Challenging someone for their "origninal thoughts" is by far the least oringinal demand. Could you lead by exmaple, please?

As a musician I began writing before I had learnt a single song.On the other hand I had an older brother who knows half the popular songs ever written.He can't write songs because as he tries to all the tunes and themes he has worked on in the past remind him that it harder than one thinks to be original.So to understand Objectivism I would look at who you are,what you want,you are just as valid as Ayn Rand or any other clever writer.So lets hear what you think,it's well documented what Ayn thinks,but nobody knows what you think yet and I'm more interested in your thoughts.Rex

I don't entirely agree. When college freshmen read Aristotle, they're generally reading select parts of his Politics and Ethics, which are by far his most readable works. His works on logic are not at all easy to read, and I don't think they are a good place to start - though they're a great place to end up, eventually.

Projects are important. It's too easy to get sucked into reading philosophy for its own sake, trying to just read as many works as possible by as many philosophers as possible. Better to think about what questions matter to you, and then use those questions to form a "curriculum" for yourself.

I'd say, start with a project.

For example, take a look at three essays: "Philosophy: Who Needs It," "Faith and Force: The Destroyers of the Modern World," and "For the New Intellectual." Follow through with The Ominous Parallels. Ask yourself if those arguments and examples hold water, if they describe the world you see, the world you've read about and thought about. If they don't, why keep studying Objectivism?

You see, Matt is right: Objectivism isn't just a matter of books and tapes. Never was.

That having been said, why, there are plenty of study materials out there...

The Presocratics

History of Ancient Philosophy, Wilhelm Windelband

Some vandal wrote a profile of Thales of Miletus for The Free Radical a few years back. Probably best to ignore him.

General histories of philosophy by Windelband, Jones, Copleston. One-volume histories by Flew and Russell.

Mortimer Adler's Aristotle for Everybody

The Philosophy of Aristotle

Introduction to Aristotle

Aristotle by Wheelwright.

Aristotle is The Man. Gotta deal with Aristotle. Aristotle and Plato are the twin 800-pound gorillas of philosophy.

I disagree that Aristotle is tough going. College freshmen read him all the time (at least, I did, and I'd read him before that). If you're interested, you'll find the reading interesting. And the dialogues of Plato are relatively easy reading for the fact that they are presented as dialogues. I have no recommended translations or editions of Plato because there are squillions of 'em out there (that's an estimate and a very, very rough one; I majored in philosophy and English, not math).

Consider Phil's warning, too, not to become rationalistic. On that score again, I recommend Aristotle. There are other good introductions to logic written for general audiences -- Copi is one, and Lionel Ruby is another -- but Aristotle did it all, and did it first, and his Prior Analytics and Posterior Analytics are available all over the internet.

Consider this if nothing else: through Aristotle we know the rules of deductive logic. How did he come by them? Aristotle didn't have Aristotle to read. He came by deductive logic inductively, that's how.

Wow. Stop and think about that.

Excellent points.

In addition to the good advice already offered in many posts - and apologies in advance if I rehash anything here - I'd say that the key to studying Objectivism is to try to follow the first-handed way that Rand discovered it.

Part of this is simply asking yourself, whenever you see a principle or a conclusion, what it would take to reach that conclusion from scratch. What other knowledge would you have to have? How would you find the evidence in your own life and experiences? If you find yourself scratching your head over how Rand could possibly have discovered something for herself, that's a sign that you haven't discovered it for *yourself* - which means you don't know whether or not it's true.

In some cases, you might not be able to fully validate a principle by referring solely to day-to-day experiences. Rand called history the workshop of philosophy for a reason - it's among the places she looked to learn about politics, ethics, and even epistemology and metaphysics. When she said she didn't think it'd have been possible to develop Objectivism prior to the industrial revolution, she wasn't kidding - the evidence for some of the conclusions simply wasn't available.

