The Basic Principles of Objectivism in Dallas, TX

[Donovan A.]

Friends of Objectivism,

The Culture of Reason Center is currently offering The Basic Principles of Objectivism course. These lectures were given by Nathaniel Branden with the consent and approval of Ayn Rand. Here is your chance to experience this monumental classic. These lectures are digitally re-mastered on CD. Classes are held on Tuesdays from 7:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. We allow an additional hour after the lectures for discussion. Admission is $5.00 per lecture.

Please review our Syllabus:

The Basic Principles of Objectivism Syllabus

Tuesday January 8th through July 8th, 2008. (All Lectures begin at 7:00 p.m.)

Due to the structure of these lectures, some classes will extend beyond a one-hour lecture period.

Admission: $5.00 per class. All payments are non-refundable. Each payment is due on the day of class. In the event of inclement weather or an emergency, we reserve the right to cancel or reschedule. Lectures are for adults only. Children are not permitted on the premises. Participants are expected to make childcare arrangements. Thank you.

To Register: Please call 214-263-2002 or Email: cultureofreasoncenter@gmail.com

Visit: www.thecultureofreasoncenter.com

January 8th The Role of Philosophy Part 1 and 2

January 15th What is Reason? / Logic and Mysticism

January 22nd The Concept of God Part 1

January 29th The Concept of God Part 2

February 5th Free Will Part 1

February 12th Free Will Part 2

February 19th Efficient Thinking Part 1

February 26th Efficient Thinking Part 2

March 4th Self-Esteem

March 11th The Psychology of Dependence Part 1

March 18th Spring Break - No lecture

March 25th The Psychology of Dependence Part 2

April 1st The Psychology of Sex

April 8th The Objectivist Ethics Part 1

April 15th The Objectivist Ethics Part 2

April 22nd Reason and Virtue

April 29th Justice vs. Mercy

May 6th The Evil of Self-Sacrifice Part 1

May 13th The Evil of Self-Sacrifice Part 2

May 20th Government and the Individual

May 27th The Economics of a Free Society

June 3rd Fallacies About Capitalism Part 1

June 10th Common Fallacies About Capitalism Part 2

June 17th Romanticism, Naturalism, and the Novels of Ayn Rand Part 1

June 24th Romanticism, Naturalism, and the Novels of Ayn Rand Part 2

July 1st The Nature of Evil

July 8th The Benevolent Sense of Life

Thank you,

Donovan A. 214-263-2002

The Culture of Reason Center

The Basic Principles of Objectivism Course is being offered with the consent of The Atlas Society.

[Brant Gaede]

Friends of Objectivism,

The Culture of Reason Center is currently offering The Basic Principles of Objectivism course. These lectures were given by Nathaniel Branden with the consent and approval of Ayn Rand. Here is your chance to experience this monumental classic. These lectures are digitally re-mastered on CD. Classes are held on Tuesdays from 7:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. We allow an additional hour after the lectures for discussion. Admission is $5.00 per lecture.

Please review our Syllabus:

The Basic Principles of Objectivism Syllabus

Tuesday January 8th through July 8th, 2008. (All Lectures begin at 7:00 p.m.)

Due to the structure of these lectures, some classes will extend beyond a one-hour lecture period.

Admission: $5.00 per class. All payments are non-refundable. Each payment is due on the day of class. In the event of inclement weather or an emergency, we reserve the right to cancel or reschedule. Lectures are for adults only. Children are not permitted on the premises. Participants are expected to make childcare arrangements. Thank you.

To Register: Please call 214-263-2002 or Email: cultureofreasoncenter@gmail.com

Visit: www.thecultureofreasoncenter.com

January 8th The Role of Philosophy Part 1 and 2

January 15th What is Reason? / Logic and Mysticism

January 22nd The Concept of God Part 1

January 29th The Concept of God Part 2

February 5th Free Will Part 1

February 12th Free Will Part 2

February 19th Efficient Thinking Part 1

February 26th Efficient Thinking Part 2

March 4th Self-Esteem

March 11th The Psychology of Dependence Part 1

March 18th Spring Break - No lecture

March 25th The Psychology of Dependence Part 2

April 1st The Psychology of Sex

April 8th The Objectivist Ethics Part 1

April 15th The Objectivist Ethics Part 2

April 22nd Reason and Virtue

April 29th Justice vs. Mercy

May 6th The Evil of Self-Sacrifice Part 1

May 13th The Evil of Self-Sacrifice Part 2

May 20th Government and the Individual

May 27th The Economics of a Free Society

June 3rd Fallacies About Capitalism Part 1

June 10th Common Fallacies About Capitalism Part 2

June 17th Romanticism, Naturalism, and the Novels of Ayn Rand Part 1

June 24th Romanticism, Naturalism, and the Novels of Ayn Rand Part 2

July 1st The Nature of Evil

July 8th The Benevolent Sense of Life

Thank you,

Donovan A. 214-263-2002

The Culture of Reason Center

The Basic Principles of Objectivism Course is being offered with the consent of The Atlas Society.

