CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF THE GREAT IDEAS

Transcription

1 CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF THE GREAT IDEAS On the importance of even wrong ideas... Good and evil we know in the field of this world grow up together almost inseparably; and the knowledge of good is so involved and interwoven with the knowledge of evil, and in so many cunning resemblances hardly to be discerned, that those confused seeds which were imposed upon Psyche as an incessant labour to cull out and sort asunder, were not more intermixed. It was from out the rind of one apple tasted that the knowledge of good and evil, as two twins cleaving together, leaped forth into the world. And perhaps this is that doom which Adam fell into of knowing good and evil, that is to say of knowing good by evil. John Milton, The Areopagitica Weismann: A few members have expressed displeasure that we published the Ayn Rand interview. Dr. Adler and I have often discussed the value of understanding the ideas of those we disagree with especially those ideas that have had some undue influence in our society. Please know that we at the Center, in no way subscribe to her views on morality and her pseudo- Aristoteleanism. Well-put. Dr. Jay Gold For what it s worth, I was not offended by this reading. Thanks for all you do. Ken Wareham Max Interesting timing on Ayn Rand. This past Thursday evening on a TV show based on the early 60 s, actor Robert Morse advised a young advertising man to read her. I ve often wondered what Mortimer Adler had to say about Ayn Rand and Objectivism.

2 2 Dave Stickrod But I cannot imagine that Dr. Adler would ever advocate censorship. As I understand him, his working intellectual premise is that we keep talking until we find the specific points at which we differ. At that point, the issue has been joined, and we discuss some more. Writing of any idea off at the beginning makes that impossible. Thanks for publishing it. I read her work long ago, and I look forward to the refresher. Peace and best wishes, Graves Enck I am surprised that people who have a membership to the Great Ideas would object? How can you learn about one idea and not another? Stand tall. I hope you are well. Cynthia Martone Thanks, Max. I didn t think you were. Mark Brumley Max, I thought the basic premise of the study of ideas is an open dialogue with those who hold views different than ours. As a clergyman, if I did not engage the atheist I could not understand why some cannot believe; if I did not respect that person s opinion I would miss the richness of that thought tradition, and my own view would suffer because of that. I find the far right Christian movement an absolute offense to my beliefs, yet I read their material and listen to their proponents if for no other reason than

3 3 to be able to better lead my congregation and counter the absolutism of those who would corrupt my traditions. Just my thoughts. Doug Eddy Max, Thanks for publishing the interview with Ayn Rand. As someone who has spent far too much time in narrow-minded fundamentalist religious circles that had a bury your head in the sand to protect your faith mentality, I m rather disappointed that some members were offended by your publication of this interview. How are we supposed to refute half-baked ideas and philosophies, and logically demonstrate that they don t deserve to be included in the list of The Great Ideas if we don t understand them? Far too often, people discuss and attempt to refute ideas that they disagree with, but due to their ignorance, all they end up doing is attacking straw-men and demonstrating that they re ill informed... which just emboldens the opposition. While not every two-bit philosophy out there deserves discussion in your newsletter, ones that have some undue influence in our society, as you put it, certainly do. Personally, I find Rand s so-called Objectivism deeply abhorrent (largely because of her selective and dishonest interpretation of the actions, morals and motivations of the great men of history), but I also admit that I need to learn more about it so that I can discuss it in an informed manner. Due to that, I found the interview to be very beneficial. My only complaint is that the date of the interview wasn t included. Please keep up the good work and don t be distracted by those who can seemingly only handle reading ideas that they already agree with. For the sake of the weak-minded, you may end up having to put a disclaimer on the first page of the newsletter saying that you don t necessarily agree with any of the following ideas, but their included for educational purposes only...sigh. Thanks again! Rob Squires

