Ayn Rand - Ppr.

It is refreshing to see at last a critical review of the philosophical thought of Ayn Rand, since her philosophy is sometimes described as "naive", and, perhaps just as troubling, as the greatest philosophy ever to appear in print. The author of this book has given the reader an honest and in-depth analysis of one of the most controversial figures in twentieth-century philosophical thought. Rand was not an academic philosopher, and this, coupled with her frequent vitriolic attacks against many philosophical schools of thought, induced many to speak out against her, and they typically did so with a degree of vituperation unmatched as yet in public debate. Fortunately the shouting and name-calling typically accompanying discussion of Randian philosophy is not included in this book. Also not included is any blind, uncritical allegiance to Randian philosophy, for this can also accompany discussions of it. Rand has made some interesting contributions to philosophical thought, and her theory of ethics is I believe unequaled, and one can find a very thorough discussion of just how she arrived at this theory throughout this book. However Rand, like every other philosopher, cannot remove herself from history and cultural influences, and view the world from a detached, apodictic point of view, for that is the nature of human learning. One builds on what has been done before, and with careful thought and unique insight, some original ideas can then be developed, which will hopefully extend what has been done before, and nontrivially. The author of this book clearly shows the historical origins of Randian thought, those origins have their place in the Russian university that Rand attended. The author sees the problem for Randian scholarship as predominantly arising from her public persona, and thus scholars need to differentiate Rand's personality from her philosophy. Her intransigence, intolerance, and general mean-spiritedness must be ignored if one is not to collapse into psychologism, argues the author. Scholars must also he argues, attempt to find out what actually defines her philosophy and makes it distinctive. This has been a source of contention in recent years, with different "schools of thought" established, each claiming to represent exclusively her philosophy. Another virtue of this book is the author's insistence on using a hermeneutical approach when analyzing Randian philosophy.The information content of an idea, he argues, includes myriads of unforeseeable non-trivial statements, this being similar to what happens in mathematics. It is well known to those who practice mathematics that a large number of problems and concepts can be generated from a particular area of it. These problems can go way beyond the intent of the mathematicians who created this particular area. Many advocates of Randian philosophy, as the author points out, like to think of her philosophy as a "closed system". Without actually defining it, one can only make educated

First let me say that this book is a difficult read. Having said that, it is a must read for any serious student of Ayn Rand's "project."Chris Sciabarra makes a strong case for the dialectical nature of Rand's philosophy. He looks at how her work might have been informed by her Russian roots and the early experiences of her life and how she developed a philosophy that attempted to integrate all aspects of Objective Reality. Objective Reality as Rand saw it is not inherently fragmented. A philosophy based on Objective Reality would of necessity integrate all aspects into a cohesive whole.Apparently, some who regard Rand as a mystical goddess, take offense at the sharp focus that Sciabarra puts on her work. This seems odd, given that this book demonstrates a profound respect for her intellectual accomplishments. Rand often said in her own writing that each person had a right to act in his own rational self-interest, and with that right came a moral obligation to actively seek the truth (Objective Reality) as a prerequisite of rational choice. In essense, Sciabarra has used Rand's most fundamental principles to attempt an objective analysis of her analysis. This makes his effort a moral one. Yet to some he has committed the original sin by eating from the tree of knowledge and must be cast out of the Garden of Eden for it. My only criticism was that this book does not critique her failures or attempt to explain her tyranny toward those closest to her. But that subject has been covered in other books by those who knew her personally and is well beyond the scope of this book.Sciabarra's thoroughly researched RUSSIAN RADICAL will remain an important contribution to Rand scholarship for many years to come.

Chris Matthew Sciabarra had to know that in writing this book he was bound to irritate the Rand-worshipping dogmatists of orthodox Objectivism. Thank goodness that didn't deter him.He propounds some controversial theses in this work; I myself have grave misgivings about regarding Rand as a practitioner of "dialectical" methods and I suspect Sciabarra overrates some of the academic influences on the young Rand. But Sciabarra's scholarship is thorough and his presentation clearly argued -- and there's certainly nothing wrong with raising controversial theses about a figure too long protected from criticism.It's also a joy to watch the Peikoff crowd respond to this book: they already know what's wrong with it even though they refuse to read it themselves, which makes their criticisms of e.g. Sciabarra's advocacy of the "mind/body dichotomy" wonderfully risible to anyone who _does_ trouble to read it. One would think a work that might help to render Rand academically respectable would delight her hard-core supporters, but perhaps academic attention is exactly what they're afraid of.

Sciabarra has chosen a very worthy and difficult goal in writing this book. Just for trying and actually getting it published he deserves kudos. I think Sciabarra has two main goals. First, there is his stated aim of reclaiming the dialectical method for libertarianism instead of marxism. Second, the introduction of Ayn Rand's Objectivism into the world of academic philosophy. The first goal relies on the validity of his thesis and there is much controversy about that. The second goal is much tougher and will take many more books, hopefully Sciabarra's book will be the first of many. I am drawn to his thesis and his arguments for it. There is much I disagree with or at least I'm not certain about, yet he presents his arguments in a very convincing way. I would highly recommend this book to those interested in Objectivism, its possible roots and influences, and its place in the intellectual history of our time. There is much to argue about and take issue with, but that doesn't make it any less worthy of study. This shouldn't, however, be the first or only book you ever read about Objectivism.