Edited March 31, 2008 by Brant Gaede

[Alfonso Jones]

(Removed due to edit in above post)

Edited March 31, 2008 by Alfonso

[Brant Gaede]

My apologies and good luck with this! (edit: apologized for material removed.)

Based on my understanding of what kind of man he is, I'm sure Nathaniel is thrilled that you are giving his course, for I doubt if it has been done since the 60s. I took it by tape transcription in 1968 in Tucson, AZ, continued live in New York City. Ayn Rand gave one lecture live, which, of course, you won't find in this series. I sent Rand a written question: "What about the esthetics of making a novel into a movie?" She answered "What about it?" Then she elaborated a bit on this brush off; I was chagrinned. You were allowed to ask the question verbally or write it out and have it sent up front. Most were written. Out of fear. And I was a combat veteran of the Vietnam War afraid of saying the wrong thing to Ayn Rand! I now know what her problem was--and mine. I was too young for that stuff. Didn't matter that in the army I had congress with former President Eisenhower and General Westmoreland and bullets crackling by my head. The only reason I appreciate the meeting of Devers Branden with Ayn Rand is that for maybe the first time in a long time she dealt with a peer adult. The other adults were only adults in this or that, but Devers was an adult to the core relative to Ayn. This is purely psychological. At a lecture NBI had, people I experienced as goons would escort you out if you behaved inappropriately, especially toward AR. Not with Nathaniel Branden. That is, I'm sure that while these same were there when NB spoke, there was never any doubt that NB would take care of himself with an authoritative if not loathing or contemptuous voice that would melt one in one's seat. I saw that happen to some poor guy who thought psychology had achieved much more than it had. NB thought it was funny: [Loud:] "Did you hear what this man said?" He didn't actually address the man who was standing in front of him but the whole audience. He was on the stage with a microphoned voice inviting all and sundry to focus on the silly question(er). I didn't realize at the time the tremendous pressures both Rand and Branden were under in the summer of 1968 and cannot compare them with how they were then to in, say, 1962. Fear of the inappropriate was the basic fear at NBI. The tragedy is you wanted to learn something you thought was important. What you learned primarily was fear. This tradition of fear continues to this day with the Ayn Rand Institute and Leonard Peikoff, who is the true heir of fear of Ayn Rand and Nathaniel Branden. Sadly, the charisma of Ayn Rand came from the inauthentic absolutism of Objectivism itself. Not sharing the modesty of real science, orthodox Objectivism has it ass backwards. So do these NB NBI Basic lectures. The genius is to hear them and disregard what was not the substance.

When you listen to these lectures understand that they were a dead-end for Nathaniel Branden--that he subsequently abjured the STYLE but not the substance of how and what he spoke. Nathaniel Branden in California treated everyone much differently than he treated Students of Objectivism in New York prior to "The Break." Nathaniel now has custody of his old Seminar records (1969-1973) which I think reflect this change and I think they will soon be available from him for your computer. You would especially experience this in the innumerable tapes he released on various subjects in the 70s and 80s. Some are still available, I think; I have most.

Nevertheless, these lectures will give you a real sense of what "Basic Principles of Objectivism" students experienced in the 1960s in pseudo-intellectual enrapturement. It was pseudo because the relationships were all wrong. They wanted to learn about this wonderful, great philosophy. They learned what it meant to be under someone's or something's (Objectivism's) thumb. No one more than Nathaniel Branden who got thoroughly steeped in the exception of Rand's moral relativism: "Take what you want, said God, and pay for it." She did. He did. Their relationship(s) will be remembered as one of those great archetypical romantic tragedies so endemic in Western literature. Such is the hormonal power of love and sex. We all end up like St. Augustine if we live long enough.