The broader point is that it's important to read outside of philosophy. Objectivism is emphatically not something you learn and apply by sitting in a cave with a bunch of books and lecture tapes. Books and lectures can guide you, but the real learning and implementing, which is the tough part, can only happen in your own mind and life. That means - get out there and live. Challenge your principles by living them, and seeing what happens. Broaden your knowledge by reading anything that interests you; when you think hard enough about it, you'll always find a connection to philosophy somewhere.

Contrary to this -- "I have little interest in work that is primarily "inspirational" or "practical" in nature; I don't tend to buy or listen to it. (I regard good technical philosophy as supremely inspirational and eminently practical!)"-- it's exactly practical and -applied- works where the rubber meets the road for Objectivists. You see how to use the philosophy, how to make it part of your everyday life which can be very difficult to do with highly abstract material. Plus the concretes are different. There is a lot of detail peculiar to the practical field which you can't deduce from technical philosophy at the risk of being rationalistic. You also need the inspiration of concrete examples from many fields and areas besides technical philosophy.

I realize one has to spend enormous time reading and studying philosophy for decades until one has thoroughly mastered Objectivism (and still more if one wishes to become a philosophy professor.) But the problem many Objectivists have is they too exclusively read philosophy. Philosophy is sort of like the skeleton, the girders supporting the building. It's only the start. You still need the floors, the ceilings, the furniture, the windows, the life and substance. You need to put flesh on the bones.

> I just wish she would do some more work that I could get from the Jefferson School. I don't think she has published or lectured in a long time.

Kelly, unless something's changed from when I knew her first in NYC and then in Southern California, Edith's a practicing psychotherapist with a heavy flow of patients coming in for sessions. And sometimes phone sessions and emergencies. I had the sense from knowing her that working with people's problems all day or all week is quite draining if one also wants to write. I seem to recall having heard her complain that finding the time and quiet mental space to write was difficult. And also having been excommunicated from one wing of the Oist movement yet agreeing with the anti-Kelley view of ARI and so not being willing to speak at TOC and with the two effects drying up her TJS conferences, I imagine its hard to find a significant audience or the right venue. Same problem for George. Although in his case, his economics work is not as closely tied to Objectivism and Oist concepts as is Edith's, so it may be somewhat harder for her to break through and find an audience outside of Oist circles.

Wow--that was excellent. Thank you very much. I have the 'The philosophy of education' tapes and bought copies for a teacher friend of mine. Great stuff. Of course, I read OPAR and have been apart of two study groups; I urge others to do the same in their efforts to understand Objectivism. [I'm also fond of the debate method as a way to learn].

I have also heard the Peikoff tapes 'moral values' and really found his expanded talk on 'independence' very interesting.

I have devoured both 'The art of fiction' and non-fiction books---love it to death! [I'm writing a novel, and these books have been a God send]. I also have a few tapes of Ayn Rand being interviewed. She was fast on her feet-and answers questions with deadly accuracy and detail. (Gee, she was really smart)

**

I applaud your purposeful and exacting approach to studying Objectivism; many who post on this site would do well to follow your methodology. I look forward to reading your future posts and hope to engage in some scintillating discussions with you.

In addition to your above methods, I've found that discussing ideas...particularly problematic/difficult ones...with others is an excellent way of honing one's arguments and clarifying one's thoughts. Reading and writing are excellent, but actual discourse can be very "eye-opening."

- JTG
"Better to fight for something than live for nothing."

Back in February 2005, I blogged some recommendations on lecture courses from the Ayn Rand Bookstore. I also wrote up some recommendations for studying Objectivism. With the caveat that some of the information about me is out-of-date, here it is:

***

For the third time this week (!), I've been asked for my recommendations regarding particularly worthwhile material available from the Ayn Rand Bookstore. Since the most recent request was public (in the comments on a random post), let me make some public recommendations. (Note that links are to CDs rather than tapes where possible. If you want tapes, just search for the title and/or author.)

