Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
27 of 41 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A wonderful book, July 11, 2001
By A Customer
This is a truly wonderful book. In it, philosopher David Kelley analyzes several issues that have haunted the "Objectivist Movement." In particular, he discusses whether Objectivism is an open or closed system of ideas, and whether the practice of toleration is in fact consonant with the principles of Objectivism. Kelley answers that it is an open system of ideas, and he shows that the practice of tolerance is consonant with the fundamental principles of Ayn Rand's thought. [I give this book 4 stars, rather than 5, because its thesis - though correct - is of peripheral philosophical importance].Moreover, this book serves as a manifesto and rally-point for Objectivists who are reasonable people. There is every reason for healthy, reasonable human beings to be interested in Ayn Rand's thought. She outlines a secular, life-affirming, benevolent morality that offers valuable, principled, fundamental guidance in making decisions. She also has many interesting philosophical theories on, e.g., the nature of historical and cultural change, concept-formation, philosophical methodology, and politics. But historically, Rand's followers have been an odd cult of self-effacing, thought-policing, paranoid sycophants. Many of the Objectivists I have met were, well, blustering, inarticulate, wrathful nutcases who liked Rand mostly for her wholesale condemnation of contemporary society. These individuals hated all other people (and Rand did, too); they also hated themselves (Rand, in her worst moments, gives them an excuse for doing so). So basically, Rand's writings gave them a great swift sword to exercise in their dealings with others. These sorts of people delight, above all, not in creating values or living happily and productively, but in acquiring and exercising the power to CONDEMN, EXORCISE, REBUKE, VILLIFY, and EXCOMMUNICATE all of mankind. Rand gives them this power, in the form of rationalizations for militant misanthropy and unreflective, religious "commitment" to her ethical dicta (with no knowledge of their basis in reality). Such Objectivists - concretized in the person of Peter Schwartz - are a variation on the mentality of Jehovah's Witnesses and the Hezbollah. Well, Kelley is - in letter and in spirit - the antithesis of this approach to Rand's work. He is a sane human being who wants to critically examine arguments and views. He thinks that Rand's fundamental framework is true and the proper superstructure for philosophical inquiry, but he is open and honest and invites the reader to explore philosophical issues in this spirit. David Kelley - more than Peikoff, Binswanger, or Schwartz - knows the meaning of the passage in Atlas Shrugged that reads: "The vilest form of self-abasement and self-destruction is the subordination of your mind to the mind of another, the acceptance of an authority over your brain, the acceptance of his assertions as facts, his say-so as truth, his edicts as middle-man between your consciousness and your existence." (AS, 1019). If the "Dark Side" students of Objectivism at the Ayn Rand Institute ever discovered the meaning of this passage, that organization would of necessity cease to exist.
|
|
|
8 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Ayn Rand for the rational - and tolerant!, July 10, 2006
A number of the reviewers here of Kelley's book are water-carriers for the ARI and their curious claim that NOBODY (except them, of course!) can speak for Objectivism and the legacy of Ayn Rand. Echoing Leonard Peikoff, they claim that Objectivism is a "closed system" that is perfect, complete, above criticism, and comprises ONLY the writings of Ayn Rand or those she endorsed (although ARI tries to ignore the Brandens' pre-1968 writings that Ayn Rand herself, endorsed). Ironically, this means that not only is Peikoff's own book on Objectivism excluded from the "canon" (as Peikoff admits in his Preface), BUT SO ALSO IS EVERYTHING ELSE THAT HAS BEEN WRITTEN ABOUT OBJECTIVISM, PRO OR CON, SINCE RAND'S DEATH! So even the Ayn Rand Institute's authors cannot claim that their writings are "Objectivist."
However, this attempt to stifle or disqualify any critical commentary on Ayn Rand's remarkable contributions to philosophy is doomed to failure, as has been repeatedly demonstrated in the history of ideological movements. The early followers of Saint-Simon, Auguste Comte, Karl Marx, and Sigmund Freud (to name a few examples) all tried to limit or disqualify any criticism or revision of their founders, but to no avail. In fact, such attempts inevitably lead to even more criticism, more revisions and additions, and the proliferation of schools of thought, all claiming that only they have found the "true" interpretation of what the original philosopher "really" meant.
Sadly, the ARI people just don't get it. I guess we will just have to let history teach them. For everyone else who has read Ayn Rand and are looking for a deeper understanding of her ideas and their implications, I suggest that they read this revealing book by David Kelley (-AND Nathaniel and Barbara Branden, AND the Objectivist Center/Atlas Society authors, AND Leonard Peikoff and other ARI authors, among others) and then, judge for yourself as to who is more true to Ayn Rand's vision of reason and individualism.
|
|
|
22 of 37 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Renewed my excitement for Objectivism., March 30, 2002
... I actually found _The Contested Legacy of Ayn Rand: Truth and Toleration in Objectivism_ far from dull. Why? Because it instilled in me a sense of excitement and appreciation for well-reasoned arguments that I had not experienced since I first started reading Rand's works in the early 1980's. Back then, the more I read, the more my excitement waned. By the time I finished reading every book written by Rand and Peikoff, I decide to give up on Objectivism for two main reason: Intolerance and Dogmatism.But in this book, Kelley addressed the issues of Moral Judgment, Sanction, Toleration and the nature of Closed/Open Philosophical Systems in such a carefully reasoned way that it has given me a desire to renew my interest in Objectivism. As an Open System, Objectivism can grow and flourish, and is worth investing Time and Rational Effort on. And with the immergence of the Objectivist Center, and other Objectivist organizations independent from Peikoff's Orthodoxy, I believe the Movement is headed in the right direction. If Objectivism remains a Closed System under Peikoff's stewardship (his "Tribal Leadership"), then it is not worthy of any additional expenditure of time, money or energy.<P...
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by W. N. Christiansen
by David Kelley
by Douglas J Uyl
by David Kelley