Now my experiences with Nathaniel Branden primarily involved psychotherapy. It was not just his brilliance as a therapist I appreciated, but how supportive he was of you trying to get through something. This was in the mid-1970s. At the time he said he had had about 3500 clients in his career. Mostly individuals in a group context (as opposed to "group psychotherapy"). I extrapolate from that that he has probably seen maybe 10,000 or more more, not counting the many "Intensives" he did in the late 70s and early 80s. He continues to this day with individual therapy the quality and type I don't know and cannot comment on, but would be interested in if I needed some help. He should be credited for creation and extensive elaboration on and use of the "Sentence Completion Technique"--not sentence completion per se--and theorectical and practical work in self-esteem. (Devers Branden, by the way, is just as great as Nathaniel in using sentence completion. I once watched them both work with the same person and it was so interesting how they complemented each other.)

I must say in closing that the essence of the technique is both an altered state of consciousness and particularly how that consciousness is addressed. The real skill is in the latter.

--Brant

Addendum: I want to correct what may be over-generalizations about the Nathaniel Branden Institute in the 1960s. I saw only a slice of its history at the very end, 1968. I was not a witness to what it was like in previous years. I did visit its offices at 120 E. 34th St. in the Spring of 1966 to start my subscription to The Objectivist. There was a very nice woman there who must have been Elayne Kalberman. I suspect there was a lot of benevolence and good will within the Objectivist sub-culture in those days. That is irrevocably lost.

Edited March 31, 2008 by Brant Gaede

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Such is the hormonal power of love and sex. We all end up like St. Augustine if we live long enough.

Brant,

LOL...

You got me in a quirky mode and I remembered the following quote from a famous prayer by him (which I looked up to make sure it was correct):

Grant me chastity and continence, but not yet. (Da mihi castitatem et continentiam, sed noli modo.)

(Conf., VIII. vii (17))

Michael

[Donovan A.]

I have a written consent from The Atlas Society to offer this course and to charge for it. Any audio-lectures I offer or plan to offer are given with the permission of the author or the copyright holder.

Brant -

I accept your apology. No harm done, though I think it is an unfortunate message to be posted right under my announcement. Especially since this thread is easy to find for someone who googles "Objectivism and Dallas" - For example.

I understand your concerns. For the future, may I suggest asking someone if they have permission, instead of jumping to conclusions?

Best regards,

Donovan

[Reidy]

This is a bargain. Attendance at a single taped lecture in the NBI days was $3.50, which works out to at least $15 today.

[Brant Gaede]

I have a written consent from The Atlas Society to offer this course and to charge for it. Any audio-lectures I offer or plan to offer are given with the permission of the author or the copyright holder.

Brant -

I accept your apology. No harm done, though I think it is an unfortunate message to be posted right under my announcement. Especially since this thread is easy to find for someone who googles "Objectivism and Dallas" - For example.

I understand your concerns. For the future, may I suggest asking someone if they have permission, instead of jumping to conclusions?

Best regards,

Donovan

I deleted that paragraph so the google won't cough up that.

--Brant

[Alfonso Jones]

I have a written consent from The Atlas Society to offer this course and to charge for it. Any audio-lectures I offer or plan to offer are given with the permission of the author or the copyright holder.

Brant -

I accept your apology. No harm done, though I think it is an unfortunate message to be posted right under my announcement. Especially since this thread is easy to find for someone who googles "Objectivism and Dallas" - For example.

I understand your concerns. For the future, may I suggest asking someone if they have permission, instead of jumping to conclusions?

Best regards,

Donovan

I deleted that paragraph so the google won't cough up that.

--Brant

I suggest also deleting the portion of Post #4 in this thread which reproduces the material.

Alfonso

[Brant Gaede]

I removed the quoted material. Is that what you're referring to?

--Brant

[Alfonso Jones]

I removed the quoted material. Is that what you're referring to?

--Brant

Exactly. Thanks. It was there suspended without a context, after the other deletion.

Alfonso

[Donovan A.]

Thank you all for being so supportive!

We are growing here in Dallas. And, I am striving to help create change in our culture. We had 16 people attend our first lecture! This has been a very exciting process for me.

[Philip Coates]

> I sent Rand a written question: "What about the esthetics of making a novel into a movie?" She answered "What about it?" Then she elaborated a bit on this brush off; I was chagrined.

Brant, I don't think I would take her response the way you did. She was pointing out that you didn't ask a specific question. Within the broader area of the esthetics of making a novel into a movie, one might ask: is it possible? how would one go about it? what are the pitfalls? does one have to omit too much? Etc. Etc.