4 4 I personally applaud you for publishing alternative views. This is what genuine dialogue and The Great Conversation is all about. John Sheehan Max: I can t believe it. Individuals not wanting to learn or listen to other ideas are members. If one doesn t like something don t read it but do not stop others Man I am upset. At the present time I am reading Sun Szu s The Art of Warfare and Niccolo Machiavelli s The Prince again I believe you understand the Niccolo did not do the things he wrote about. He was just reporting on what was going on around him. I have always thought of him as a reporter, or something like that. Sun Szu s book can be used in corporate world and some of his concepts/teaching can be used in personal life. Knowing yourself and knowing your enemy one can win all battles. I finally understood myself and I studied my enemies (smoking, drinking to excess, and overeating) and have managed to stop all of them. I m not bragging at least I don t intend to. I think I m just stating a fact. Oh well I m shooting my mouth off again. Alan MacFarlane I ve just received your disclaimer about the Rand interview (though unlike some, I didn t take it as an endorsement). If memory serves me well, I recall William Buckley asking Mortimer about Rand in relation to Aristotle s thought on Firing Line, I believe the show concerning Ten Philosophical Mistakes, to which (in what I thought to be a spirit of charitable restraint) he had little to say, aside from noting she might have said something interesting about epistemology. I took that to be a reference to what I consider her only substantial work, Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology. One might say the woman was dogmatic and intolerant, though there is always a fine line between that and strong advocacy; and if one is to believe personal accounts, emotionally difficult (though we all are to some degree). I attribute her stay to two factors: like Mortimer, or say, Will Durant, her

5 5 writing was clear and non-technical, which accommodates popular marketing; and her simplistic politics and worldview dovetails nicely with political trends. But anyone whose read Mortimer would know there s no liking to Rand. Best regards, Irvin Halbleib Hello Max, I want to applaud you for publishing the Ayn Rand interview, and I hope you ll follow through with your plan to print the second part. I ve never read Ms. Rand s writings and had known of her only by reputation (both good and bad). Like it or not, she has had a persisting influence. I agree with you and Dr. Adler about the value of discussing ideas with which we might happen to disagree. I d love to see more of this type of variety in the journals. Thanks, Mark Cwik Max: I was happy to get the Ayn Rand article. She was very influential in developing my early interest in Philosophy. I admire her courage and willingness to address some very difficult issues. Furthermore, she was the first writer to enlighten me of our power to reason and the responsibility that comes with that power. While I don t agree with many aspects of Objectivism, I find it hard to believe that we should ignore or censor her views in any way. Quite the contrary. I would be very interested in learning more about Dr. Adler s views on Objectivism and the errors inherent in the Philosophy. Best Regards, Dennis Picha

6 6 Hi, Max, I have not read the interview yet...but it was the right thing to do (publishing it, that is). Ayn Rand was a force in laissez-faire capitalistic thought. I was introduced to her at about the same time I found Adler (roughly 1959). She definitely had some influence on my early thinking, primarily because of her Aristotelian tendencies. Eventually, however, I uncovered some serious flaws in her interpretation of Aristotelian and in her thoughts regarding economic theory and practice. She was an impressive presence I saw her on TV back in the 60s taking on four male thinkers of the time (including Russell Kirk, David Lilienthal, and a couple others, moderated by Eric Severeid) and she made literal mincemeat out of them. You did the right thing! Forget those with censorious mentalities and closed minds. Cheers, Dr. Jon Dolhenty You deal gently with these heads-in-the-sand members. They need firm reminders of the learning steps they must take to develop reliable opinions and practical standards and to attain the certainty necessary to reject the opinions and standards of others. Imagine Dr. Adler s writings if he had refused to study the writings of suspected dissenters. Regards, Dewey Wasser Hi Max, I haven t read the piece yet on AR but you re absolutely right on sharing views of those you may not agree with. Bravo for you Max!! Sylvia Mendoza

7 7 Thank you for your kind note. I have always thought that you were one with good judgment. Please know that your work is appreciated. Bill Hansen Hi, Max: FWIW, I have no problem with the Ayn Rand interview. She is the absolute antithesis of what I believe in, but I do not think we should avoid her just because we can t stand her! I was much more impressed with Toffler s insightful questions than with AR s glib and IMHO, profoundly wrong answers. BTW, I thought your disclaimer was most apt. Cheers Mike Murphy My husband asked me if the Center is now the "Center for the Study of Positions on the Great Ideas That I Agree With"? If one's personal conduct is a disqualifier, the Great Books would be a very small set. "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone"- Jesus of Nazareth. Keep up the good work! Love & Kisses, Max & Brenda Alt