The following has been sent to me by a SOLOist who doesn't wish to be embroiled in any controversy that might ensue from the mention on this list of works whose inclusion might raise eyebrows or danders in certain quarters. He doesn't want his name on it, therefore I'm posting it under my name. It's his list, not mine ... but I have no problem with it.—Linz
____________________________________________
Many people come to SOLOPassion describing themselves as "newbies" and are filled with a lot of super questions. However, many of these super questions already have super answers (or at least super discussions) to be found in previous Objectivist literature. (Sometimes, it seems that even "old timers" raise issues in seeming ignorance of any prior discussion on the subject.) So, rather than “reinvent the wheel” for everyone each time, below is a resource that may of some help. If used properly, it could save a lot of data bits from streaming through servers around the globe––over and over… and over again.
The following is a bibliography of writers, books, lectures and articles influenced by Ayn Rand.
It does not attempt to include every writer who has been influenced by Rand–¬–and it certainly does not list all the work of any one of these writers (or even do justice to some of these authors’ work.) However, it is more than just a representative sample of some the best and most important "post-Rand" scholarship out there. Few can claim to be experts on all of this material, and it is certain that no one would agree with all of the views expressed by these authors. Some are critics of Rand, others admirers––some are “Objectivists,” others just “students” thereof––but all of this stuff is to be taken seriously. It will be noted that several works highly critical of Objectivism are NOT included, simply because they are not "serious," e.g., they present gross misrepresentations of Rand's ideas.
Agree with these writers below or not, they should be considered. (And do feel free to add what you think has been missed in the comments.)
This is offered because there is another value here: almost at a glance one can see the accelerating pace of serious Rand scholarship, along with its increasing power and scope.
The Works of Ayn Rand (no citations given, as you should have this stuff already, kids!):
• The Night of January 16th (1st Produced as Woman on Trial in Hollywood, 1934; 1st Produced on Broadway, 1935)
• We the Living (1936)
• Anthem (1938)
• The Fountainhead (1943)
• Atlas Shrugged (1957)
• For the New Intellectual (1961)
• The Virtue of Selfishness (1964)
• Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal (1966)
• The Romantic Manifesto (1970)
• The New Left: the Anti-Industrial Revolution (1971)
• Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology (1979)
• Philosophy: Who Needs It (1982)
Posthumous Works of Ayn Rand:
• The Early Ayn Rand, ed. Leonard Peikoff (1984, New York: New American Library.)
• The Voice of Reason, ed. Leonard Peikoff (1988, New York: American Library.)
• Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, rev. 2nd edition, editors. Harry Binswanger and Leonard Peikoff (1990, New York: New American Library/Meridian.)
• Return of the Primitive: The Anti-Industrial Revolution, ed. Peter Schwartz (1999, New York: Meridian.)
• The Ayn Rand Column, ed. Peter Schwartz (1991, Oceanside, CA: Second Renaissance Books.)
• The Art of Fiction, ed. Tore Boeckmann (2000, New York: Plume.)
• The Art of Nonfiction, ed. Robert Mayhew (2001, New York: Plume.)
• Ayn Rand’s Marginalia, ed. Robert Mayhew (1995, New Milford Conn.: Second Renaissance Books.)
• The Ayn Rand Reader, editors. Gary Hull and Leonard Peikoff (1999, New York: Plume.)
• Ayn Rand: Russian Writings on Hollywood, ed. Michael Berliner (1999, The Ayn Rand Institute Press.)
• Letters of Ayn Rand, ed. Michael Berliner (1995, New York: Dutton.)
• Journals of Ayn Rand, ed. David Harriman (1997, New York: Dutton.)
• Ayn Rand Answers: the Best of Her Q. & A., ed. Robert Mayhew (2005, New York: New American Library.)
Leonard Peikoff, PhD
• Objectivism: the Philosophy of Ayn Rand (1991, New York: Dutton.)
• The Ominous Parallels (1982, New York: Stein & Day.)
• The Status of the Law of Contradiction in Classic Logical Ontologism (1964, PhD diss., New York University, Sidney Hook, advisor)
• The Founders of Western Philosophy: Thales to Hume (twelve lectures, 1972, Oceanside CA: Lectures on Objectivism; now available through The Ayn Rand Bookstore, Irvine, CA.)
• The History of Modern Philosophy: Kant to the Present (twelve lectures, 1970, Oceanside, CA: Lectures on Objectivism/Ayn Rand Bookstore.)
• Understanding Objectivism (Twelve lectures delivered in New York City, 1983, Oceanside, CA: Second Renaissance Books/Ayn Rand Bookstore.).
• A Philosophy of Education (Six lectures delivered in La Jolla, California, 1985, Oceanside, CA: Second Renaissance Books/Ayn Rand Bookstore.)
• “Aristotle’s ‘Intuitive Induction,’” The New Scholasticism 59 (Spring): 185-199.
• “The Analytic-Synthetic Dichotomy,” The Objectivist, May- September, 1967, reprinted in Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology (Rand.)
• “Maybe You’re Wrong,” The Objectivist Forum, vol. 2, no. 2 (April, 1981.)
• “Fact and Value,” The Intellectual Activist vol. 5, no. 1 (May 18, 1989.)
• “My Thirty Years With Ayn Rand,” The Objectivist Forum, vol. 8, no. 3 (June, 1987), reprinted in The Voice of Reason (ante.)
• “A Picture is Not an Argument,” The Intellectual Activist, vol. 13, no. 2 (February, 1999.)
• “Why Should One Act on Principle?” The Intellectual Activist, vol. 4, no. 20 (February 27, 1989.)