In perusing my recommendations, please keep in mind that my interests tend toward more academic philosophy. I have little interest in work that is primarily "inspirational" or "practical" in nature; I don't tend to buy or listen to it. (I regard good technical philosophy as supremely inspirational and eminently practical!) Also, I'm going to focus on lecture courses here, although I'll mention books as they become relevant. Then I'll have some more general personal recommendations on studying Objectivism toward the end.

All of Leonard Peikoff's big lecture courses are consistently interesting and excellent, but the three which strike me as of greatest general significance are Understanding Objectivism, The Art of Thinking, and Unity in Epistemology and Ethics.

Eventually, anyone with a serious interest in studying Objectivism ought to listen to all of Peikoff's major lecture courses. Those who don't are necessarily limited to an unnecessarily incomplete and inadequate understanding of Objectivism. I've listened to almost all of them in the past year and a half -- and it's been quite an education, to say the least.

The urgency and order of listening to Peikoff's other lectures will depend upon a person's particular interests. I was particularly entranced by Philosophy of Education. (For those interested in the topic, Lisa VanDamme's various lectures provide a very interesting set of real-life appendices.) The History of Philosophy series is excellent; it is particularly critical for anyone in or near a philosophy department. I also very much enjoyed and benefited from Introduction to Logic and Objective Communication. (I've only heard part of Induction in Physics and Philosophy, none of Objectivism Through Induction, and none of The DIM Hypothesis.)

This year, I've also been slowly and carefully re-reading Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand (OPAR). Hearing Peikoff's various lectures related to the book has been enormously helpful in fully understanding that work. I've listened to The Philosophy of Objectivism (the original lectures upon which OPAR is based), Objectivism: The State of the Art (great stuff on hierarchy), and Moral Virtue. I'm currently listening to his Advanced Seminars on Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand, a fascinating series of observations about and answers to questions on the Galley Proofs of OPAR. Although I still have a a few personal complaints and confusions about the book, my appreciation for the clarity and depth of the book has grown enormously through the course of these studies. The work really is a tremendous and important achievement.

Clearly, Leonard Peikoff is The Man. But thankfully, he's not The Only Man. In no particular order:

Those interested in ancient philosophy will certainly profit from the work of both Robert Mayhew and Greg Salmieri. I learned more in Mayhew's uber-clear and essentialized course on Aristotle's Metaphysics than in two unhappy semesters of Aristotle classes at Boulder. (He has other courses on Aristotle, but I haven't heard those yet. Paul and I both enjoyed his course Ayn Rand on Humor, which we listened to while running.) Salmieri's courses are excellent, although Platonism doesn't seem to be available yet. Also, I should mention that Mayhew's anthology, Essays on Ayn Rand's We the Living, is a fine example of what Objectivist scholarship might and ought to be. I'm very much looking forward to his forthcoming anthologies on Ayn Rand's later novels.

Tara Smith has a substantial collection of always-good lectures on ethics available. Her ability to thoughtfully integrate the theoretical with the practical is particularly valuable to both academic and regular folks. (Really, it's no wonder that she was a huge hit at FROST this past weekend!) Given my longstanding interest in moral development, I particularly enjoyed her lectures on Perfection and Pride. Her recent lecture on Kindness, Generosity, and Charity was a noteworthy contrast to Kelley's elevation of benevolence to a major virtue in his Barely-Objectivish-Philosophy. I'd also very much recommend Smith's second book, Viable Values, as well as the multitude of journal articles that she's written over the years. (The topics of those articles will be of greater or lesser interest to particular people depending upon their degree of interest in technical philosophy. I haven't read them all, but those that I have are interesting, thoughtful, and clear.)

Harry Binswanger has a host of lectures available on a variety of technical and fascinating topics, such as psycho-epistemology, consciousness, and the emotions. I don't always agree with his arguments and conclusions, but I do generally enjoy his ground-breaking explorations.

