WHEN:
SATURDAY, May 19, 2012 7:00 PM Arrival Time

TOPIC:
Atlas Shrugged 50 Years Later
Talk at FreeMinds 2009 by Edward Hudgins
July 9, 2009 filling in for Stephen Moore

READING:
Article in the Wall Street Journal January 9, 2009
‘Atlas Shrugged’: From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years
By Stephen Moore
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123146363567166677.html

DISCUSSION LEADER:
Jackie Hazelton

ABSTRACT:
Hudgins discusses the parallels between Atlas Shrugged and the world today, including the economic carnage, the moral carnage and the evasion of reality.  He ends on a positive note with Atlas Shrugged and the promise of tomorrow.  Stephen Moore, author of the article in the Wall Street Journal ‘Atlas Shrugged’: From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years, was to give the talk.  Hudgins speaks on the same theme.

BIO:
Edward Hudgins formerly director of regulatory studies for the Cato Institute and editor of Regulation magazine, is an expert on the regulation of space, transportation, pharmaceuticals, and labor.  He served as a senior economist for the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress and was both deputy director for economic policy studies and director of the Center for International Economic Growth at the Heritage Foundation.  He has testified on many occasions before Congress.

Ed’s opinion writing has been published in the Wall Street Journal, Houston Chronicle, USA Today, Philadelphia Inquirer, Journal of Commerce, Aviation Week & Space Technology, among other publications.

He is the editor of Freedom to Trade: Refuting the New Protectionism, Space: The Free Market Frontier and two books on postal service privatization.  His latest collection is entitled An Objectivist Secular Reader.

Ed has appeared on NBC’s Dateline NBC, National Public Radio, PBS, Fox News Channel, CNN, MSNBC and Voice of America.  Hudgins has a bachelor’s degree from the University of Maryland, a master’s from American University, and a doctorate from Catholic University in political philosophy.  He taught at universities in the United States and in Germany.  He served as Washington director and then executive director of The Atlas Society before taking up his current position.

WHERE:
Jackie & Lyman Hazelton’s Home
480-516-3281
Use http://www.mapquest.com/ to get directions from your location.

QUESTIONS:
Jackie Hazelton
(c) 480-516-3281
(e) AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net

RSVP:
Reply to this message to AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net or
Call Jackie Hazelton at 480-516-3281

BRING:
Snacks or beverage to share or a monetary donation.

WHEN:
TUESDAY, May 1, 2012 7:00 PM Arrival Time

TOPIC:
The Fountainhead Session 5
We are discussing Ayn Rand’s epic novel The Fountainhead in one session per month in 2012.

DISCUSSION LEADER:
Jackie Hazelton

READINGS:
The Fountainhead, Part 2, Chapters 1-5
Pages 203-255 in the Centennial Edition
Pages 213-266 in the Bobbs-Merrill hardback
Pages 194-243 in the Signet paperback

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: by John Kannarr
The Fountainhead

Part II - Ellsworth M. Toohey

Chapter I [pp. 213-221 Bobbs-Merrill hardback; pp. 194-201 Signet paperback]

1. Does Roark seem to have given up on architecture as he labors by day and relaxes by night? Does his detachment from painful thoughts about building indicate resignation, or simply a refusal to allow suffering to be a major part in his life? [213-215;194-196]

2. Whereas Roark works to exhaustion of necessity, Dominique occasionally pushes herself to exhaustion on her walks, as if the exhaustion were the goal. Does this make any sense? What purpose is there in Rand’s depiction of each of them, in their own way, stretching out on the ground in the woods? [215-216;196-197]

3. Roark endures physical pain as part of his laboring existence, but seeks to ignore mental anguish over his plight. Dominique seeks out uncomfortable experiences. Does she do so to accomplish the same end as Roark? [216-218;197-199]

4. Why does Dominique think Roark’s face an “abstraction of strength made visible”? Why does his unwavering observation of her upset her so? She has singled him out by returning to look at him, so why is she surprised that he knows that? [216-218;197-199]

5. Dominique thinks of “being broken - not by a man she admired - but by a man she loathed.” Have we had any indications at all of any men whom she did admire? What does it mean that she seems to have this intense loathing for Roark and desire that he suffer? [218-221;199-201]

Chapter II [pp. 222-234;pp. 202-214]

