35

What is so AWESOME about the gulch

Posted by dbhalling 8 years, 11 months ago to Philosophy
107 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Hi Scott,

I want to tell you what is so amazing about the gulch. It is not only about giving people a voice. However, it may take me a bit of history to explain.

At the end of Rand’s life she was tired of arguing with fools, as were many geniuses including Newton and Gauss (both refused to publish for this reason). This encouraged a fortress mentality, which is perhaps best exemplified by the debate between open and closed Objectivism. Unfortunately, this resulted in a retrenchment much like the pythagoreans. As a result, Objectivists withdrew to their ivory tower and refused to engage with anyone who was not anointed by the denizens of O land. This excluded and intimidated many who were interested in Objectivism and many people who could advance the study of Objectivism. As a result, Objectivism has stalled. Overall Objectivism has not made the progress it should have in the last 20 years, either in scholarship or in attracting people to its principles.

You have created a site that bridges, the academic and the “real world”, you have created a site that opens scholarship to those that are not anointed, you have created the breakthrough that will allow objectivism to advance in the world. That is amazing and will earn you a place in the history of philosophical scholarship. Unfortunately, this will require tolerating a lot of conservatives, libertarians, and some socialists, who do not understand or want to undermine Objectivism. However, your site allows the wheat to sift through the chaff.

Your journey has included trying to convert the most complex, intellectual novel into a movie. You have received unwarranted criticism from both the ivory tower O’s and the socialists. Unfortunately, the criticism from both sides was expected. Despite this you and JA and Harmon and my daughter brought tens of thousands if not millions to the ideas of Rand. These people are not O’s, but many are willing or interested in learning.

In order to complete your journey you and us will have to deal with many on the left and the religious right and we will not always agree, however the value of staying the course will be enormous for both Objectivism, the world, and your place in history.


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • 15
    Posted by sdesapio 8 years, 11 months ago
    Thank you for the wonderful note Dale.

    To you and to Kaila, thank you for being here everyday. Thank you for staying in the fight. Thank you for your patience. Thank you for sharing your wisdom. Thank you for your consistent rational demeanor. Thank you for introducing us to your wonderful daughter. Thank you for your enduring friendship.

    Thank you. It's been an honor and a pleasure.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • 12
    Posted by waytodude 8 years, 11 months ago
    After many years if thinking I was the crazy one, I found Rand and objectivism and learned I was not the only one there was another. Since I found the Gulch there's a lot more of us. I'm still studying Rand ' s work and still have a long road ahead to master this philosophy, however a road made even easier with your help and the help of all the other members of the Gulch. I would like to extend my thanks to all evolved in the Gulch.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by IndianaGary 8 years, 11 months ago
      Hi WayTo: I'm always fascinated to hear from others, like myself, who are studying the philosophy and interacting with like-minded people. I'm curious to hear where you think you are in the process. What areas still bother you or confuse you, if any?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by waytodude 8 years, 11 months ago
        If first seen parts 1 and of AS, then got the book, then the Fountain Head, and Anthem. Next I got Objectivism the Philosophy of AR, I'm now about 16% into Introduction to Objectionist epistemology.
        I began my quest a few years before wondering what sort of philosophy I should live my life being not a religious, or we'll educates person. So I looked to Plato first and read the Republic. I learned a lot but not a philosophy I liked even Plato stated a few times it was not how he felt but it was how to build a perfect society. Now that I've found AR everything fits how I feel and has answered questions I had trouble with in religion.
        I have found a flaw in the Gulch it seems everyone had a special job. When I left the cities I wanted to become as self sufficient as I possibly could and not have to rely on any one for my basic needs I don't see this in the Gulch. I know in the future I will have to trade for speciality items however I feel man must be able to care for his and his family over a collective which I seen there was still in the Gulch. I plan to re read AS. I would welcome anyone else to give me their insight.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by kevinw 8 years, 11 months ago
          Hello waytodude,
          The "flaw" in the gulch you're talking about is the division of labor and/or the specialization of labor. When people specialize in specific categories of labor it allows one to be far more productive than he can by working at all the separate needs for day to day living. I believe it is touched on in the "money speech" and probably in Galt's speech but it is more of an economics subject.

          While being as self sufficient as possible is looking more and more important as the days go by, it is very inefficient compared to living among a society that properly rewards the highly productive specialized labor. The subject is waaaayyy more involved than that but very worth even a minimal amount of study.