The depth, substance, and detail of Darryl Wright's course Advanced Topics in Ethics was a particular delight for me. As I was listening to it, I was desperate to listen to it again immediately so as to take copious notes. (To my great frustration, I haven't been able to do that yet due to time constraints.) His course on Reason and Freedom was also very interesting. I'm glad to see that he has various lectures that I haven't heard yet.

Onkar Ghate's characteristic thoughtfulness, thoroughness, and thorough knowledge of Objectivism is quite apparent in his lecture course analyzing Galt's Speech. (I'm not alone in being a huge Onkar fan.)

Also, I should mention a few Objectivist intellectuals that generally lecture outside my limited sphere of philosophic interest, but whom I've very much enjoyed: John Lewis, Eric Daniels, and Yaron Brook.

Before I move on, I should make a few qualifying remarks. First, I've omitted some ARI speakers for totally innocuous reasons, either because I haven't heard them lecture or because I'm not so interested in their topics. However, I do actively avoid a few for various reasons related to both style and substance. In any case, please don't jump to conclusions just because I didn't mention someone. Second, my evaluations of lectures often change upon a second hearing, when I have time to more fully absorb and evaluate the material. So don't treat my comments here as set in stone.

Now let me offer a bit of advice about studying Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism. People relatively new to the philosophy might want to check out ARI's suggested reading list. For those of you interested in seriously studying Objectivism again, perhaps after a few years of inactivity, here's what I've found useful.

First, reacquaint yourself with Ayn Rand's writings. Re-read her novels. Re-read her major anthologies. You might want to jot down some interesting ideas here and there, but don't impose the burden of taking copious notes upon yourself. The goal is simply to help you get your bearings again. You don't want to make the process so hard that you don't do it at all.

Next, explore the more promising up-until-now or for-a-long-time neglected Objectivist work. Listen to the lecture courses of most interest to you offered by the Ayn Rand Bookstore, particularly The Big Ones by Leonard Peikoff. Read Ayn Rand's Letters and Journals. Read the Art of Fiction and The Art of Non-Fiction. Read Viable Values and Essays on Ayn Rand's We the Living. You will be delighted by the unexpected philosophic gems you find in these works. Again, I wouldn't recommend burdening yourself with the chore of copious notes. You can't possibly absorb it all at once anyway, so you may as well plan to spiral back upon the better material later.

Meanwhile, re-read OPAR, carefully and actively, perhaps with those related lectures mentioned above. In this case, I would recommend taking two particular kinds of notes. First, within the structure of the chapters and sections, condense each paragraph into a single essentialized sentence. Also, write down any questions on the text that you have, whether concerning confusions, interesting leads, or whatnot. (It's very easy to structure those notes that in MS Word's outline mode.) Also, I'd recommend reading a chapter once straight through before reading again to condense and question. (I got the general idea of condensing from Harry Binswanger's lecture How to Study Ayn Rand's Writings.)

I started this general process about a year and a half ago (i.e. the summer of 2003). I'm presently in the "next" and the "meanwhile" stages. I'm not in any great hurry, but I am working steadily within the constraints on my time imposed by graduate school. (Given my long commutes, I have lots of time for lectures, but little time for books.) As I move through the material, I do two helpful things. First, I keep track of what I read when, both by marking the date on the material itself somewhere and by noting the date in a darn big spreadsheet. Given the scope of my project, it's important to know if and when I last read some book or heard some lecture. (I also note the "importance" and "value" of each source in the spreadsheet, to help me decide when and whether to review it.) Also, it's a lovely feeling of accomplishment to peruse the ever-growing list on occasion. Second, I make a point of talking with Paul about the more noteworthy issues raised in my sources, as that greatly helps me integrate and retain the material. (Paul says that he's only available for intra-spousal conversations. Sorry!) I've also benefited enormously from various other sources of discussion and conversation.