Harry Binswanger, PhD
• The Biological Basis of Teleological Concepts (1990, Marina Del Rey, CA: The Ayn Rand Institute, rev. PhD diss., Columbia University.)
• [editor] The Ayn Rand Lexicon: Objectivism from A to Z (1986, New York, New American Library.)
• “The Possible Dream,” The Objectivist Forum vol. 2, no. 1 (February, 1981): 1-5
• Ayn Rand’s Life: Highlights and Sidelights (Two lectures, 1994, Oceanside, CA: Second Renaissance Books/Ayn Rand Bookstore.)
• Selected Topics in the Philosophy of Science (Two Lectures, 1987, Oceanside, CA: Second Renaissance Books/Ayn Rand Bookstore.)
Peter Schwartz, MA
• “Libertarianism: The Perversion of Liberty,”
• The Foreign Policy of Self-Interest: A Moral Ideal for America (2004, Irvine, CA: The Ayn Rand Institute Press.)
Allan Gotthelf, PhD, Prof. Emer.
• On Ayn Rand (2000, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.)
• [editor] Aristotle on Nature and Living Things (1985, Pittsburgh, PA: Mathesis Publications.)
• [and James Lennox, editors] Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology (1987, New York, Cambridge University Press.)
• “Aristotle’s Conception of ‘Final Causality,’” Review of Metaphysics (October, 1976, First Prize: Dissertation Essay Competition.)
• “Aristotle as Scientist: a Proper Verdict” (1988, two lectures, Oceanside CA: Second Renaissance Books/Ayn Rand Bookstore.)
Tara Smith, PhD
• Viable Values: a Study of Life as the Root and Reward of Morality (2000, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.)
• Ayn Rand’s Normative Ethics: the Virtuous Egoist (2006, New York: Cambridge University Press.)
• Moral Rights and Political Freedom (1995, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.)
• “Intrinsic Value: Look-Say Ethics,” Journal of Value Inquiry 32 (December, 1998): 539-553.
• “Morality Without a Wink: A Defense of Moral Perfection,” Journal of Philosophical Research 29 (2004): 315-331.
• “The Metaphysical Case for Honesty,” Journal of Value Inquiry 37 (2003): 517-531.
• “Tolerance and Forgiveness: Virtues or Vices?” Journal of Applied Philosophy 14, no. 1 (1997): 31-41.
• “Egoistic Friendship,” American Philosophical Quarterly, forthcoming
• “Why Do I Love Thee? A Response to Nozick’s Account of Romantic Love,” Southwest Philosophy Review 7 (January, 1991): 47-57.
• “The Practice of Pride,” Virtue and Vice, Paul, Miller and Paul, editors, (1988, New York: Cambridge University Press) 144-148.
• “Rights, Friends and Egoism,” Journal of Philosophy XC (March, 1993): 144-148.
Andrew Bernstein, PhD
• The Capitalist Manifesto: the Historic, Economic, and Philosophical Case for Laissez-Faire (2005, Lanham, MD: University Press of America.)
• Heart of Pagan: the Story of Swoop (2002, Cresskill, NJ: The Paper Tiger.)
• “Friedrich Nietzsche¬–His Thought, His Legacy; His Influence on Ayn Rand” (1999, New Milford, Conn.: Second Renaissance Books/Ayn Rand Bookstore.)
Robert Mayhew, PhD
• [editor] Essays on Ayn Rand’s We the Living (2004, Lanham, MS: Lexington Books.)
• [editor] Essays on Ayn Rand’s Anthem (2005, Lanham, MD, Lexington Books.)
• Ayn Rand and Song of Russia: Communism and Anti-Communism in 1940s Hollywood (2005, Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press.)
Edwin A. Locke, PhD, Prof. Emer.
• [editor] Theories of Cognitive Self-Regulation, special issue of Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50 (December, 1991.)
• The Essence of Leadership (1991, New York: Lexington Books.)
• Study Methods and Motivation: A Practical Guide to Effective Study (1998, rev. 2d edition, New Milford, Conn.: Second Renaissance Books.)
• The Prime Movers: Traits of the Great Wealth Creators (2000, New York: American Management Association.)
• [editor] Postmodernism and Management (2006, Elsevier.)
• [and Gary P. Latham] A Guide to Effective Study (1975, New York City: Springer Publishing.)
• [and Gary P. Latham] Goal Setting for Individuals and Groups and Organizations (1984,Chicago, IL: Science Research Associates.)
• [and Gary P. Latham] Goal Setting: A Motivational Technique That Works! (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.)
• [and Gary P. Latham] A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance (1990, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.)
• “A Critique of Bramel and Friend,” The American Psychologist 37, no. 7 (1982): 858-859.
• “The Nature of Human Intelligence” (1991, Oceanside, CA: Second Renaissance Books/Ayn Rand Bookstore.)
Gary Hull, PhD
• [editor] The Abolition of Antitrust (2005, Transaction Publishers.)
Jeff Britting
• Ayn Rand (2005, Woodstock, NY: Overlook Press.)
Charles Sures, JD, and Mary Ann Sures, MA
• Facets of Ayn Rand (2001, Irvine, CA: The Ayn Rand Institute Press.)
Michael Paxton
• Ayn Rand: A Sense of Life (companion book to Oscar-nominated documentary film, 1998, Layton, UT: Gibbs-Smith.)
James S. Valliant, JD
• The Passion of Ayn Rand’s Critics (2005, Dallas, TX, Durban House.)
Craig Biddle
• Loving Life (2002, Glen Allen.)
George Smith
• Atheism: the Case Against God (1979, Buffalo, NY: Prometheus.)