6. How do Dominique’s thoughts about her sexual feelings for Roark resemble those of Hank Rearden for Dagny early in Atlas Shrugged? In what respects do Dominique and Rearden act differently upon their feelings? [222-224;202-204]

7. What kind of reaction does she expect from Roark in response to her treating him as if he were indeed merely a workman doing a job for her on the fireplace slab? What kind of a reaction does he give her? Which of them has the better understanding of the other? [223-229;203-208]

8. In spite of Rand’s explanation of Roark’s taking Dominique as “rape by invitation” and the narrative of the novel expressing that both of them understood and fully accepted their actions, are you comfortable with the scene? [229-232;208-211]

9. If this was such an important event in Roark’s life, is it reasonable that he would so cavalierly leave her behind with no real thought of her, that he would be astonished that he had even thought of her as he was on his way? [232-233;211-212]

10. Dominique’s thoughts about her encounter with Roark seem to echo certain thoughts of Hank Rearden toward Dagny early in Atlas Shrugged. How are they similar, and how are they different? [233-234;212-214]

Chapter III [pp. 235-247;pp. 214-225]

11. Both Toohey and Steven Mallory do things that Keating would never do, yet Keating admires one and resents the other. What is the difference between those two men that explains this? [235-238;214-217]

12. What is the nature of the danger in Mallory’s motive to both Keating and Toohey? Why does Keating fear learning what that danger is, while Toohey seems to understand it all too well? [239-240;218-219]

13. Keating finds Toohey to be disconcerting in ways that he never expected. What are they, and why are they so puzzling to Keating? [242-247;219-225]

14. After the initial words at their meeting, Keating seems to think he can let his guard down and just be himself with Toohey. But does he really? How does he continue to revert to his usual style? And why does Toohey approve? [242-247;219-225]

15. Is the statement, “There are things that must be destroyed - or they’ll destroy us.” the key to Toohey’s character? And what is the key to Keating’s? [244-247;222-225]

Chapter IV [pp. 248-257;pp. 226-235]

16. “In Gertrude Stein’s writing every word lives and, apart from concept, it is so exquisitely rhythmical and cadenced that if we read it aloud and receive it as pure sound, it is like a kind of sensuous music. Just as one may stop, for once, in a way, before a canvas of Picasso, and, letting one’s reason sleep for an instant, may exclaim: “It is a fine pattern!” so, listening to Gertrude Steins’ words and forgetting to try to understand what they mean, one submits to their gradual charm.”

- Mabel Dodge Luhan, Speculations, or Post-Impressionists in Prose, 1913, borrowed fromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gertrude_Stein

No question, here. Just added this quote for comparison to Lois Cook! Let one’s reason sleep, indeed! [248-250;226-228]

17. Has Toohey completely destroyed any appreciation of value and self in Catherine? What similarities are there between Toohey and Katie here and James Taggart and Cherryl in Atlas Shrugged? What differences? [250-255;228-232]

18. Is Keating’s character on a par with Cook’s, or Toohey’s? [255-257;232-235]

Chapter V [258-266;pp. 235-243]

19. Why does Dominique change her mind about quitting her job at the Banner? [258-259;235-236]

20. What contradiction does Toohey catch Dominique in? [259-260;236-237]

21. What are the defining characteristics of Toohey’s group of young “builders,” if any? [261-266;237-243]

22. For long periods in the novel, Roark appears only indirectly, with brief mentions of events in his career and references to his character. What other techniques used in this novel (honed here, perhaps?) did Rand use more dramatically in Atlas Shrugged? [235-266;226-243]

WHERE:
Jackie & Lyman Hazelton’s Home
480-516-3281
Use http://www.mapquest.com/ to get directions from your location.

QUESTIONS:
Jackie Hazelton
(c) 480-516-3281
(e) AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net

RSVP:
Reply to this message to AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net or
Call Jackie Hazelton at 480-516-3281

BRING:
Snacks or beverage to share or a monetary donation.

WHEN:
SATURDAY, April 21, 2012 7:00 PM Arrival Time

TOPIC:
The Missing Link in Objectivism
Talk at FreeMinds 2010 by Dr. Nathaniel Branden
Dr. Branden was 80 years old at the time of the talk and this was his last talk.