I have some general ideas about what I'd like to do next, after I'm (mostly) done with those two phases. I'd like to listen to the better lecture courses again, taking notes if possible. (If I can't afford the sit-down time to take notes, I'll listen to them in my car, pausing to take notes on my digital voice recorder as necessary.) I'd like to read and condense all of the writings in the bound volumes of The Objectivist Newsletter, The Objectivist, and The Ayn Rand Letter. I'd like to work through the methods described in Understanding Objectivism and elsewhere for critical issues and concepts in Objectivism. I'd like to read the bound volume of The Objectivist Forum. I'd like to make a careful study of Ayn Rand's novels.

As I move forward, I expect that those plans will shift and change in various ways. Despite my Platonic tendency for Excessive Planning, I've given up all hope of Rationalistically Plotting a Course of Study That I Must Follow No Matter What Because It Is the Only Right Way to Do It. I also try not to focus too much on all that I have left to do, as it quickly becomes overwhelming. Every once in a while though, I do allow myself the luxury of amazement at all that I have learned in the past year and a half on all fronts: content, method, theory, practice. Those are nice moments, I have to say.

I would also add that Leonard Peikoff's course Objectivism Through Induction is fantastic -- definitely a must-listen. And I heartily recommend all of Robert Mayhew's courses on Aristotle -- or any other topic. I also heartily recommend anything by Eric Daniels, although I haven't yet heard his long-running course on American history (to be finished this summer). Let me also extra-special recommend Essays on Ayn Rand's Anthem. Some of the philosophical and literary essays are mind-blowingly fantastic.

Also, I should mention that I'm not as enthusiastic about the method of condensation as I once was.

P.S. Victor, was that enough in the way of suggested lectures from ARB?

-- Diana Hsieh
diana@dianahsieh.com
NoodleFood

Not that this has a connection to studying Objectivism, but I was wondering if you saw the bio flick 'Sense of Life' (and even the Mike Wallace interview with Ayn Rand?) If so, what did you think of them both?

In regards to study CD and DVD material, I'm thinking of ordering something from the AR book store...any suggestions...anybody?

-Victor

The second thing he does is to call me and ask me if he got it right

Great thread.  I third the recommendation to keep a philosophical (or personal) journal.  It's always fun to look back at one's own intellectual progress over time.  Come to think of it, all of Penelope's recommendations are good ones for those interested in studying Objectivism.  Yay, Penelope

I've found that it can be incredibly helpful to periodically go back over philosophical fundamentals and more precisely define concepts.  As one's context of knowledge broadens, he becomes able to more fully integrate fundamental principles.  When I'm having difficulty thinking something through, the first thing I do is make sure I have all the relevant concepts properly defined in terms of genus and distinguishing characteristic(s).  This is also very helpful with intellectual communication, to make sure everyone is on the same page.

Thanks to everyonwe who commented on this thread, it's always great to get thinking and studying tips.

--Dan Edge

Thanks for the plug, Jason. But Windelband is probably too advanced for the beginner.

One name I might recommend more from what I've heard than from personal experience is Mortimer Adler. I've only read a little of his but I've heard good things about him - and he does have an Aristotelian orientation.

Of course the ideal would be Leonard Peikoff's taped course, The History of Philosophy.

http://snipurl.com/rueh

Although at $695 I could see where that would be daunting for anyone but the most serious student.

That's very cool (and the beer too, I hope)

"[why do I feel like having a beer?]"

While dining at a waterfront restaurant in Edenton, North Carolina I was pleasantly surprised to find my name listed among the beer options.

Thanks for the recommendations Lance, Victor and Jason.

While it might not be a "beginning" text I would like to add a plug for Windelband's History of Philosophy. This extremely terse history is outstanding if you are willing to take the time to study it. It is currently published by SOLO member Fred Weiss's publishing company "The Paper Tiger". For more info see www.papertig.com.

- Jason

"THE STORY OF PHILOSOPHY" by Bryan Magee.

It's the essential and illsutrated guide to the history of Western philosophy. It's fun and pretty!

[why do I feel like having a beer?]

Hi Joe,

The 5 volume series by W.T. Jones is very good for preparing yourself for the originals.

