| | Ted,
Thanks for relating your encounter with Mr. B. (in Post #20) Unbelievable! You wrote, Before going to the lecture I went out and bought a blank notebook in case there was any information about books or coming events or especially any interesting formulations I wanted verbatim. Needless to say, by the end of his speech, which was basically a rehash of the axiomatic argument, he had said nothing new and the notebook was as brand new. He started taking questions. A woman asked something to which he responded that even to ask the question showed she had a concrete bound mentality, "just like" he said, "someone who would bring a notebook to a philosophical lecture as if he were recording a list of unintegrated facts." What a jerk! And what he said makes no sense anyway. You take notes, so you can remember key points in order better to integrate what is being said. Binswanger has a degree in philosophy. Did he take no notes during class?
When I attended Branden's and Peikoff's lectures, everyone had notebooks and took voluminous and detailed notes. I filled entire books with lecture notes and so did many of the other people. There was, after all, no written record of the lectures, so the only way you could have the material available for further study was to record what was being said. You don't want to rely on your memory, especially if the material is abstract and philosophical and you're hearing it for the first time. In fact, when I took Peikoff's 10-lecture course on Objectivist epistemology (back in 1965), I probably took 50 pages of notes, and it's a good thing I did, because I wouldn't have remembered half of what I heard if I didn't. There were about 80 people in the room. I was the only one with a notebook on his lap. He was looking straight at me as he spoke. I wanted to wave the book and say that since he hadn't said anything interesting enough to write down verbatim it was still blank. You should have. He deserved it. Of course, he would have had you ejected from the lecture! I can't believe that you were the only one with a notebook. Did all of these other people have perfect recall or were they, like the parishioners at a Sunday congregation, having their hearts warmed by the Objectivist gospel?! How many people take notes in Church? None, because their goal is not critical understanding, but unexamined belief. Afterwards there was an informal session at an on-campus bar. There he pretty much just cracked insults. My brother-in-law asked him a question about how children could be held responsible for choosing to focus or not to focus before they were aware that there was a moral issue involved. Binswanger answered that the fact that my brother-in-law asked the question showed that he would not understand the answer. Amazing! -- especially in response to a very reasonable question! This is reminiscent of a statement by Aquinas, which Objectivists are fond of citing for its absurdity: "To those who understand, no explanation is necessary; to those who don't, none is possible." I chose not to have any contact with "Objectivists" from then until I found Kirez Korgan's Cornell discussion list to which you and I subscribed in the latter half of the nineties. I'm not surprised! With this kind of antagonism to honest inquiry, Binswanger is turning off the really thoughtful people in favor those who accept the philosophy on faith -- and this from a guy who claims to value integration!
- Bill
|
|