          And please be careful using the words "collective" and "gulch" in the same sentence around here. "Them's fightin words".
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by waytodude 8 years, 11 months ago
            I'm still studying objectivism so please bear with me. The two speeches that really drove me was Galt ' s and Francisco's. I do understand the concept of what they were trying to do in Galt s speech, but as I'm reading about the Gulch one person could not survive without the others hence a collective. If I am to live for the sake of no man and no man is to live for mine then why can't those in the Gulch more self sufficient. Some 16 year ago l left Phoenix to become self sufficient. I bought a small cattle ranch and I'm now out on my own not living for the sake of another. I have had to learn to be my own carpenter, welder fabricator, gardener,Veterinarian, etc. I only learned about the objectionist philosophy about a year ago and I agree with most everything. I do also understand how things are and how they are on paper can vary ie in Plato s Republic is only how he believed a society should be. I do plan to re read AS again and I'm working on the introduction to objectivism epistemology. I've already read Objectivism the Philosophy of AR and For the new intellect. I am trying to catch up compared to many here so please bear with me so I may learn. Thanks for your input.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago
              Way that is wonderful, but no one can be both a surgeon for themselves, make steal, mine, create computers, etc, etc. The point of Rand is not self sufficiency, it is that you have to be able to exercise your own mind. We get tremendous value interacting with other people,, such as here However, that value can only occur when we are allowed to exercise our own reason and keep the products of our labor. .
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by waytodude 8 years, 11 months ago
                Ok I see your point and I do agree for the most for at times I do seek others that specializes. My next question is that in what I'm doing now would it be a contradiction to the objectionist philosophy by having my own personal Gulch?
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago
                  No, absolutely not.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by waytodude 8 years, 11 months ago
                    That makes me wonder Db how many here have taken the plunge to construct their own Gulch. It would be interesting to hear others journey and may inspire others to begin their own journey.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago
                      Start a new post. Years ago I thought we could escape from the nonsense by just being far enough away from everyone else. However, the government can make you life miserable wherever your are. In our case we left the country. It's no gulch where we live, but there is more de facto freedom
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by MiKa 2 years, 2 months ago
            Very important distinctions made here since we can't have a society without cooperation/collaboration and the quality of that collaboration is much better if individuals are encouraged to pursue their own talents.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • 12
    Posted by Mamaemma 8 years, 11 months ago
    The Gulch is a place where I can spend time with like-minded individuals and where I can learn. But what makes the Gulch awesome to me is its awesome sense of life. People here acknowledge the serious problems in our culture and in our country, but this is overlaid by Rand's sense of life. What I get here in addition to learning is a chuckle, a smile, a feeling that life is joy and that having fun is important. Life is to be treasured, and the Gulch is a wonderful place to be.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by johnpe1 8 years, 11 months ago
      Yes! . intelligent, kind-natured people with a sense
      of humor and a joy of life which is healthy . . . . not a
      grousing about fairness and good intentions and the
      tearing-down of value to massage society into utopia.

      we love it, live it, and enjoy others doing the same!!! -- j

      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • 11
    Posted by Herb7734 8 years, 11 months ago
    Pressure to discuss Objectivism and related topics had been building inside me for years. It's a miracle that I didn't blow my top. Luckily, I have friends and relatives who would put up with my rants and diatribes. Once in a while, I was a guest speaker, usually to an audience that, for the most part, were clueless. The Gulch has proved to be a release (relief) valve that has aided in returning me to sanity in an insane world. (An inane world?) I am delighted with the movie even though I would have written the screenplay somewhat differently. It had long been a dream to see A.S. as a movie, a TV series, etc. Here's another idea: Show all three in one day. Start with a morning brunch, (a mimosa or two would be nice) show #1, serve lunch. Show #2, take a break, show #3 and include a buffet dinner. You'd need a premier venue and make it available in select locations, as a touring roadshow. It could be done without food or alcohol but not as much fun. Ticket prices would be up there with that of a Broadway show. Since it would be an all day event, a discussion panel with questions from the audience might also be a feature.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by johnpe1 8 years, 11 months ago
      Herb, wasn't the inane world the drugged-out 60s?
      we have graduated to insane;;; I agree.

      my first wife and I used to go to a theater nearby
      called the "tap house" where we would munch on
      nachos and drink long island teas and watch silly
      movies -- with a cult movie at midnight like "Rocky
      Horror" . . . your idea would be soooooo much more fun!!! -- j

      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • 11
    Posted by samrigel 8 years, 11 months ago
    Beautiful and precise. As I get older my patience with the Left has gotten shorter to the point of the debate is futile!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • 11
      Posted by Esceptico 8 years, 11 months ago
      The problem is cognitive dissonance. We O's suffer from it too. For most people there are some beliefs are not amendable to change. In fact, most beliefs are not changeable.