Philosophy: The Basics by Nigel Warburton is decent. It's a little dark but he hits on the fundamental issues of volition and ethics and God.

For Aristotle, a guy named Jonathan Lear has a book called Aristotle: The Desire to Understand that I recommend highly. Aristotle is tough sledding and that book helped a lot. If you go straight to Aristotle try his Ethics.

Good luck and welcome.

I just started reading "Atlas Shrugged" for the first time. I have read "We The Living", "Anthem" and "The Fountainhead". After I finish "Atlas Shrugged" I plan to reread Rand's novels and then move on to her non-fiction.

Before I take on Rand's non-fiction, I think it would behoove me to read a general overview on Philosophy. I managed to get through college without taking a single course on Philosophy and I find my knowledge on the subject lacking.

So does anyone have any suggestions on good introductory level Philosophy books? I do know enough about Rand to know that I should probably learn a little about Aristotle.

I'm glad you mentioned journaling. I think it's a useful way to compare the values I take from Objectivist reading to how I actually live day-to-day.

I just wish she would do some more work that I could get from the Jefferson School. I don't think she has published or lectured in a long time.

Kelly

Lovely comments! I agree with all of it, particularly your recommendation of Edith Packer's work. I listened all her psychology lectures a while back and, gotta say: it's a shame she's not part of the Objectivistm movement anymore. By my eyes she's the best Objectivist psychologist there ever was.

This is something that I have been thinking a lot about in the last few years. First, I defined my goals. My main goal is to become happier, and I think I will be able to do that by understanding the philosophy better and by working on my psychology. The main thing I do to work on the philosophy is to attend my OPAR study group. We are working our way very slowly (about 10 pages a week) through OPAR. We talk about anything that seems interesting, confusing, or that brings an example to our minds. We try to constantly concretize everything by using examples close to home. This has been marvelously helpful to me, especially in discovering where my weaknesses are. I also listen to tapes and CDs when I can afford them (or borrow them), and though I often choose things dealing with applications, they always give me some new insight into Objectivism.

Working on my psychology is the part that I spend the most time on. The OPAR meetings are also helpful in this because since we are all friends, we often bring up very personal issues that relate to the principles Peikoff is talking about. We also call each other on immoral behavior and thinking and help each other figure out ways to work on our virtues and our values. As far as my personal work, I keep a journal where I explore issues that I find are problems in my personal life, try to identify the reasons I do the things I do, and brainstorm solutions. I have found Edith Packer's pamphlets very helpful with this, especially "Understanding the Subconcious." She lays out a method that has helped me to better understand my emotions, the premises at the root of them, and how to work on them. I have made a very detailed list of my values in the order that I hold them, and I constantly revisit them to make sure I am allotting the right amount of time to each one and to break them down into smaller components that I can work on every day. I highly recommend Andy Bernstein's lecture on "How to Be a Passionate Valuer" if explicit value work is appealing to you. It really helped me to see how important it is to be totally concious of how I spend my time and what exactly it is I want to do. Finally, I have worked very hard to make good solid Objectivist friends. This is invaluable to me. There is nothing like going to your friends to talk about work, romance, problems, hopes, and plans, and getting rational responses. Good advice, someone to keep tabs on your progress, sympathy about the right things, anger about the right things, and a sense of having allies in the same fight are very heartening.

Kelly

I love hearing about how people came across this brilliant writer and philosopher.

For me, it was The Fountainhead. I immediately related to the character of Howard Rourke. Not because I'm a red head--but rather, it was his independence. I'm glad to say that I have always been like that, way before knowing The Fountainhead or Ayn Rand. This book merely concretized--before my wide-eyed disbelief--my very soul. (I hope I don’t unduly flatter myself here.) I'll tell you it rocked my world and I was in such an emotional and intellectual whirlwind for months after. In fact, I had to read that book again--right away!--when reaching the last page.

