Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!ucsd!ames!pacbell!osc!tma
From: tma@osc.COM (Tim Atkins)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: talk.philosophy.objectivism
Message-ID: <1915@osc.COM>
Date: 22 Jan 90 11:20:48 GMT
References: <8P1157Gxds8@ficc.uu.net. <1990Jan14.155617.19822@twwells.com.
Reply-To: tma@osc.UUCP (Tim Atkins)
Organization: Object Sciences Corp., Menlo Park, CA
Lines: 51

In article <1990Jan14.155617.19822@twwells.com. bill@twwells.com (T. William Wells) writes:

.
.And finally, there is the "great Objectivism schism" :-)
.
.There are, essentially, two different schools of Objectivist
.thought, one, orthodox, holding that one defines Objectivism as
.only what Ayn Rand said it is, and one saying that Objectivism is
.a living school of philosophy, that starts with Ayn Rand, yet
.must be continuously explored, added to and, if necessary,
.corrected.
.
.The former school is much given to moralizing and to damning
.those who disagree with them; as such, they will flame. And,
.naturally, some of those who are the targets of their flames will
.respond in kind.
.
.---
.Bill                    { uunet | novavax | ankh } !twwells!bill
.bill@twwells.com

Hmmm.  Bill, I know that there are various Objectivists who do not think
critically enough about Objectivism, although Objectivism requires critical
thinking.  I realize there is a sort of war afoot between the "official"
Objectivism and those who rightly or wrongly depart from the "official" 
version in various ways.  Frankly I find this war incomprehensible.  
Obviously Objectivism is an evolving philosophy.  I have never heard Peikoff
claim that all branches of the tree were already perfect and complete.
Obviously there will be disagreements on the meaning and implications of
Objectivism.  There may even be disagreement on some of the more derived
parts of the philosophy.  But to declare a war over disagreements that 
should be open to rational discussion is repulsive in the extreme.

When it comes to flames I have received far more heat from the "revisionists"
when I come out in support of an "official" position than I've ever received
from the supposed dogmatist when I espouse a position at odds with "official"
wisdom.  

Hopefully the new group will be open to all persuasions.  While I would love
to escape the perpetual flamers I would hesitate to have the group moderated
by an individual who seems to have more than a slight persecution complex.

Hopefully the new group will be open to discussions of both the philosophy
and its real world application.  I would also hope that it will not be
afflicted with the sterility of waiting until one's magnum opus is ready 
before posting.   Too many Objectivist I have met seem almost afraid to
apply the philosophy to real-world events without generating ten pages of
theory to back themselves up.


- Tim Atkins