      The most difficult beliefs for people to examine are those beliefs which have been
      (1) held for a long time,
      (2) adopted before age of reason, and
      (3) most often repeated.

      Which explains why it is impossible to have a conversation on the two subjects one should never discuss socially: Religious and political beliefs. Both of these belief sets are indoctrinated by parents, teachers, religious leaders, and other adults, almost from birth, many years before the age of reason, and they are the most often repeatedly “drummed” into them. People will kill based upon their beliefs, but will not examine whether the belief is true or false.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by IndianaGary 8 years, 11 months ago
        I'm a prime example of the failure of your argument. I was raised a Christian and all three items in your list would apply to me. I was, however, surrounded by people who proclaimed their fealty to Christ on Sunday and promptly broke all the laws the rest of the week. This hypocrisy caused me to search for alternatives and when I was 23 at Purdue University I discovered Atlas Shrugged. As a result, I've been a student of Objectivism now for nearly 50 years. Ed, sp
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Esceptico 8 years, 11 months ago
          I was giving a generalization that this is true for most people due to cognitive dissonance--something well explained by first Festinger and then confirmed by more than 3,000 subsequent studies. Some people do fight this battle and win. For them I have a great deal of respect. For people who remain intellectually flexible even into their forties, fifties, sixties, and seventies, and some people do, it’s quite amazing and impressive. I think it is very admirable. It is rare, but it really is admirable, because it really means an enthusiasm for truth which I hope all of us O's have.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by johnpe1 8 years, 11 months ago
        reminds me of Morris Massey's psychological theories
        about value system formation in the early years
        (like ages 5 to 15), with a "significant emotional event"
        required to change the person's value system.

        I like your phrase "the age of reason." . they say
        that's around age 6, but I wonder. -- j

        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Esceptico 8 years, 11 months ago
          Six may be when people begin to thnk, but they have formed beliefs before that. I am sure the age at which a person begins the ability to reason varies from person to person, but, like all other skills, takes a starting point and training. My understanding is the frontal cortex does not mature until into the early twenties, but, given some people with whom I have spoken or watched on tv, I am sure with others they never develop how to think, they simply believe.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by autumnleaves 8 years, 11 months ago
    Finding this site while surfing the net, brings back the same feelings of excitement and awe, and love, I had when first reading Atlas. In 1963, my first reaction was, I can't believe what I am reading! This woman, AR , writing this beautiful story that is so true! I was fortunate to have attended some lectures taped by Ayn herself. Then O seemed to disappear from my life. Although I continued to reread Atlas there was no one to talk with. Long story short, Thank You for bringing this site to fruition...I love studying/learning every day!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 8 years, 11 months ago
      I agree completely. I remember in college first reading AS (I was lost to the world for the three days it took). I am pretty tired of discussing things with most people today. Its just a waste of time it seems. But on this forum, things are different. Its uplifting and exciting really. Reaffirms my desire to interact with people actually.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Genez 8 years, 11 months ago
        Yes, my parents encouraged the reading of the book and I even found a philosophy professor in college to discuss it with.. Then, nothing... For many years. I'm not on a ton and don't comment a lot but definitely enjoy it every time. Being able to find people who understand the concepts of individuals, true liberty and so on, is very refreshing!
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by JCLanier 8 years, 11 months ago
    db:
    A just tribute.

    "Because the sight of an achievement was the greatest gift a human could offer to others"-A. Rand

    Yes, the endeavors of Scott and others with him, have shown us that it can be done. The creation of the Gulch has offered a live and functioning sanctuary, if you will, to all who seek the knowledge of Objectivism.

    "It was the greatest sensation of existence: not to trust, but to know."-A. Rand

    The Gulch has offered me the reality of "knowing" there are others that follow and seek out the philosophy of Objectivism. I do not have to "trust" that it is alive. I know it.

    I thank you all.