I was already interested in philosophy from since my early teens, and when I began to learn of Ayn Rand's reputation as a "controversial" and ground-breaking philosopher, my rapture reached a feverish pitch (and it's difficult to impress me; but Rand sent me into another orbit). So, of course, I moved on to Atlas and her non-fiction works. My thoughts while reading her was, “God, but this is so true!” Sure, there had been times when I thought she was wrong or had exaggerated some point, but as I grew older and gained more experience, her points had been validated by observation again and again.

I almost regarded her insights as prophetic. But of course I realized it was her methodology that accounts for her conclusions and insights. Truly a brilliant mind. You talk about standing in awe of some writer. From there on in, I have been hooked. I explored her writings deeply in Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology and employed it to the issues of today. So when I hear, say, an environmentalist engaging in evasive and obscurantist rhetoric, I can uncover the tricks and intellectual shysterdom. I can pin-point the essentials of a matter and zero in. This is thanks to Rand. There has been no looking back.

You know, I shudder to think what my life--or intellectual processes--would have been like had I not discovered Rand, and thus been inspired and taught by her philosophy. She blasted me from my dumb-ass left-leaning ways. And sure, I have always been independent and a critical thinker, but still…I do feel indebted.

For me it was just a long process of reading, thinking through, often getting pissed off but ultimatly agreeing.

Started with the fiction, then moved on to the baisic non-fiction (VOS, Philosophy who needs it, Romantic Manifesto). I spent a long period of time just reading and thinking through everything it meant, and then as time went on comparing my own thinking previous to having read Rand and how I approached things.

Since then I made it a point to adjust my life to something closer to what I could enjoy and be proud of. I started taking my jobs seriously. I moved out on my own. I quit a band that was a huge drain on me on most every level. I made it a point to spend more time developing my skills in the field of comic writing and art. And I put a lot more thought into who I spent time with and why.

---Landon

Inking is sexy.

http://www.angelfire.com/comics/wickedlakes

I discovered Atlas Shrugged three years ago. I can't remember how. But I read it and fell in love with Ayn Rand's universe. It's appeal, I guess, was that I always pursued my own values, but in a kinda subjectivist way. It was eye-opening to realize that if you wanted to be passionate and happy and pursue and achieve your values, the thing you had to be was RATIONAL.

I'm curious to ask, if you don't mind: How did you come across Ayn Rand's works, and what was the appeal of it all to you?

I am particularly fond of well-produced CDs and DVDs (especially the latter). They can bring subjects to life and are convenient for travelling. This is particularly valuable for interesting friends - a well-presented and interesting DVD can work like a long advertisement.

Outreach is very important as most posters on the site would agree. Magazines and short pamphlets are valuable tools too. Once we have someone interested, it is important that there is a study guide. At the risk of being vilified, I suggest that there needs to be an equivalent of the study guides offered by the Cato and Mises Institutes.

What I've been doing for the past eight or so years is studying OPAR, VOS, CUI, and RM and comparing that to my own thoughts and experiences. My goal in this approach is to see exactly how the abstract principles presented in the Objectivist corpus are reflected in my own life. I too would like to join the OAC, but I'm going to wait until I finish my bachelors of music composition degree first. The branches of the philosophy that I'm most concerned with are ethics and aesthetics. I'll probably post a little more on this later, but I need to get some sleep.
www.adambuker.com

I would like to offer a few tips and insights on how I came to study Objectivism. Mind you, if I may say so, I find your grasp of Objectivism rather amazing. So I’m a little surprised by this post and your request. But it’s okay.

Firstly, I simply read all of Ayn Rand’s works and that of other Objectivists philosophers and intellectuals. Then I would think over and “chew” on what I had read-for months-and then again do more reading. Yes, I did engage in a systematic process to improve my understanding of it. Years, in fact. Ayn Rand is a fountainhead of information and I'm still learning from her even after 14 years.