READING:
The Six Pillars of Self-Esteem by Dr. Nathaniel Branden

DISCUSSION LEADER:
Jackie Hazelton

ABSTRACT:
Objectivism offers a noble vision of the human potential and of the virtues our life on earth requires.  But it does not tell us about how to get there from here.  In the course of Dr. Branden’s psychotherapy practice, he has learned a good deal about the problem from his clients.  He shares  some of these findings with us.

It was not his conscious purpose, but he has become convinced that he book, The Six Pillars of Self-Esteem, provides the missing link.  Dr. Branden does not mean to suggest that Objectivism owes the world a treatise on personal development; rather, his message is that there are psychological issues that need to be addressed and understood if our goal is personal transformation.

BIO:
With a Ph.D. in Psychology and a background in Philosophy, Nathaniel Branden is a pioneer in the field of self-esteem and personal development.

Author, lecturer, and therapist, he is also a corporate consultant who teaches clients how the principles of self-esteem can help them to meet the challenges of modern business.  Many of his books have been translated into 18 foreign languages and worldwide his books have sole four million copies.  His books include The Psychology of Self-Esteem, How to Raise Your Self-Esteem, The Six Pillars of Self-Esteem, The Art of Living Consciously, and his memoir, My Years with Ayn Rand.

WHERE:
Jackie & Lyman Hazelton’s Home
480-516-3281
Use http://www.mapquest.com/ to get directions from your location.

QUESTIONS:
Jackie Hazelton
(c) 480-516-3281
(e) AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net

RSVP:
Reply to this message to AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net or
Call Jackie Hazelton at 480-516-3281

BRING:
Snacks or beverage to share or a monetary donation.

WHEN:
TUESDAY, April 3, 2012 7:00 PM Arrival Time

TOPIC:
The Fountainhead Session 4
We are discussing Ayn Rand’s epic novel The Fountainhead in one session per month in 2012.

DISCUSSION LEADER:
Jim Kirk Chapter 13
Jackie Hazelton Chapters 14-15

READINGS:
The Fountainhead, Part 1, Chapters 10-13
Pages 156-200 in the Centennial Edition
Pages 164-209 in the Bobbs-Merrill hardback
Pages 151-193 in the Signet paperback

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: by John Kannarr
The Fountainhead

Part I - Peter Keating

Chapter XIII [pp. 164-177 Bobbs-Merrill hardback; pp. 151-163 Signet paperback]

1. Is it true that there is nothing Roark could say to people about his buildings? What would you tell him to say? Are the defining qualities of his buildings objective or subjective characteristics? [164-166;151-153]

2. What does it mean to say that Roark is “too arrogant to boast”? [166-167;153]

3. Why does Mrs. Wilmot want Roark for an architect? Are there any arguments that Roark could offer her that would be likely to reach her? [167-168;153-155]

4. Roark offers strong arguments to Mr. Mundy about what he, Mundy, appears to be doing in asking for a particular type of house. Does this seem to be consistent with previous statements about Roark’s inability to understand other people? [169-170;155-157]

5. In spite of their differences, Mundy says that he likes Roark. Does that make any sense? [170;157]

6. When talking to Mr. Janss, Roark seems to be describing his vision of integrity. Is this consistent with earlier statements Roark himself made about “some one principle” to cover his “kind of people” that he couldn’t quite explain? [165-166,170-172;152-153,157-159]

7. We don’t find out (here at least) how the Fargo department store project turns out. Does that detract from the story? [173;159-160]

8. Why does Roark agree to pay for certain changes to the house he has designed, even though it involves rebuilding an already completed wing? What does that tell us about Roark’s concept of a building’s integrity? [176;162-163]

9. How does the Architects’ Guild take revenge upon Roark for his non-conformity to their practices? Is the Sanborn residence uninhabitable, as they claim? [177;163]

Chapter XIV [pp. 178-189; pp. 163-174]

10. Why does Peter no longer show any respect toward Lucius N. Heyer, after being so solicitous towards him earlier in the novel? Why does Peter’s changed attitude puzzle Heyer so? [178-179;163-164]

11. What sort of issues does Peter consider in designing for the Cosmo-Slotnik competition? What does Roark attend to instead? Roark says he doesn’t enter competitions. What does that say about his opinion of those who judge such competitions? Why would he “go blank” with such projects when he designs others with no such hindrance? [180-182;165-167]

12. What is it about the Enright House project that intrigues Roark? When Enright’s gatekeeper turns Roark away, why does Roark give up so easily? What might Roark have done differently? [183-184;169]