• Atheism, Ayn Rand, and Other Heresies (1991, Buffalo, NY: Prometheus.)
Chris Mathew Sciabarra, PhD
• Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical (1995, University Park, PA: The University of Pennsylvania Press.)
• Marx, Hayek, and Utopia (1995, New York: State University of New York Press.)
• Total Freedom: Toward a Dialectical Libertarianism (2000, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania University Press.)
• Toward a Radical Critical of Utopianism: Dialectics and Dualism in the Works of Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard and Karl Marx (1988, PhD diss., New York University, Bertell Ollman, advisor.)
• “The Crisis of Libertarian Dualism,” Critical Review 1 (Fall, 1987): 86-99.
• “Ayn Rand’s Critique of Ideology,” Reason Papers 14 (Spring, 1989): 34-47.
• “The Rand Transcript,” Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, (Fall 1999.)
• “Investigative Report: In Search of the Rand Transcript,” Liberty (October, 1999.)
• Ayn Rand, Homosexuality, and Human Liberation (2003, Cape Town, South Africa: Leap Publishing.)
David Kelley, PhD
• The Evidence of the Senses: A Realist Theory of Perception (1986, Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press. 1974, rev. PhD diss., Princeton University, advisor, Richard Rorty.)
• The Art of Reasoning (1988, New York: W. W. Norton.)
• Laissez Parler: Freedom in the Electronic Media (1983, Bowling Green, OH: Social Philosophy and Policy Center.)
• The Contested Legacy of Ayn Rand: Truth and Toleration in Objectivism (2000, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.)
• A Life of One’s Own: Individual Rights and the Welfare State (1998, Washington, D.C.: Cato.)
• Unrugged Individualism: the Selfish Basis of Benevolence (1996, Poughkeepsie, NY: The Objectivist Center/Atlas Society.)
• “A Theory of Abstraction,” Cognition and Brain Theory 7 (Summer/Fall, 1984): 329-357.
• [and Janet Kreuger] “The Psychology of Abstraction,” Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 14 (March, 1984): 43-67.
• “Truth and Toleration” (1990, Verbank, NY: Institute for Objectivist Studies/Atlas Society.)
Douglas Den Uyl, PhD
• The Virtue of Prudence (1991, New York: Peter Lang.)
• “Ethical Egoism and Gerwirth’s PCC,” The Personalist 56 (Autumn, 1975): 432-447.
Douglas Den Uyl, PhD, and Douglas Rasmussen, PhD
• [editors] The Philosophic Thought of Ayn Rand (1984, Urbana and Chicago, ILL: University of Illinois Press.)
• Liberty and Nature: An Aristotelian Defense of Liberal Order (1991, LaSalle, ILL: Open Court.)
• “In Defense of Natural End Ethics: A Rejoinder to O’Neil and Osterfeld,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 7 (Spring, 1983): 115-125.
• “Nozick on the Randian Argument,” The Personalist, April, 1978, 186-187, reprinted in Reading Nozick, J. Paul, editor, (1981, Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.)
Douglas Rasmussen, PhD
• “Aristotle and the Defense of the Law of Non-Contradiction,” The Personalist, Spring, 1973.
• “Austin and Wittgenstein on ‘Doubt’ and ‘Knowledge,’” Reason Papers 1, Fall, 1974.
• “A Critique of Rawls’ Theory of Justice,” The Personalist 55, (Summer, 1974.) 303-318.
• “Quine and Aristotelian Essentialism,” The New Scholasticism 58 (Summer, 1984.)
• “Logical Possibility: An Aristotelian, Essentialist Critique,” The Thomist 47 (October, 1983): 513-540.
• “A Groundwork for Rights: Man’s Natural End,” The Journal of Libertarian Studies 4 (Winter, 1980): 65-76.
Tibor Machan, PhD, Prof. Emer.
• Generosity–Virtue in Civil Society, (1998, Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute.)
• Human Rights and Human Liberties (1975, Chicago, Ill.: Nelson Hall.)
• Ayn Rand (2000, New York: Peter Lang.)
• Liberty and Hard Cases (2002, Stanford, Stanford University: Hoover Institution.)
• A Primer on Ethics (1997, University of Oklahoma Press.)
• Objectivity: Recovering Determinate Reality in Philosophy, Science and Everyday Life (2004, Ashgate Publishing.)
• Libertarianism Defended (2006, Ashgate Publishing.)
• “Some Recent Work in Ethical Egoism,” American Philosophical Quarterly (January, 1979.)
Eric Mack, PhD
• “How to Derive Ethical Egoism,” The Personalist (Autumn, 1971.)
• “Egoism and Rights,” The Personalist (Winter, 1973.)
• “Egoism and Rights Revisited,” The Personalist (July, 1977.)
George Reisman, PhD
• Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics (1998, Ottawa, ILL.: Jameson Books.)
• The Government Against the Economy (1979, Ottawa, ILL: Caroline House.)
• [translator, from the original German] Epistemological Problems of Economics, by Ludwig von Mises (1933, first English language edition, 1960, now available from The Ludwig von Mises Institute.)
Robert Hessen, PhD
• In Defense of the Corporation (1979, Stanford, Stanford University, Hoover Institution Press.)
• Steel Titan: the Life of Charles M. Schwab (1975, Oxford University Press.)
• Berlin Alert: the Memoirs and Reports of Truman Smith (1984, Stanford, Stanford University: the Hoover Institution Press.)
Murray N. Rothbard, PhD, Prof. Emer.
• America’s Great Depression (1963, Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Co.; 1972, Los Angeles, CA: Nash Publishing; 1975, revised edition, New York: New York University Press.)