Branden's saying 'look at this guy and this silly question', on the other hand, was inappropriate and implied ridicule. Not just a criticism of the question.

I once asked Rand at the Ford Hall Forum question and answer session: "Aristotle identified five branches of philosophy - Metaphysics, Epistemology, Ethics, Politics, and Aesthetics. Are there any others?" She simply said, "I don't know of any others? Do you?"

I had no fear at any time of asking her questions and didn't take any offense at her answer this time, even though it got a chuckle out of the audience.

Nor should you.

[Brant Gaede]

> I sent Rand a written question: "What about the esthetics of making a novel into a movie?" She answered "What about it?" Then she elaborated a bit on this brush off; I was chagrined.

Brant, I don't think I would take her response the way you did. She was pointing out that you didn't ask a specific question. Within the broader area of the esthetics of making a novel into a movie, one might ask: is it possible? how would one go about it? what are the pitfalls? does one have to omit too much? Etc. Etc.

Branden's saying 'look at this guy and this silly question', on the other hand, was inappropriate and implied ridicule. Not just a criticism of the question.

I once asked Rand at the Ford Hall Forum question and answer session: "Aristotle identified five branches of philosophy - Metaphysics, Epistemology, Ethics, Politics, and Aesthetics. Are there any others?" She simply said, "I don't know of any others? Do you?"

I had no fear at any time of asking her questions and didn't take any offense at her answer this time, even though it got a chuckle out of the audience.

Nor should you.

Phil,

I am quite a different person than I was then, but it was a brush off. She wasn't trying to educate me about that which you mentioned though of course she did. She knew what I meant and she pretended she didn't, but she was caught in her knee-jerk reply and stayed with it. She was demonstrating authority and control. She knew a lot about the question I asked and only said that that would require a whole course in itself. This from a woman who told the world what Objectivism was while standing on "one foot." As far as I know she essentially behaved this way with people publicly and privately though with many exceptions. That was then. THings and times and people have changed and moved on.

I think I have a vague memory of your FHF question and her answer. She could be very benevolent and positive and even humorous. It might be in 1968 just before the famous "break" that she associated NBI students with Nathaniel Branden, with whom she was then having a terrible time, and two years earlier she wouldn't have been so abrupt with me.

--Brant

[Reidy]

Seconding Gaede and Coates: I never saw Rand in person and don't know first-hand what standard of grumpiness she set, but I agree that Branden could be quite bitchy toward his audience. I remember attending a course a few months after he'd written in The Objectivist to the effect that thoughts and feelings aren't subject to moral evaluation, citing Francisco's remark that the only evil thought is the refusal to think, and wondering how he'd square that with his weekly pronouncements on the character and mental state of anyone who could ask such (written, anonymous) questions.

About #13: I'm skeptical that Aristotle ever said this. Do you have a citation? They certainly weren't the only topics he wrote about.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

About #13: I'm skeptical that Aristotle ever said this. Do you have a citation? They certainly weren't the only topics he wrote about.

Pete,

Thank you.

I have looked all over Google and the five branches of philosophy as defined by Rand are specific to Objectivism and systems deriving from Objectivism (or aping it like Neotech). I have written about this elsewhere on OL.

Just Google "branches of philosophy." When there are only the five branches Rand mentioned, look who the source is. It will be Objectivist or Objectivism-influenced. Everywhere else gives a wide array of categories.

Anyway, with Rand there were only four for the longest time. (Her standing on one foot thing, for instance, only gives four.) Aesthetics popped in as a formal category when she did her essays on art. Rather than making some kind of statement of addition, she simply started saying there were five categories. At least, I haven't found any statement by her discussing why there were only four before and five later in her writing.

Michael

[Donovan A.]

I had 14 attendees last night for The Psychology of Sex. It was a very interesting lecture. Does anyone have any ideas on how I could reach more people? I am hopping to grow my attendance to 30 participants by the end of the year.

[Brant Gaede]

I had 14 attendees last night for The Psychology of Sex. It was a very interesting lecture. Does anyone have any ideas on how I could reach more people? I am hopping to grow my attendance to 30 participants by the end of the year.

The Atlasphere?

--Brant

[Donovan A.]

I have obtained permission from Dr. Branden to host audio-samples of his Basic Principles of Objectivism Lectures on The Culture of Reason Center website. Please feel free to enjoy.

www.thecultureofreasoncenter.com