13. What does Cameron say that seems to presage the theme of Atlas Shrugged? Why does Rand not develop that theme in this novel? [184-186;170-171]

14. How would you describe Dominique’s treatment of Keating? Do her actions match her words? Why does Keating persist in his pursuit of Dominique? Does he really believe that getting the partnership with Francon depends on marrying her? Why does he experience such conflicting feelings about her, and why can’t he make up his mind? [186-189;171-174]

Chapter XV [pp. 190-209; pp. 174-193]

15. What does Keating fear above all else? [190;174-175]

16. What change occurs that (temporarily at least) causes Keating to lose his fear? [191;175-176]

17. After Heyer’s death, how does Keating manage to change his feelings of guilt into justification and innocence? [194-195;178-179]

18. Why do the words of the award for the Cosmo-Slotnik building eat at Keating? Which features of the building are most celebrated? [195-198;179-182]

19. Keating says that Roark’s problem is that he thinks he is better than everyone else. Is that what or how Roark thinks? Keating says that if Roark will just “drop that fool delusion,” Roark will be successful and will “be one of us!” Does Keating think that argument will persuade Roark? [200;183-184]

20. What does Keating mean when he suggests that Roark should “work like a normal person?” Why is that so important to Keating? [200-201;184-185]

21. Keating asks Roark why he thinks he “can do this to people.” What does Keating mean by that? What sort of metaphysics do Keating’s statements represent when he tells Roark, “You can’t touch me! I have the whole world with me!”? [202;186]

22. Is Weidler dishonest with Roark when he tells him Roark has gotten the commisssion for the bank building, or does he truly not understand what Roark’s reaction would be to the “compromise” being offered? [203-204;187-188]

23. Weidler calls Roark’s decision “fanatical and selfless.” Roark calls it the most selfish act “you’ve ever seen a man do.” How are they using the terms selfish and selfless differently? [206;189-190]

24. Why doesn’t Mike want Red (Roark) to take a building trade job in New York City? How is this attitude similar to that of Keating and the bank chairman and Weidler? Is it different in any way? [207-208;190-191]

25. “But in a trash basket on a corner a crumpled sheet of newspaper was rustling, beating convulsively against the wire mesh.” Besides being a great descriptive image, does this reflect the idea of Roark’s struggle? Why do you think Rand added the passage in which this line occurs? [208;192]

WHERE:
Jackie & Lyman Hazelton’s Home
480-516-3281
Use http://www.mapquest.com/ to get directions from your location.

QUESTIONS:
Jackie Hazelton
(c) 480-516-3281
(e) AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net

RSVP:
Reply to this message to AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net or
Call Jackie Hazelton at 480-516-3281

BRING:
Snacks or beverage to share or a monetary donation.

WHEN:
SATURDAY, March 17, 2012 7:00 PM Arrival Time

TOPIC:
Setting the Stage for the Renaissance
Talk at FreeMinds 2009 by Emily Merrill

DISCUSSION LEADER:
Jackie Hazelton

ABSTRACT:
Merrill presents Ayn Rand’s view of history, what Rand viewed as the best of times and worst of times, i.e. The Middle Ages.  Merrill, whose speciality is the Middle Ages, takes us through the Middle Ages, starting with the fall of the Roman empire, explaining what set the stage for the Renaissance to happen.
Rough Timeline
476  Fall of The Roman Empire
476-1000  The Dark Ages
1000-1300 High Middle Ages
1300-1453 Late Middle Ages
1453-1650 Renaissance
1650-1800 Enlightenment
1700-1900 Industrial Revolution

In The New Left: The Anti-Industrial Revolution, The Left: Old and New, Rand wrote:
“The Renaissance was specifically the rebirth of reason, the liberation of man’s mind, the triumph of rationality over mysticism, a faltering, incomplete, but impassioned triumph that led to the birth of science, of individualism, of freedom.”

“The 19th century, with its political freedoms, science, industry, business, trade, all the necessary conditions of material progress, was the result and the lasting achievement of the intellectual power released by the Renaissance.”

“The Middle Ages were an era of mysticism, ruled by blind faith and blind
obedience to the dogma that faith is superior to reason.”

In Atlas Shrugged, in John Galt’s Speech:
“The supernatural doctrines of the Middle Ages, kept men huddling on the mud floors of their hovels, in terror that the devil might steal the soup they had worked eighteen hours to earn.”