    JC
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 8 years, 11 months ago
    I am thinking that there are too many people who just "feel" instead of "think" today, and the underlying nature of that approach to life (reverting to animal nature) is resulting in the socialist tendencies that are being followed today. I think socialism as a philosophy has been pretty much debunked at this point (just look at south america, greece, and russia), BUT emotionally people seem to still ebrace its tenets
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Genez 8 years, 11 months ago
      Our society today is stuck in "adolescence" when it comes to emotional maturity. That's why so many people are so easily "offended". They haven't grown up and learned how to take things with a grain of salt or roll with the punches. they only feel and expect others to feel with them. Often since it's a lot of work to feel, they don't work very hard and expect others to help meet their needs so they don't "feel" so distressed due to lack of food, basic services and so on..
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Owlsrayne 8 years, 11 months ago
    The discussions and debates is what make the Gulch an adventure in learning. To understand Ayn Rands Objectivism you need this type of forum.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 8 years, 11 months ago
    When I read above that "Objectivism has not made the progress it should have made in the last 20 years" the words that popped out of my mouth were "I'll say!"
    Those AS movies had to come out before I ever heard of the philosophy.
    Would this country be in the state it is now?
    Would my spellchecker be red-lining Ojectivism?
    As that dude sang in "Smokey And The Bandit," "We've a long way to go and a short time to get there."
    It may be too late.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ winterwind 8 years, 11 months ago
    what he said.
    What is of most value now, for everyone [including those who haven't heard of us - YET] is staying the course, and finding a way to do so that will not burn us out or sour us on the goal.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 8 years, 11 months ago
    any bridge of this quality and scope deserves the
    utmost in appreciation and respect. . Scott and Dale and
    everyone who contributes to this forum, Thank You!!! -- john

    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by gcarl615 8 years, 11 months ago
    This small discertation and comments confirms to me that my choice to join was sound. I have read everything AR has written that I can find. I have spent many hours reflecting on those writings and sometimes found myself wondering if I just wasn't smart enough to grasp it all. This site helps me understand that I am not the only one who thought that way. Thank you for this site.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by radical 8 years, 11 months ago
    As more and more people realize that Objectivism
    applies to them personally and that their 'ox is getting gored', they will add this 2+2 together and get 4.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 8 years, 11 months ago
    The timing of this message could not have been better, db. You write, "However, your site allows the wheat to sift through the chaff." I would not have included the "However" in that. I think that the intellectual sifting is the greatest strength of Galt's Gulch Online. If one's ideas are not properly defensible, they will be attacked as they should be.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 8 years, 11 months ago
    dbh, you have discounted all of the promotion of Objectivism that has been done and is ongoing by the Ayn Rand Institute, have you not! I think this web site is completely worthwhile for many to voice opinions right or wrong, that is the right of free speech. Yaron Brook and his associates have done very well and you should have recognized them in your letter to Scott.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago
      Wiggy, I think ARI has been sidetracked by the idea of closed objectivism. I think Yaron Brook is doing some nice work, but I have not seen that he has added much to the scholarship of objectivism. And most of the new scholarship in Objectivism has been fairly recent IMHO.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by philosophercat 8 years, 11 months ago
        ARI properly presents Ayn Rand's philosophy as a logically derived system of philosophy based on axioms of existence. Each of the major disciplines of philosophy is derived logically from the previous statements such that the whole is consistent, coherent, and magnificent. It is consistent not closed. the idea of an "open" philosophy is a chaotic grab bag of unlinked propositions. The problem is not with Ayn Rand's philosophy but with a few of her followers who thought it required a person have a particular psychology and act in the couture in particular ways. That era is ending. The philosophy will begin to be seen as liberating individuals by giving them the path to their future. What most admirers of Rand miss is the challenge of learning how to think by using reason. It is a demanding process and few accept its challenge. Objectivism is not closed, it is the first logically consistent coherent derived system of thought in human history. Master it and celebrate it, then apply it and discover the freedom it offers.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago
          I think you have spotted one of the issues - people are talking about two different things. That said I have spent some time reviewing this and Piekoff and ARI at one time were using "closed" to mean complete, with nothing left to learn or expand upon, which turned objectivism into the study of history.

          Euclidean geometry is a logical system in which advances are still being made today. If it was closed in the sense that there was nothing to add, it would not be nearly as powerful today, but it is not open in that to be part of Euclidean Geometry any scholarship has to be consistent with the underlying axioms.