• Man, Economy and State: a Treatise on Economic Principles (in two volumes;1962, Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Co.; 1970, Los Angeles, CA: Nash; New York: New York University Press.)
• Power and Market (1970, Menlo Park, CA: Institute for Humane Studies; 1977, Kansas City, MO: Sheed & McMeel; 1977, New York: New York University Press.)
• The Panic of 1819: Reactions and Policies (1962, New York: Columbia University Press; PhD diss., Columbia University, advisor, Joseph Dorfman.)
• The Ethics of Liberty (1982, Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.)
• Conceived in Liberty (in four volumes, 1975, 1975, 1976, and 1979, New Rochelle, NY: Arlington House Publishers.)
• The Mystery of Banking (1983, New York: Richardson & Snyder.)
• For A New Liberty: the Libertarian Manifesto ([1973] 1978, rev. edition, New York: Collier.)
• [and Ronald Radosh] A New History of Leviathan (1972, New York: E. P. Dutton.)
• Individualism and the Methodology of the Social Sciences (1979, Cato Paper Number 4, San Francisco, CA: Cato.)
• “The Sociology of the Ayn Rand Cult,” 1987, Port Townsend, WA: Liberty.
• “My Break With Branden and the Rand Cult,” Liberty (September, 1989): 27-32.
• “What Has Government Done to Our Money?”1964, Pine Tree Press; reprinted, Vol. 1, No. 1, Washington and Lee Commerce Review (Winter 1973), Commerce School of Washington and Lee University.)
Martin Anderson, PhD
• The Federal Bulldozer: a Critical Analysis of Urban Renewal, 1949-1962 (1964, M.I.T. Press.)
• Welfare: the Political Economy of Welfare Reform in the United States (1978, Stanford, Stanford University: The Hoover Institution Press.)
• Revolution (1988, Harcourt.)
John Hospers, PhD, Prof. Emer.
• Libertarianism: a Political Philosophy for Tomorrow (1971, Los Angeles, CA: Nash Publishing.)
• “Conversations with Ayn Rand,” Liberty, July, 1990, 23-36, and September, 1990, 42-52.)
Henry Mark Holzer, JD
• Sweet Land of Liberty? (1983, Costa Mesa, CA: Common Sense Press.)
Edith Efron, MS
• The Newstwisters (1971, Los Angeles, CA: Nash.)
• How CBS Tried to Kill a Book (Los Angeles, CA: Nash.)
• The Apocalyptics: How Environmental Politics Controls What We Know About Cancer (1984, New York, Simon and Schuster.)
Anne Wortham, PhD
• The Other Side of Racism: A Philosophical Study of Black Race Consciousness (1981, Columbus, OH: Ohio Sate University Press.)
Charles Murray, PhD
• Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950-1980 (1984, New York: Basic Books.)
Louis Torres and Michelle M. Kamhi
• What Art Is: Ayn Rand’s Philosophy of Art in Critical Perspective (1996, Chicago, Ill.: Open Court.)
• [editors, 1982-1994] Aristos: The Journal of Esthetics, vol. 1-6.
William Thomas
• [editor] The Literary Art of Ayn Rand (2005, The Objectivist Center/Atlas Society.)
Mimi Gladstein, PhD
• The Ayn Rand Companion (1984, Westport, CN: Greenwood.)
• [and Chris Mathew Sciabarra, editors] Feminist Interpretations of Ayn Rand (1999, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.)
Jack Wheeler, PhD
• The Adventurer’s Guide (1976, D. McKay Co.
Petr Beckmann, PhD, Prof. Emer.
• Einstein Plus Two (1987, Boulder CO: Golem Press.)
• The Health Hazards of NOT Going Nuclear (1976, Boulder, CO: Golem Press.)
• Eco-Hysterics and the Technophobes (1973, Boulder, CO: 1973.)
• A History of Pi (1982, Boulder, CO: Golem Press.)
Robert Efron, MD, Chief, Neurophysiology Unit, V.A. Hospital, Boston
• “Biology Without Consciousness and Its Consequences,” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 11 (Autumn, 1967.)
• “The Conditioned Reflex: A Meaningless Concept,” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 9 (Summer, 1966.)
Edith Packer, JD, PhD
• “The Language of Emotions and Introspection” (lecture) (1985, Oceanside, CA: Second Renaissance Books.)
• “The Role of Philosophy in Psychotherapy” (lecture) (1986, Oceanside, CA: Second Renaissance Books.)
• “Toward a Lasting Romantic Relationship, Part One” (lecture) (1988, Oceanside, CA: Second Renaissance Books.)
• “Toward a Lasting Romantic Relationship, Part Two” (1990, Oceanside, CA: Second Renaissance Books.)
Nathaniel Branden, MA (PhD)
• The Psychology of Self-Esteem: a New Concept of Man’s Psychological Nature (1969, Los Angeles, CA: Nash.)
• Breaking Free (1970, Los Angeles, CA: Nash.)
• The Disowned Self (1971, Los Angeles, Nash; 1978 New York: Bantam.)
• The Psychology of Romantic Love (1980, New York: Bantam.)
• Honoring the Self: Personal Integrity and the Heroic Potentials of Human Nature (1983, Los Angeles, CA: Jeremy P. Tarcher.)
• The Art of Self-Discovery ([1986] 1993, New York: Bantam.)
• Judgment Day: My Years With Ayn Rand (1989, Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin, revised as My Years With Ayn Rand, 1999, Jossey-Bass.)
• The Basic Principles of Objectivism (recorded lecture series, 1960, Nathaniel Branden Institute, Academic Associates.)
