

[Guyau]

Sorry. This post was accidental (hit the wrong button).

Well, as long as there's a spot here willy nilly, I'll say #34 rings true.

[Robert Campbell]

Mr. Boydstun may also wish to note that, contrary to his vigorously maintained impressions of their partisan neutrality, both Jim Lennox and Allan Gotthelf are members of the Harry Binswanger List.

In other words, they have both taken the Loyalty Oath.

Robert Campbell

[Brant Gaede]

Mr. Boydstun may also wish to note that, contrary to his vigorously maintained impressions of their partisan neutrality, both Jim Lennox and Allan Gotthelf are members of the Harry Binswanger List.

In other words, they have both taken the Loyalty Oath.

Robert Campbell

Maybe they got a, "I know you guys, you don't need to take no stinkin' oath!"

--Brant

[Robert Campbell]

Brant,

I've heard that Dr. Binswanger has given some thought to doing away with the Oath.

But he hasn't yet.

And he doesn't operate his list Sebelius-style.

No waivers.

Robert Campbell

[PDS]

Brant,

I've heard that Dr. Binswanger has given some thought to doing away with the Oath.

But he hasn't yet.

And he doesn't operate his list Sebelius-style.

No waivers.

Robert Campbell

I wouldn't want to be a member of a List that would let me join anyway.

[caroljane]

Brant,

I've heard that Dr. Binswanger has given some thought to doing away with the Oath.

But he hasn't yet.

And he doesn't operate his list Sebelius-style.

No waivers.

Robert Campbell

I wouldn't want to be a member of a List that would let me join anyway.

I enjoin that sentiment.

[caroljane]

Also I am enjoin the benefits of the list that did let me join it, as usual.

[9thdoctor]

I've heard that Dr. Binswanger has given some thought to doing away with the Oath.

In the Demos debate his opponent brought it up and made him look like a freak. On OO I mentioned once that I couldn't be on HBL because of the Oath, and someone came back with "which enemies of Ayn Rand do you sanction?" Such a pleasure to answer. I think a lot of those people have been run off, BTW. There's still Knucky, but otherwise there's certainly less. But where have they gone? Facebook, I think.

[Robert Campbell]

ND,

Maybe they've gone off to Facebook to join Jim Valliant...

Robert Campbell

[caroljane]

There is a rumour that they have infiltrated the Oath Keepers and are planning a coup de raison, but they are already arguing amongst themselves about what form of raison. Chocolate covered or plain?

[Robert Campbell]

I doubt your conjecture that Lennox has “gone over” to an ARI side of issues. Unlike Gotthelf, he has never made presentations at OCON.

If that is the case, why is Jim Lennox a member, along with Allan Gotthelf, of the Harry Binswanger List?

Robert Campbell

[Brant Gaede]

Brant,

I've heard that Dr. Binswanger has given some thought to doing away with the Oath.

But he hasn't yet.

And he doesn't operate his list Sebelius-style.

No waivers.

Robert Campbell

It's quite a combination: integrity plus constipation.

--Brant

HB is welcome here, as far as I'm concerned

enema man

[Robert Campbell]

I surely do suppose David Kelley might be invited to deliver a paper or a response at a session of ARS. At the session in which Irfan gave his paper, Gotthelf gave enormous deference to David Kelley's participation time in the Q&A. That was the session in Baltimore at which was announced not only the volume on Atlas Shrugged edited by Mayhew, but the volume on Atlas Shrugged edited by Younkins.

I wasn't at the December 2007 session of the Ayn Rand Society.

However, I have been able to find an eyewitness. And this witness gives an account sharply at variance with Mr. Boydstun's, at nearly every point.

(1) Before the session started, Nigel Ashford from the Institute for Humane Studies came into the meeting room and placed IHS brochures on each seat. Seeing them, Allan Gotthelf chewed Ashford out in front of the early arrivals, and instructed him to remove the brochures because they "weren't allowed."

(2) A little later, Ed Hudgins walked up to Dr. Gotthelf and tried to shake hands with him. Dr. Gotthelf refused to.

(3) Introducing the speaker, Dr. Gotthelf remind the attendees that 2007 was the 20th anniversary of the founding of ARS, by "myself, George Walsh, and others." In fact, there had been one other, and he was sitting 6 feet away: David Kelley. Dr. Gotthelf refused to acknowledge Dr. Kelley by name.

(4) Dr. Gotthelf allowed Dr. Kelley to ask the speaker one question during the Q&A. Period. This would not normally be counted as deference. When Will Thomas asked a question, Dr. Gotthelf jumped in before he had finished and put him down for asking it.

(5) This witness has no recollection of Dr. Gotthelf mentioning Ed Younkins' edited volume on Atlas Shrugged. Since Dr. Gotthelf (and his protégé, Greg Salmieri) were contributing chapters to the rival, ARI-sponsored volume edited by Robert Mayhew—and the Mayhew volume was not out yet—such a reference would have been out of character, to say the least. Later on, Dr. Gotthelf would publicly defend Dr. Mayhew's claim that his was the first "scholarly" volume on Atlas Shrugged—while refusing to identify any chapters in the Younkins volume that he thought were worthwhile.

Robert Campbell