Tara Smith - new book dropping this summer

[Strictlylogical]

"Egoism Without Permission: The Moral Psychology of Ayn Rand's Ethics (Ayn Rand Society Philosophical Studies)"

This was news to me, so I decided to put it here.  I own most of her books, she is an incredible thinker and I am looking forward to getting this one as well.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

S,

There are videos of Tara Smith around on the Internet.

I always found her a bit too rehearsed. Kind of like Toastmaster's trained and templated. Moments of forced enthusiasm that seemed like they had a timer on them and came with on-off switches.  

Her leading questions were very very leading if I remember correctly. I mean, it's OK to ask leading questions in a speech, then answer them, since this resets the audience's brain a bit with curiosity. But I remember some questions that were way too obvious for my taste at the time.

I'm not going to say quote me on that, though, because to be fair, I need to look and find examples. So let me also say my memory might be off. I don't think it is, but this needs verification.

 

In the stuff I saw, she was always super-prepared. And I appreciate that a lot.

Robert Campbell, when he was posting on OL, had a strong criticism of her he liked to chew on. If you want to use the search function, I am sure you will find something. I don't recall what it was, though.

 

I will probably check out Tara's new book when it comes out.

Michael

[Neil Parille]

She has interesting things to say when it comes to Objectivism.  When she talks about other things such as religion she should be used with some caution.

[Neil Parille]

Speaking of books, Yaron said the other day that he doesn't know why the Milgram Knapp bio has taken "longer than I hoped or expected."

[Strictlylogical]

On 3/15/2024 at 12:37 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

S,

There are videos of Tara Smith around on the Internet.

I always found her a bit too rehearsed. Kind of like Toastmaster's trained and templated. Moments of forced enthusiasm that seemed like they had a timer on them and came with on-off switches.  

Her leading questions were very very leading if I remember correctly. I mean, it's OK to ask leading questions in a speech, then answer them, since this resets the audience's brain a bit with curiosity. But I remember some questions that were way too obvious for my taste at the time.

I'm not going to say quote me on that, though, because to be fair, I need to look and find examples. So let me also say my memory might be off. I don't think it is, but this needs verification.

 

In the stuff I saw, she was always super-prepared. And I appreciate that a lot.

Robert Campbell, when he was posting on OL, had a strong criticism of her he liked to chew on. If you want to use the search function, I am sure you will find something. I don't recall what it was, though.

 

I will probably check out Tara's new book when it comes out.

Michael

I have no real convictions about her speaking / presentation style or her abilities to extemporaneously tackle questions, I find her her written work quite exceptional in the O’ist arena and generally speaking.
 

Have you read any of her books Michael?

 

I highly recommend “Viable Values” and “Normative Ethics” the former for its accessibility and sense of life, the second for its logical rigour.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

4 hours ago, Strictlylogical said:

Have you read any of her books Michael?

 

I highly recommend “Viable Values” and “Normative Ethics” the former for its accessibility and sense of life, the second for its logical rigour.

S,

These are on my to-do list.

After reading almost everything Rand wrote, there is a little voice in the back of my mind that keeps wondering if the effort to read a book explaining what Rand meant ethics-wise will be a productive use of my time. I mean, Rand was clear from what I understood. I even adopted it as a worldview  Also, there is that academic thing I do not value--not at all--due to the tribalism and elitism and agenda-mongering in higher education. 

I'm not trying to be a snob. These things cause a subconscious resistance in me to reading her books.

But I will get to them. Hell, if I could go through parts of two of Binswanger's books (The Biological Basis of Teleological Concepts, and How We Know: Epistemology on an Objectivist Foundation), her books should be a breeze.  

Incidentally, I am no fan of the Binswanger books. We can go into why later if you want. I do like the work he did on joining ITOE to the workshop, though.

 

Also, I have added so much more to my base in Rand, stuff from evolutionary biology--especially brain development, neuroscience, modern psychology, behavioral science, and story, I find books that derive their arguments from Rand as their starting point and presenting themselves as universal are limited for where I am going intellectually.

Once again, I'm not being a snob, you plebeian.

 

Michael

[Strictlylogical]

2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

S,

These are on my to-do list.

After reading almost everything Rand wrote, there is a little voice in the back of my mind that keeps wondering if the effort to read a book explaining what Rand meant ethics-wise will be a productive use of my time. I mean, Rand was clear from what I understood. I even adopted it as a worldview  Also, there is that academic thing I do not value--not at all--due to the tribalism and elitism and agenda-mongering in higher education. 

I'm not trying to be a snob. These things cause a subconscious resistance in me to reading her books.

But I will get to them. Hell, if I could go through parts of two of Binswanger's books (The Biological Basis of Teleological Concepts, and How We Know: Epistemology on an Objectivist Foundation), her books should be a breeze.  

Incidentally, I am no fan of the Binswanger books. We can go into why later if you want. I do like the work he did on joining ITOE to the workshop, though.

 

Also, I have added so much more to my base in Rand, stuff from evolutionary biology--especially brain development, neuroscience, modern psychology, behavioral science, and story, I find books that derive their arguments from Rand as their starting point and presenting themselves as universal are limited for where I am going intellectually.

Once again, I'm not being a snob, you plebeian.

 

Michael

After having read Peikoff, some Brandon, Rand, and Binswanger... I was impressed with Smith's approach.  It is at once accurate and careful about what Rand said, but unapologetic in its independent examination and investigation of why and how (and in what way) what Rand said is valid, without simply parroting or paraphrasing her statements or appealing to her persona.  Smith's mind is a steel trap and her "ripostes" against criticisms of Rand's ethics are unmistakably and refreshingly successful.

Snob or plebeian, if you want to be selfish... for you... yeah... just get and read them books.

[Neil Parille]

New biography of Rand coming in August:
 

Amazon.com

WWW.AMAZON.COM