“The infamous times you call the Dark Ages were an era of intelligence on strike when men of ability went underground and lived undiscovered, studying in secret and died, destroying the works of their mind when only a few of the bravest martyrs remained to keep the human race alive.”

Again from Rand:
“There is only one power that determines the course of history, just as it determines the course of every individual life, the power of man’s rational faculty, the power of ideas.

BIO:
Emily Merrill has a BA in history from Smith College and an MA in medieval history from King’s College in London.  At the time of this talk, she was just starting a PhD in history at the University of Pennsylvania.  Merrill is the daughter of Ronald E. Merrill who wrote The Ideas of Ayn Rand so she is familiar with Objectivism.

WHERE:
Jackie & Lyman Hazelton’s Home
480-516-3281
Use http://www.mapquest.com/ to get directions from your location.

QUESTIONS:
Jackie Hazelton
(c) 480-516-3281
(e) AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net

RSVP:
Reply to this message to AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net or
Call Jackie Hazelton at 480-516-3281

BRING:
Snacks or beverage to share or a monetary donation.

WHEN:
TUESDAY, March 6, 2012 7:00 PM Arrival Time

TOPIC:
The Fountainhead Session 3
We will discuss Ayn Rand’s epic novel The Fountainhead in one session per month in 2012.

DISCUSSION LEADER:
Cindy Wooten Chapter 10
Jim Kirk Chapters 11-13

READINGS:
The Fountainhead, Part 1, Chapters 10-13
Pages 108-168 in the Centennial Edition
Pages 116-177 in the Bobbs-Merrill hardback
Pages 106-163 in the Signet paperback

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: by John Kannarr
The Fountainhead

Part I - Peter Keating

Chapter X [pp. 116-131 Bobbs-Merrill hardback; pp. 106-120 Signet paperback]
1. Is Ralston Holcombe substantially different from any other of the mainstream architects depicted in the story? He considers himself a man of ideals. Do we learn what those ideals are? [116-117;106-107]

2. Does Dominique Francon tell people what they want to hear from her? Does she always speak the truth to them? Why do you think she acts as she does toward them? [119-124;109-113]

3. Snyte tells his designers that Austen Heller wants a house that is different. Does he have any idea of what Heller really wants? Does he really care what Heller wants? How do we know? [126-130;115-119]

4. What one thing seems to be sacred to Snyte? Does it make any sense? [105,128;96,117-118]

5. When Rand describes the house in the sketches as having been “designed not by Roark, but by the cliff on which it stood,” does that in any way detract from Roark’s accomplishment, or highlight It? Why, and how? [127-128;117]

6. What words does Austen Heller use in describing what he wants but didn’t get from Snyte’s presented design? How does Roark demonstrate that he understands Heller? [129-130;118-119]

Chapter XI [pp. 132-142; pp. 120-130]

7. Are Snyte’s arguments as to why Roark should return to his employ (and bring back the Heller commission!) convincing? To you, or to Roark? What seems to be Snyte’s motive? Has he learned anything from his experience with Heller? [132-133;121-122]

8. When Keating visits Roark in his new office, why does he “fish” for any hint that Roark might be unsure of himself. Why is Keating appalled when he learns that Roark has no intention of joining the A.G.A.? [134-136;122-124]

9. Why does Cameron tell Roark that if he wins, it will be a great victory for “something . . . that moves the world”? Why does he think that Roark is on his way into “hell”? Does Roark agree with him? [137;125]

10. Is it clear in the story why the workers at the Heller site like Roark? Or why the contractors and superintendents don’t? [138-139;126-127]

11. Is Roark’s explanation to Heller that he thought of the house, not Heller, ring true? To what extent do you think it is true? And to what extent is it not true? [140-141;128-129]

12. How is the Heller house treated in the press and by people in the architectural profession? Is it easier for them to ignore it than to justify their dislike for Roark’s principles and style? Is ignoring it a strategic move? [141-142;129-130]

13. How does their response to it compare to the critics’ response to Rand’s novels? Are there both similarities and differences? [141-142;129-130]

Chapter XII [pp. 143-163; pp. 130-150]

14. What are the common denominators of The Banner’s news campaigns? [143-144;130-132]

15. Does Dominique tell her audiences, both private and public, what they want to hear? Does she follow the typical Banner pattern? [144-147;132-135]