• “Rational Egoism: a Reply to Professor Emmons,” The Personalist 52 (Spring, 1970.)
• “Rational Egoism Continued,” The Personalist 51 (Summer, 1970.)
• “The Benefits and Hazards of the Philosophy of Ayn Rand,” The Journal of Humanistic Psychology, (Fall 1984.)
Nathaniel Branden and Barbara Branden, MA
• Who is Ayn Rand? (1962, New York, Random House.)
Barbara Branden, MA
• The Passion of Ayn Rand (1986, Garden City, NY: Doubleday, later adapted for cable-television.)
Allan Blumenthal, MD
• [and Joan Blumenthal, MA] Music: Theory, History and Performance (1974, Twelve Lectures.)
• “Nature, Nurture, and Free Will” (1992, Institute for Objectivist Studies Forum.)
Erika Holzer, JD
• Double Crossing (1980, Harper and Row)
• Eye for an Eye (1993, Tor Books, later adapted for screen.)
• Ayn Rand: My Fiction Writing Teacher (2005, Madison Press.)
Kay Nolte Smith
• Mindspell (1983, William Morrow & Co.; reprinted: 1984, Ballantine Books.)
• Elegy for a Soprano (1985, Villard.)
• [translator, from the original French] Chantecler: a Play in Four Acts, by Edmond Rostand (1987, University Press of America.)
• A Tale of the Wind: a Novel of 19th Century France (1991, Villard.)
• Country of the Heart (1987, Villard.)
Robert Heinlein
• The Moon is a Harsh Mistress (1966, reissued, 1997, Orb.)
• Stranger in a Strange Land (1961, reissued, 1987, Ace.)
Kay Nolte Smith
If Kay Nolte Smith is to be included, then her two first novels are missing from the list. They are "The Watcher" (which won the Edgar Alan Poe best mystery prize in 1981) and "Cathcing Fire." Her last novel "Venetian Song" is missing too.
Nice!
Now we're talking truth in advertising.
I guess I have to withdraw my earlier comments objecting to the list. It now gives you just what it says on the tin.
That was really funny, Linz.
Aaron
Maybe if it was just titled more appropriately like 'Works influenced by Rand' or 'Authors Objectivists should be aware of'.
Good point. I just went with the title supplied, but since the author said of the whole list "Do with it what you will" I might just change the title to something that better describes what the list actually is. This'll be fun.
Linz
Oh, & Dan Edge was indeed NOT the author. But in order to head off any attempts at a process of elimination, I shan't comment on any future guesses. My non-comment should most emphatically NOT be construed as confirmation of any such guesses!
Nope
Not me. For one, I can't imagine I would ever post anything annonymously. For two, I wouldn't have recommended Kelly, Rothbard, or BB (for starters).
Do I seem like an annony-mouse? Hell, I hope not!
--Dan Edge
What a list Linz. On the
What a list Linz. On the one hand I feel I should congratulate the anonymous author and yourself on being willing to list some onpopular choices that cross lines of factional or personal conflict. On the other - I have to agree that a lot of those works just don't fit on a list called 'Important Rand scholarship'. Fiction? Murray Rothbard?
The explanation/disclaimer paragraph is actually good, and I especially liked him clarifying "Some are critics of Rand, others admirers––some are “Objectivists,” others just “students” thereof––but all of this stuff is to be taken seriously." It's probably just the title concerning Rand scholarship that doesn't seem to fit. Maybe if it was just titled more appropriately like 'Works influenced by Rand' or 'Authors Objectivists should be aware of'.
Whoever..
...wrote this list should be castigated for trying to slaughter the English language with this horrible US slang label "newbie"
Guess #2
I am guessing that the anonymous poster is Dan Edge.
Ditto
what Landon said. Rand wrote that she would know her ideas have affected the culture when they appeared in the popular literature, which is why the inclusion of writers like Heinlein and Ditko would have a place in the above list, in that context. (Ditko moreso then Heinlein, I believe, who not only is influenced by Rand but is believed to practice Objectivism consistently.)
Non-Rand fiction
I think there is a necessity for new avenues of fiction to enjoy once you've experienced Rand so I can understand the Heinlein entries (though I'm thouroughly miffed that there was no Steve Ditko on the list)
Though I also agree this might not necessarily be something directly tied to Rand/Objectivist "scholarship." (except in cases of aspiring fiction writers)
In reference to that I think it might be a good idea to move any discussion on any sort of "Newbie's guide to Rand friendly non-Rand fiction" to its own thread.
---Landon
Inking is sexy.
http://www.angelfire.com/comics/wickedlakes
It's Not Reisman ...
... but don't think you'll find out by process of elimination!
Noble Vision
If it's going to include fiction, then I like see Gen LaGreca's NOBLE VISION or any of Casey Fahy's fiction there. There are some real philosophical themes in those.
Guess the list author
I have not noticed any guesses on who Linz is posting for.
The inclusion of Rothbard leads me, via the Mises Institute, to George Reisman.
Jeff
My comment reflected my view that Heinlein's works, much as I personally admire them, are not Objectivist works. The list, I thought, was aimed at those NEW to Objectivism so that they gain a broader and more detailed understanding of the philosophy.
There are many science fiction authors, in addition to Heinlein, whose novels have a libertarian message. I would not have listed them for the same reasons but would recommend them to anyone who loves liberty.
In addition to Rand, I would be point to the newbie Objectivist towards Peikoff, Reisman, Bernstein, Mack, Kelley, early Nathaniel Branden and Tara Smith.
Chris
I agree with Diana.
Some of those who seem to need PARC the most are now the ones saying that Rand's life doesn't matter, that we should all focus on "substance."