Secondly, I would talk with other like-minded people and, as you may now know, with “sophisticated” philosophical adversaries. I wanted to really hone my understanding of Objectivism by being challenged. I wanted hard-hitting blood spattered (intellectually speaking) DEBATES, and I got it. If I was unhappy with how well I argued—more reading and thinking, thinking, thinking. Of course, as we both established in some other post, the fruits to be derived from arguing with committed irrationalists are limited. But that’s contextual: I did find that it helped me ground the philosophy as an off-shot adjunct to simply reading and thinking. Naturally, depending upon the intellectual honesty or out-and-out irrationality of the person involved, I have “won” debates with people who were sincere in their OWN efforts to know the facts. With others, their irrationality was ugly to face.

Something else: I’m also well versed on “general philosophy” and this, I found, helped me with my studies of Objectivism. Now here’s an idea that really helped me: I have formed and organized two OPAR study groups—years apart, of course. Do you know of Gary Hull’s OPAR study guide? If so, take advantage and organize a study group if time and energy permits. I found it to be worth it.
Consider Ayn Rand’s own words:

“The best way to study philosophy is to approach it as one approaches a detective story: follow every trail, clue and implication, in order to discover who is a murderer and who is a hero. The criterion of detection is two questions: Why? and How? If a given tenet seems to be true--why? If another tenet seems to be false--why? and how is it being put over? You will not find all the answers immediately, but you will acquire an invaluable characteristic: the ability to think in terms of essentials.”

In my continuing efforts to comprehend the world and Objectivism, I decided to join Solo (I have never been an internet-chat guy, and so this is all so new to me). I have done a lot of reading of other posts -long before ever submitting my own posts. Believe me, the fights and schisms was an eye-opener. I wanted to see what I was gettng into, you see. It's great!

As to your final question, why study Objectivism? (IF indeed that’s the question) The brief answer is: Because it’s a philosophy for living on earth. It’s a practical and idealistic philosophy. To the question of OBJECTIVISM: Who needs it? YOU do…as a human being.

Again, consider Ayn Rand’s words on this matter:

“Nothing is given to man automatically, neither knowledge, nor self-confidence, nor inner serenity, nor the right way to use his mind. Every value he needs or wants has to be discovered, learned and acquired--even the proper posture of his body.”

And why not this from Atlas Shrugged:

“Fight for the value of your person. Fight for the virtue of your pride. Fight for the radiant certainty and the absolute rectitude of knowing that yours is the Morality of Life and that yours is a battle for any achievement, any value, any grandeur, any goodness, any joy that has ever existed on this earth.”

**

My approach has not been step-by-step/systematic but as with most things I learn well (music, for example) I become obsessed with it until I've made it to the next peak. A systematic approach would be more efficient for most people.

The Romantic Manifesto is the one that opened my eyes to Objectivism 10 years ago. And that never gets old for me. Early on it was the major stuff Rand is known for (Egoism, A is A, Capitalism) and the next peak was reached though the study of other philosophers which helped to set a context for Rand's ideas. It helps a great deal to have a general idea where Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas, Descartes, Hume, Kant, Spinoza, Nietzsche and Sartre and so on are coming from. When you see what those guys were fighting for Objectivism becomes that much clearer and that much more valuable.

Next there is a ton of literature to become familiar with. Rand is right on the dollar about Victor Hugo's stuff. His universe is an inspirational, this-worldly universe of giants and anyone who wants to live a heroic life has Hugo's works to draw inspiration from. And there are lots of other authors (lesser but still great) to be aware of as well. There's no end to that.

I agree that the lectures are a great way to go. I've just recently been turned on to Craig Biddle's stuff. I'm a whole new guy after going though his lectures. And The Objective Standard is excellent, as well. I have not done any of Piekoff's stuff yet so all that is waiting for me. And all Rand's speeches at the Ford Hall Forum. Lots and lots of material in waiting. It's great.

Finally, debating with friends over drinks helps to reinforce ideas and to apply Objectivist principles in my own life. That's been big for me.