16. What does Dominique think about having a job or other things that would be important to her? Why does she think that way? What does that tell us about her view of the universe? [146-150;134-138]

17. Guy Francon doesn’t appear to understand his own emotions about his memory of Dominque as a young girl jumping the hedge. He is described as wanting to help her without knowing what it is that she needs help against. What could explain that emotion? [150-151;138]

18. How is Dominque’s interaction with Peter different from her father’s interaction with him? [151-154;139-141]

19. How are Peter’s feelings about Dominique different from his feelings about Katie? How do we know? [154-156;141-143]

20. Mrs. Keating masterfully manipulates Peter concerning marrying Katie. How does she do it? Yet Toohey has a simpler approach with his niece, Katie. What is it? Who is the more masterful? [159-163;145-150]

21. Both Peter and Katie are ambivalent about their decision not to follow through on getting a marriage license. How are their reactions to that decision different? How are they similar? [162-163;149-150]

Chapter XIII [pp. 164-177; pp. 151-163]

22. Is it true that there is nothing Roark could say to people about his buildings? What would you tell him to say? Are the defining qualities of his buildings objective or subjective characteristics? [164-166;151-153]

23. What does it mean to say that Roark is “too arrogant to boast”? [166-167;153]

24. Why does Mrs. Wilmot want Roark for an architect? Are there any arguments that Roark could offer her that would be likely to reach her? [167-168;153-155]

25. Roark offers strong arguments to Mr. Mundy about what he, Mundy, appears to be doing in asking for a particular type of house. Does this seem to be consistent with previous statements about Roark’s inability to understand other people? [169-170;155-157]

26. In spite of their differences, Mundy says that he likes Roark. Does that make any sense? [170;157]

27. When talking to Mr. Janss, Roark seems to be describing his vision of integrity. Is this consistent with earlier statements Roark himself made about “some one principle” to cover his “kind of people” that he couldn’t quite explain? [165-166,170-172;152-153,157-159]

28. We don’t find out (here at least) how the Fargo department store project turns out. Does that detract from the story? [173;159-160]

29. Why does Roark agree to pay for certain changes to the house he has designed, even though it involves rebuilding an already completed wing? What does that tell us about Roark’s concept of a building’s integrity? [176;162-163]

30. How does the Architects’ Guild take revenge upon Roark for his non-conformity to their practices? Is the Sanborn residence uninhabitable, as they claim? [177;163]

WHERE:
Jackie & Lyman Hazelton’s Home
480-516-3281
Use http://www.mapquest.com/ to get directions from your location.

QUESTIONS:
Jackie Hazelton
(c) 480-516-3281
(e) AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net

RSVP:
Reply to this message to AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net or
Call Jackie Hazelton at 480-516-3281

BRING:
Snacks or beverage to share or a monetary donation.

WHEN:
SATURDAY, February 18, 2012 7:00 PM Arrival Time

TOPIC:
Promoting Objectivity for Science and Ethics
Video of Milo Schield’s Presentation At FreeMinds 2009

DISCUSSION LEADER:
Jackie Hazelton

Objectivity is at the core of Objectivism.  In the Introduction to The Art of Reasoning, David Kelley writes, “Objectivity in this context means staying in touch with the facts.  It means guiding our thought processes by a concern for the truth.  To some extent, objectivity is a matter of choice: the choice not to indulge in wishful thinking, not to let bias or prejudice distort our judgment.”

Please think about:
1. How do you ensure you are being objective in your life?
2. What hinders your ability to be objective?
3. What can you do to be more objective?
4. How can you encourage other people to be objective?

Milo Schield is a Professor at Augsburg College and Director of the W. M. Keck Statistical Literacy Project.  He founded the MIS program at Augsburg and took it to be the seventh largest major within six years. He served as the chair of the Department of Business Administration for three years.  Earning a physics degree from Iowa State University, an M.S. in physics from the University of Illinois, and a Ph.D. in space physics from Rice University, Schield worked on the Apollo project at North American Aviation and on satellite data analysis at the University of Iowa. After starting several businesses, he worked as a management consultant for a national CPA firm and as an operations analyst at the St. Paul Insurance Companies before coming to Augsburg.  Dr. Schield presents the following slides.