Many of these people also agreed with David Kelley that the ARI sort's failure to discuss Barbara Branden's book, at that time, was "shocking."
However, Peikoff never ignored the subject as far as I can tell. He identified Ms. Branden's book as having the status of being "arbitrary." This is not the same thing. He seemed perfectly pleased and open about PARC, when it came to his attention.
All along, hasn't ARI been doing what my critics urge us now to do, "focusing on substance"?
These are the same critics who were "shocked" along with Kelley about the absence of a conversation about PAR, but who want to move along very quickly about PARC. You know, the ones who object to any of Rand's notes being published.
Diana should "move along." She never really needed PARC. Those who thought PAR was just marvelous are the ones who need PARC.
No, the ARI side wasn't ever "closed." It's the so-called "open" side that closed up like oyster shell.
Diana's right: I'm not affiliated with ARI. However, my experience with PARC has shown me which side is "open," if by that we mean, "open to truth."
(At least the lister put the good stuff on top.)
Why Weiss?
With his usual breathtaking ignorance, Fred intones:
"Why Heinlein?
"Although he's at least inocuous [sic] as compared to some of the others (like Rothbard), what does he have to do with Objectivism? Is there any direct evidence that he was even aware of AR, let alone being influenced by her?"
I realize that the only thing any Objectivist ever has to read is the works of Ayn Rand, Fred. Having done that, he or she will henceforth know everything. Setting that aside for the moment, however, the answer to your characteristically ignorant question is "Yes. In The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress there is at least one direct reference to Rand."
Helpfully,
JR
For once I agree with Fred Weiss
Since this list is for "newbies" to Objectivism, I would question the inclusion of Robert Heinlein and Rothbard. Rothbard, after his break with Rand, was very hostile to her - as demonstrated in his one-act play, "Mozart was a Red" (now on Google video).
I would also question the inclusion of Charles Murray's "Losing Ground".
Not Quite
Chris C said: "Lindsay B., the response (or lack thereof) to the Brandens is a case in point. In the years prior to PARC, the response coming from the ARI circles seemed to be mainly one of ignoring the Brandens' published works on Rand."
First, let me say that I'm really glad Jim Valliant wrote and published PARC. As Objectivism grows in prominence, people in the media need to understand at minimum that NB and BB's portrayals are controversial.
However, it's just wrong to claim that ARI intellectuals have remained silent upon these topics. Peter Schwartz's review of BB's biography published in TIA is scathingly accurate. (I have it in PDF form, for anyone desperate to read it.)
Moreover, it's doubly wrong to even hint that ARI intellectuals were somehow missing the boat by failing to do more. Might more commentary have been helpful, particularly for insufficiently-critical readers like me? Sure. That doesn't oblige them to say a single word on the subject.
In my experience, the most common reason why honest people got suckered by Nathaniel Branden, Barbara Branden, David Kelley, Chris Sciabarra, and the like is an inadequate understanding of Objectivism. Personally, I could not have understood DK's gross philosophic errors without serious study of Objectivism, study of a sort unheard of in TOC circles. If you don't know much, particularly if you think you know more than you do, what they say might sound plausible.
Notably, ARI solves that problem by educating developing scholars in Objectivism. ARI offers its students a *stellar* education in Objectivism at OAC. Armed with that, it's damn easy to see the dishonesty of the Brandens and the like. An OAC student does not require detailed, lengthy, and painstaking arguments to see the glaring errors and dishonesty of Kelley or Branden or Sciabarra. (Even just listening to Leonard Peikoff's excellent courses on Objectivism -- long offered for sale by Second Renaissance and now Ayn Rand Bookstore -- made so many issues clear to me.)
So who might the audience for detailed commentaries responding to the Brandens be? Oh, perhaps the folks who were (at the time) convinced that ARI was evil? How inappropriate would that have been! And sheesh, ARI intellectuals have better things to do... like oh, save Western civilization from the barbarous onslaught of totalitarian Islam.
Also, I should add that ARI intellectuals are doing no more now than they used to be. Dr. Peikoff was seeking to publish AR's personal journals for some years. Jim Valliant isn't associated with ARI. I've written lots of commentaries on these issues, but I'm just an OAC student, not an ARI intellectual. (And, in any case, I'm done writing commentaries on those issues. As tempted as I am to discuss DK's Kantian view of objectivity or dissect NB's criticisms of Objectivism in the "Benefits and Hazards" article, I've got much more important work to do.)
-- Diana Hsieh
diana@dianahsieh.com
NoodleFood
Why Heinlein?
Why Heinlein?
Although he's at least inocuous as compared to some of the others (like Rothbard), what does he have to do with Objectivism? Is there any direct evidence that he was even aware of AR, let alone being influenced by her? James Clavell and Tom Clancy, who are not on the list, were at least avowed fans if I recall correctly - and of course they are much better and more important writers than the others on the list, including Heinlein.
Why Peikoff's dissertation?
Why Peikoff's dissertation?
Oh, I see . . .
Linz writes: "I would imagine that if a newbie reads through the list in the order given, he'll be ready for the crappy stuff by the time he gets to it. Plus he'll be well-informed as to just what crappy stuff has been said & by whom."
Oh right, good point. I wasn't thinking of the list as a suggested order of reading the material at all. If that's part of the intention, then a big part of my objection goes away. Thanks for that.
Signing off for tonight--cheers, all.
Lindsay B.
But not the newbie who really wants to understand the ideas. Both strawman criticisms and incompetent analysis are exactly what the newbie isn't ready for, and can be worse than useless to such a person, IMO.