          Any research that is consistent with the basic premises of objectivism should be considered part of objectivism If not Objectivism is dead.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ puzzlelady 8 years, 11 months ago
      wiggys, ARI has distanced itself from the movies, not even acknowledging their existence. ARI is more interested in monetizing "the estate of Ayn Rand" than in the value of the philosophy itself in the world. Here is the schism between open and closed Objectivism, or orthodox or reform versions of belief systems.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ewv 8 years, 11 months ago
      Yes, there are a number of assertions in the post that are simply not true and obviously worded in an insulting polemical manner. It is not "history". Whatever the future of gg, success does not come from such an approach.

      ARI has not refused discussion with "anyone who was not anointed by the denizens of O land. "Objectivism'" is the name given by Ayn Rand to her own philosophy as she expressed and explained it, not whatever anyone else wants to say it is as they mangle it into eclecticism. ARI has not refused discussion or turned people away trying to understand Ayn Rand's philosophy, but it does not condone or help spread the confusion of subjective "open" Objectivism.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • 10
        Posted by $ puzzlelady 8 years, 11 months ago
        Oh dear, ewv, where to begin. Ayn Rand named her philosophical system "Objectivism", to capture the idea of an objective reality and the human mind's ability to reason. She "owns" that name. However, she does not own the objective principles of logic, philosophy, reality, existence, or the laws of physics. Those are universal principles that any reasoning mind can use and make its own, and most of them preceded her historically.

        There can be no such thing as a "closed" system of thought in an ever evolving and growing world. That would be a totalitarian dead end. Universal truths are not a closed system--they are the all-encompassing reality. Rand's great contribution was her emphasis on "values", that objective values are derived from what a rational animal needs for life and happiness.

        Objective values can be embraced without contradiction. If you don't like the word "subjectively", substitute "personally" or "individually". Rand was the arch-individualist who never claimed to have a monopoly on truth. She stated that any rational mind could discover and make it its own. What Rand gave the world was a framework of an integrated philosophy that was able to derive an ethics for living from the facts of existence... the integration of "is" and "should".

        ARI is in the unfortunate position of not really completely understanding the full extent of that integration and thus having to stick to dogma as best they know it, clinging to the core doctrine without knowing how to apply it to a wider context, sort of like the infallible Pope persisting in Dark-Ages dicta.

        ARI is doing nothing to counteract the antipathy in the culture that their portrayal of Ayn Rand has perpetuated. Perhaps that will change in time. But pronouncements by Yaron Brook to the effect that we were right to torture prisoners and that we didn't torture them enough is not likely to endear him or the philosophy he professes to love and propound to the larger society.

        ARI's all-or-nothing attitude toward others does not leave even a sliver of an opening for a newcomer to approach and learn about the philosophy if he or she is not already compliant with the expected dogma.

        The producers of the A.S. movies and the minds at the Atlas Society are far more effective in ipromoting Objectivism (the "open" version) as a living philosophy for today's cultures.

        The big sticking point is that altruism and benevolence are not synonymous though many people conflate them. Without benevolence there can be no resolution of wars, and without peace we will have a failed civilization, no ethics, no justice, no rational resolution of conflicts. We merely drive other cultures to the deeper ends of despair and resistance and destruction.

        Rational values cannot be imparted with a gun, only by example and persuasion. Volitional consciousness is not automatic; it is learned. Ayn Rand was a great teacher, but she expected everyone to be like her already, and short of that they were to be held in contempt. Yet it takes a spark of received insight and a long process of thought to arrive at a stage of enlightenment and reason. We are what we digest, intellectually as well as physically. A philosophy of reason has never been more needed in the world than now, nor more fiercely resisted.

        Thank you, Scott, and thank you, DB, for all you've done to bring the message of reason and individualism to the world.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago
          Hear hear
          The closed thing with the complete standoffishness of ARI historically have stunted scholarship. This is work to be done in the arts, in economics, in law, in physics, etc in apply objectivism and expanding its understanding. Rand often would say I have laid out the fundamentals, but it is for an expert in law or economics to take this further.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago
        Well I offered to be their expert on patents and they blew me off. I can assure I know more about IP and its relationship to Objectivism than anyone, including Adam Mossoff.

        I also asked to give a talk to a big ARI group in Colorado based on my new first non-fiction book, telling them I was and objectivist. They said no, because I was not anointed.

        So the facts that I am aware do not support your point of view.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo