Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 6, 2007 Author Share Posted December 6, 2007 Robert,Just for the record, here is a post I made earlier on another thread. I know you know this.I am surprised that nobody remembered this: Fact and Value by Leonard Peikoff. From the essay (my emphasis):Now I wish to make a request to any unadmitted anti-Objectivists reading this piece, a request that I make as Ayn Rand's intellectual and legal heir.MichaelMichael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bidinotto Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 Oops, you're right, Michael. I forgot.Funny that he hasn't provided a lick of evidence for that claim since making it in 1989. Given the absurd nature of what he was asserting in that essay, however, I can perfectly understand why he would want to give his assertions the borrowed support of his late mentor. One can only wish that she had been alive to render her own public verdict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 [...] not a single soul has ever complied with my request for a source or citation for it. In the absence of any evidence for that claim, I believe it is justifiable to conclude that such a title was never granted to Peikoff, or to anyone else, by Ayn Rand.In support of that interpretation, Peikoff himself says only "legal heir" on his own website [...]Agreed. I think that if she had granted him the "intellectual heir" title, he would use it on his own website. He doesn't object to others using it, and he himself, as MSK has noted, did use it in "Fact and Value" (the source which probably started the whole idea he'd been designated her "intellectual heir"). My bet is that he doesn't want, now, to declare in public that he over-spoke, in haste and the heat of battle, in "Fact and Value," and he doesn't want to contradict in public those who refer to him as her "intellectual heir," but he can't go quite so far, in cold blood, as to use the designation himself.Ellen___ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Grieb Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 (edited) This tread has been very interesting. The only problem is how does it affect me. I'm not breathlessly awaiting "Dim Hypothesis". I'm not going to buy this silly DVD. One of these days I'm going to listen to the "State of Art" tapes Peikoff did and which I have.As I have said I think some of the other lecturers at ARI and many of lecturers at TAS events contribute more of my knowledge of Ayn Rand's ideas. As I have said before they are more her intellectual heirs. Edited December 6, 2007 by Chris Grieb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 Oh my god!!! John Little's review of this DVD reminds me of what Louis XIV's courtiers wrote about Le Roi Soleil. The difference being the literary flair they could bring to their flattery...Meanwhile, Interplanetary Funksmanship is a handle I'd expect from someone who was a fan of Sun Ra and George Clinton. Nothing sinister there. I just don't know too many denizens of Rand-land who are also in the Ra orbit.However, I must note that, unless Mr. IF appropriated his photo and movie preferences from someone else, he bears an uncanny resemblance to an occasional contributor right here at OL.As for IF's review of the Peikoff DVD, I'm withholding judgment till I've witnessed said DVD. It may, after all, be the kind of thing that deserves a horselaugh.Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emb021 Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 One would suspect that if Peikoff believed these advertising statements to be over-the-top, he would have long ago taken steps to have Little (or whoever) modify the promotional and advertising language.It may be that he is unaware of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 6, 2007 Author Share Posted December 6, 2007 One would suspect that if Peikoff believed these advertising statements to be over-the-top, he would have long ago taken steps to have Little (or whoever) modify the promotional and advertising language.It may be that he is unaware of them.Michael,Heh.(With all due respect.) Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiodekadent Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 http://www.maxcontraction.com/peikoff.htm[emphasis added]Peikoff recognized the significance of Ayn Rand’s novel The Fountainhead and detected within its pages a philosophical message of profound importance. Had he been like millions of others, he might simply have left it at that. Instead, he took it upon himself to contact the author and travel at his own expense to learn first hand at the university of the “self-made soul” that was Ayn Rand. [....] Any acceptance, however reluctantly granted, to Objectivism over the years as a legitimate philosophical system is due largely (if not solely) to the pioneering efforts of Dr. Peikoff. This was not unrecognized by Ayn Rand, who not only considered him intellectually (and solely) qualified to speak with authority on her ideas, but who encouraged him to write about his own conclusions (the result: The Ominous Parallels). As if this alone was not sufficient testimony to his philosophic significance, Rand then entrusted Peikoff with the future of her legacy and of the philosophic system she created by designating him as her legal and intellectual heir (this last title is, in many respects, of far greater and graver significance than the former).In the decades just prior to and after her passing, Dr. Peikoff has proven himself to be not only a brilliant educator, but also a world-class thinker who has cultivated unique insights into history and man that have served to further validate the Objectivist postulates. He is Objectivism’s greatest protector, advocate and champion and he has proven himself to be an eminently worthy recipient of the trust and high moral judgment that Ayn Rand granted him. Moreover, Dr. Peikoff has demonstrated the most rare of qualities, that of being a dedicated and loyal friend; a friend to Ayn Rand, a friend to her philosophy, and a friend to all those who value reason, philosophy and man at his best.It is one thing to have a “sense of life” or even a personal philosophy, but it is quite another to have the courage and conviction to act on it; i.e., to live it. And it is quite another thing still to possess the intellect and the ability to effectively communicate and advance such a philosophy when its creator is no longer present to offer advice and support. Leonard Peikoff has accomplished this, often doing so in the teeth of great adversity, because of his intellectual honesty and his passionate belief that the message he had been entrusted with safeguarding was vitally and historically important. The genius he has displayed is known by many today, but it is the generations not yet born that will be the greatest beneficiaries of his labors.That is the biggest piece of self-promoting (in the bad way) ego-masturbatory (again, in the bad way) cult-of-personality generating crap since Kim Il-Sung. Leonard Peikoff is not the intellectual heir of Ayn Rand, by any rational standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now