I would imagine that if a newbie reads through the list in the order given, he'll be ready for the crappy stuff by the time he gets to it. Plus he'll be well-informed as to just what crappy stuff has been said & by whom.
Cheers, Lindsay--hope it's ok to call you "Lindsay P".
Of course, Lindsay B!
But it's probably best to call me "Linz" to keep folk from getting confused. 
Hi Chris
You wrote: "
"Lindsay B., the response (or lack thereof) to the Brandens is a case in point. In the years prior to PARC, the response coming from the ARI circles seemed to be mainly one of ignoring the Brandens' published works on Rand. One thing that happened in recent years to turn that perception around, and put their critics on the defensive, was the response contained in PARC. Insofar as ARI leadership like Peikoff paid attention to what the Brandens had said, they didn't do so in any public way that I know of. Now, I think there's more of the attitude that it's an open playing field, and to bring these kinds of things out in the open and respond."
Ok, so then what you're talking about is responding to things written by the Brandens, and in particular criticisms or smears of Ayn Rand as a person. But I got the impression from your post that you were saying there was this idea (which you weren't necessarily endorsing) that ARI-affiliated folks have somehow "ignored" criticisms of Objectivism as a philosophy. That's what I'm saying seems ridiculous to me as an assertion. But I think I misunderstood.
Or did I? Do people try to contend that ARI folk "ignore" intelligent and informed criticisms of Objectivism itself, as opposed to criticisms of ARI, of Objectivists, or of Ayn Rand? I've never been clear on this.
I could have guessed that Lindsay P!
lol!
Well, I'm not looking to tempt him out of hiding, I promise!
I do object to the list, though, for the reasons I said, unless I simply don't understand the opening statement of intent and the qualifiers. I'm open to the idea that I just don't get the intention.
I can see some limited value in reading just about any criticism or analysis of Objectivism, if for nothing other than philosophical detection as someone said upthread. (Or in some cases for me, amusement.)
But not the newbie who really wants to understand the ideas. Both strawman criticisms and incompetent analysis are exactly what the newbie isn't ready for, and can be worse than useless to such a person, IMO.
Getting from the philosophical mix we're all brought up with to Objectivism is very, very hard and takes time and thought. Introducing "noise" in the form of some of the the things cited tends to confuse and sabotage rather than clarify, until one has learned and digested a fair amount for one's self. I've seen this in my own life and too often in that of others I know. Christ, just look at Diana Hsieh's intellectual experience with Objectivism over time as recounted on her Web site.
To echo and add to what someone said above, the best thing for a newbie to Objectivism to do, IMO, is to read and re-read Ayn Rand's own writing, and most importantly to experience life and actively think about the ideas in between the readings. Sounds obvious, but I've read too many posts here on SOLO and elsewhere by people who clearly don't do this.
It's best to come up with your OWN criticisms and objections all by yourself while you're trying to understand the ideas and connect them to the reality all around you. Then look in Ayn Rand's own work for the answers to your objections (they're in there somewhere). And if one needs help finding those answers in the corpus, one should ask someone who has lived with the ideas for longer and accepts the philosophy as true--not someone critical about Objectivism and/or hostile to Ayn Rand.
Once your own original objections are satisfied, THEN it's time to let others be the "devil's advocate" and test your own understanding and acceptance. And if your own original objections are never satisfied, it's time to reject Objectivism and get out of the way of those who do accept it as we try to promote it to the world in our own small or big ways. That's my view, anyway.
Cheers, Lindsay--hope it's ok to call you "Lindsay P".
Lindsay, the response (or
Lindsay B., the response (or lack thereof) to the Brandens is a case in point. In the years prior to PARC, the response coming from the ARI circles seemed to be mainly one of ignoring the Brandens' published works on Rand. One thing that happened in recent years to turn that perception around, and put their critics on the defensive, was the response contained in PARC. Insofar as ARI leadership like Peikoff paid attention to what the Brandens had said, they didn't do so in any public way that I know of. Now, I think there's more of the attitude that it's an open playing field, and to bring these kinds of things out in the open and respond.
Fred, at the very least, it's a good idea being familiar with past instances of misunderstanding or misrepresentation of Objectivist ideas, to better prepare oneself for reacting to future ones.
Lindsay B. writes:
So isn't the author really implicitly stating an opinion concerning the value of certain works and writers, then hiding from any challenges to those value judgments by remaining anonymous?
Well, if you can tempt him out of hiding, good luck to you. You'd be amazed who it is. (But no, it's not Yaron Brook.
)
Linz
Lindsay P. writes: "I
Lindsay P. writes: "I believe the other objections registered here are covered by the author's qualifier, though I can see why he was worried about getting embroiled in controversy."
But the point I'm making is that I contend the author doesn't understand how to apply his or her own qualifier and isn't competently separating the "important" from the unimportant. The author is essentially stating his or her views of what is "important" and "serious" in the way of criticisms and analysis of Objectivism, and presenting this to the "newbie" who wouldn't be in a position yet to validly judge this one way or the other.
So isn't the author really implicitly stating an opinion concerning the value of certain works and writers, then hiding from any challenges to those value judgments by remaining anonymous?
Stating to newbies that "Benefits and Hazards", and the pointless and contradictory "Russian Radical" are "to be taken seriously" is something one should do openly where the newbie can evaluate the the likely soundness of the author's judgment of such things.
Chris
Why do you assume that the attacks/criticisms will get tougher? True, there may be more of them as Objectivism becomes ever more prominent. But I don't see any reason to suppose they will be any more serious than what we've seen to date, much of which has been mostly endless variations on the same general themes. I can't recall seeing anything significantly new in years. Have you?
