Surely that is the question that we must ask ourselves? At what point, does speaking to a hostile group become sanction?

Mike,

"Devloping a good character does far more to squash the cult smear than lecturing about it."

Brav-f'ing-o, young sir! I salute you.

Jeff

Your skepticism of Skeptic honesty is pretty much the only sane way one could be about a bunch of people with a vested interest in permanent doubt, with pragmatism their only recourse. Throw geriatric cantankerousness into that party and... whoa! Enough to cure anyone suffering from Urge-to-Outreach symptoms.

There's a comic screenplay in that scenario.

With the exception of the LaRouchies, the only people I've ever seen disruptive at Objectivist events were much older or Muslim.

Anecdote:
In 2002 Binswanger was giving a lecture at UPenn. A man who looked in his 60s stood up and started shouting that Objectivism was a cult. Binswanger said "You're in a cult! Get him the hell out of here!" Security escorted him out onto the street. I could see him through the window. His face was still deep red and he was yelling at no one in particular. His comments had nothing to do with the topic (the topic was how professors had reacted to 9/11), but were just a rant against Ayn Rand and Objectivism in genearl. I still rank it as one of the strangest things I've ever seen.

- Mike

Devloping a good character does far more to squash the cult smear than lecturing about it. It puts Ed (unnecessarily) on the defensive.

- Mike

She sat in the front row and said with a chuckle that jiggled her wrinkled, flabby face:

"I read Atlas Shrugged in 1957 and I have been anti Ayn Rand ever since!"

My friend Bob, who lives not far from the place where I gave that particular talk, came to watch the circus from the back of the room.  He grew so disgusted with the irrational hostility of the audience during the question and answer period that he left!  As he explained later, "I don't know why you waste your time with those lefty loser yo-yos!  I decided I could spend my time in a better way at the local barbecue joint!"  So he went there to savor some pork while I dealt with the pork barrel dummies.

Needless to say, I have not returned to visit that particular group.  I did run into their leader at an atheist event about a year later.  Our brief exchange went along these lines:

ME: "Oh, I remember you now!  You're the one who told me during the Q&A for my talk that my philosophy lacked compassion, such as assuring that everyone receives a living wage!"

HER: "Yes.  Well, I guess we have nothing else to discuss."

At another group, one fellow in the back argued that an Objectivist society would have no teachers because teachers make less money than other occupations.  Another said it would amount to a big game of Monopoly.  These assertions came within a group of Humanists claiming to live by reason!  What the f***?

I have quit my misguided outreach efforts to these people.  Ed has more patience than I do.

Also, might the older crowd be more Marxist and socialist than the younger crowd? That would make them more hostile to AR.

-- Diana Hsieh
diana@dianahsieh.com
NoodleFood

Luke,

Very illuminating. It should tell you about the nature of someone who becomes a skeptic and why. In the young, it's a desire to understand, to think independently, to avoid dogma; an honest recognition that they have much to learn. In the older, it's a desire to simply destroy any argument whatever, equally dogmatic as their alleged opponents. It is cynicism with a philosophical bent.

And, regrettably, some people become old very young.

Jeff

I have spoken about Objectivism to a number of freethought groups over the years with mixed responses.  I have noticed that the older the audience, the more entrenched in collectivized thinking they act.  The warmest reception came from the youngest audience while the ones closest to tarring and feathering me belonged to the senior citizen crowd.  I found their refusal to check their own premises disturbing and tedious and their hatred of freedom infuriating.

I wish Ed the best, but I remain skeptical of the honesty of self-proclaimed skeptics.

Robert, I had to look to the online dictionary for the key term pugilism.  No, I do not enjoy that verbal sport of boxing.  Hence, I have not addressed a freethought group about Objectivism in quite a long while.

It is worth contesting the absurdity if the audience is receptive & respectful. If that isn't the case, and pugilism (verbal or otherwise) doesn't excite you, then you're wasting your time.

Great. Then you just leave the criticisms standing and they become the conventional wisdom. The uncontested absurdity becomes the accepted viewpoint.

He will also address misconceptions about the Objectivist philosophy, including the concern of some that Objectivism is a cult.

Intellectuals shouldn't dignify this kind of "criticism" with any kind of response.

- Mike