I'm confused Chris
Chris Cathcart writes: "There was the impression for a number of years that rather than discussing and confronting such criticisms, the folks aligned with ARI chose instead to ignore them. Not merely to avoid sanctioning them by showcasing them, but to ignore them.That impressions was changed in good part by works like PARC, which, rather than ignoring the Brandens, confronted them head-on. It seems all that much more effective to do it that way, than to ignore."
I'm confused by this, Chris. Aren't you blending two different things together here? That is, "ignoring" what were always dishonest smears of Ayn Rand, and "ignoring" stupid or clearly uninformed criticisms of Objectivism?
If there ever was "the impression for a number of years that rather than discussing and confronting such criticisms, the folks aligned with ARI chose instead to ignore them" where the criticisms are of Objectivism itself in the form of persuasive arguments against the philosophy, which of these were ignored by folks associated with ARI? Can you give some examples?
I've extensively read and listened to the ARI-affiliated material for years, and every semi-plausible criticism of Objectivism I've ever heard has been well covered and addressed.
Could you clarify?
On the inclusion of pieces like "Benefits and Hazards"
Whoever supplied the list didn't say that all works that seriously distort Rand's views are excluded from the list, though that doesn't mean that some won't make it on to the list. (It's been so long since I've read the "Benefits and Hazards" piece that I can't really comment on whether it qualifies, but for the sake of argument....) The supplier of the list also disclaims that whether you agree with the works or not, they should be considered. An article by someone who used to be the #2 leading exponent of Objectivism, discussing his criticisms of the philosophy, at least prima facie, should merit consideration. There is at least one basis for giving such an article consideration or attention: to familiarize oneself with how the philosophy can come under attack, from whatever causes or reasons. It can serve as an exercise in philosophical detection, i.e., of pinpointing where criticisms can go wrong, so that such can be rooted out and confronted. "Newbies" looking to read up on prominent defenses or expansions of Rand's ideas should also be familiar with prominent criticisms.
There was the impression for a number of years that rather than discussing and confronting such criticisms, the folks aligned with ARI chose instead to ignore them. Not merely to avoid sanctioning them by showcasing them, but to ignore them. That impressions was changed in good part by works like PARC, which, rather than ignoring the Brandens, confronted them head-on. It seems all that much more effective to do it that way, than to ignore. And it's only going to get tougher in the coming years, as Rand's name gets more prominent and invites more and more attacks/criticisms, whether personal or philosophical. Aspiring-Objectivist newbies need plenty of fortification to stave off whatever challenges may be coming down the pipe.
No Jeff ...
I contemplated using the apostrophe as per a newbie singular, but reflected that this is a guide for newbies plural.
I believe the other objections registered here are covered by the author's qualifier, though I can see why he was worried about getting embroiled in controversy.
Linz
Advice to "newbies"
"Many people come to SOLOPassion describing themselves as "newbies" and are filled with a lot of super questions."
I'd advise "newbies" to read, read, and re-read Ayn Rand's writings, both fiction and non-fiction. She has super answers. Many of the books on this list are too advanced for a beginner.
Category Schmategory
I agree, Jeff, but those are pretty benign compared to screwing up badly the stated intention of excluding works that are "not 'serious', e.g., they present gross misrepresentations of Rand's ideas."
The most alarming is the inclusion of the silly "Benefits and Hazards" piece by Branden. Certainly it "grossly misrepresents" Objectivism in ways that need little explanation. I'm surprised to see Lindsay Perigo say that he "has no problem with" the list, when if I'm not mistaken he's stated as much on SOLO about "Benefits and Hazards".
In a way, that article succinctly encapsulates and summarizes many of the distortions and misrepresentations about Objectivism and Ayn Rand that float around among the confused even still today. It's a summary of all the ways a person may not understand Ayn Rand's ideas due to the influence of the bad philosophical mix we're all brought up with, and simply confirms and entrenches those misunderstandings for anyone new to Objectivism. I think Branden accomplished what he set out to do with that article in this way. Either that or he's not really all that bright after all and actually believed what he was writing made sense.
MISSING
The best thing to add to this list is the Sparrowhawk series by Edward Cline.
Oh, By the Way
It should be Newbie's NOT Newbies'.
JR
Category Mistake?
The novels of Erika Holzer, Kay Nolte Smith, and Robert A. Heinlein are "important Rand scholarship"? Of interest to admirers of Rand, yes. But "important Rand scholarship"?
JR
Eyebrows and Danders
Obviously any list of secondary literature on Objectivism which includes works by writers with a sound understanding of Objectivism and respect for Ayn Rand, AND works by writers with little or no understanding of either philosophy in general or Objectivism in particular and hostility to Ayn Rand, will raise eyebrows from some quarters--and properly so.
The inclusion of some authors who have offered the most ignorant criticisms of Objectivism and/or the most contradictory and untenable "revisions" to the philosophy over the years is especially worthless for the newbie. Such works, no matter the claims of some on SOLO, are not "important" in any way. Neither should they be considered Rand "scholarship" as far as I can tell.
I see little point in this bibliography, which contains works which in some cases are specifically designed to confuse the "newbie" to Objectivism and sabotage their ability long-term to grasp not only Objectivism, but wider issues concerning what philosophy is and what its role in a person's life is.
The list only makes me sad that so much has been written about Ayn Rand and Objectivism out of ignorance, hostility, dishonesty, or a combination of all three--almost enough to equal that which actually has value to someone wishing to learn the philosophy.
Excellent list
I agree Linz. Whilst the various "factions" of Objectivism may disagree about the quality of some of the work, it is a valuable list of works. I will comment on authors separately. There are some whom I admire greatly and others that I do not.