SLIDE HEADINGS:
I. Claim #1: Objectivism has Strengths
II.Claim #2: Objectivism has Weaknesses
III. Claim #3: Truth & Value Issues are Increasingly Divisive
IV. Claim #4: The Objectivist Epistemology Promotes Objectivity
V. Claim #5: Develop Evidence-Based Inductions in Science and Ethics
VI. Marketing Recommendations: Find Something Overlooked to Sell
VII. Forming Sound Generalizations Require Objectivity
VIII. Solution or Resolution of the Problem of Induction
IX. Finding Objectivity is a Personal Journey
X. To Be Successful Evangelists, Objectivists Need To…

WHERE:
Jackie & Lyman Hazelton’s Home
480-516-3281
Use http://www.mapquest.com/ to get directions from your location.

QUESTIONS:
Jackie Hazelton
(c) 480-516-3281
(e) AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net

RSVP:
Reply to this message to AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net or
Call Jackie Hazelton at 480-516-3281

BRING:
Snacks or beverage to share or a monetary donation.

Chapter VII [pp. 86-94; pp. 79-86]

4. What does Keating want, in offering a job to Roark? How does Roark react? And why isn’t Keating pleased by Roark’s acceptance of the offer of a job? [ 86-88;79-81]

5. What is it that Keating understands about Roark, and why does it bother him? [87-89;80-82]

6. What difficult thing must Roark learn in his new job at Francon & Heyer? [89-90;82]

7. What is the difference in Keating’s reactions to Roark’s occasional compliments, no matter how minimal, as compared to those from others? [90-91;83]

8. Keating likes giving orders to Roark that appear to diminish Roark’s status. What does Keating hope for from these occasions? Why? [91;83]

9. Why does Roark accept Mike’s offer to go for a beer, when earlier he rejected Keating’s offer to go for a drink together? [88,93;81,85]

Chapter VIII [pp. 95-103; pp. 86-94]

10. Francon begins his meeting with Roark by complimenting Roark, but then stops. Why does he stop? [95;86-87]

11. When Roark tries to convince Francon to let him design the building the way the client wants, he sabotages his own argument. How? Is Roark right when he says he’s not criticizing Francon’s taste? [96-98;87-89]

12. What was (were) Wynand’s purpose(s) in buying the Austrian village and reconstructing it in the U.S.? [98-99;90]

13. Why does Cameron not want to talk about the rejections Roark has gotten from other architects? Do you think that bothers Roark? [100;91]

14. Do we learn any useful information from Gordon Prescott’s comments to Roark, either about his opinion of Roark’s work or about his own character? [102;92-93]

Chapter IX [pp. 104-115; pp. 94-105]

15. What is unique about John Eric Snyte’s approach to architectural design? What does Roark’s style mean to him? What does this job allow Roark to do? [104-106;94-96]

16. What is different between Austin Heller’s speech and the one by Ellsworth Toohey? The crowd seems to respond well to both Heller’s speech and to Toohey as speaker. How can that be? [109-111;100-102]

17. When Austen Heller says that “unfortunately - we are forced to live together,” how much of that statement do you think represents Rand’s own personal feelings? Is this just a particular characterization, or is it another case of Rand “in a bad mood?” [109-110;100]

18. What is it about Catherine Halsey’s reaction to Toohey’s speech that bothers Keating? Why does he feel fear? Why did she agree to leave without hearing her uncle’s speech, which she wanted to hear? [111-112;102]

19. Why do you suppose Wynand raises Toohey’s salary? Why does Toohey claim it is a bribe? [112;102]

20. What is the focus of Dominique Francon’s column in The Banner about the Ainsworth House? Is the column unfair in its description of the residence? What is Guy Francon’s sole apparent concern about the column? [114-115;104-105]

Chapter X [pp. 116-131; pp. 106-120]

21. Is Ralston Holcombe substantially different from any other of the mainstream architects depicted in the story? He considers himself a man of ideals. Do we learn what those ideals are? [116-117;106-107]

22. Does Dominique Francon tell people what they want to hear from her? Does she always speak the truth to them? Why do you think she acts as she does toward them? [119-124;109-113]

23. Snyte tells his designers that Austen Heller wants a house that is different. Does he have any idea of what Heller really wants? Does he really care what Heller wants? How do we know? [126-130;115-119]

24. What one thing seems to be sacred to Snyte? Does it make any sense? [105,128;96,117-118]

25. When Rand describes the house in the sketches as having been “designed not by Roark, but by the cliff on which it stood,” does that in any way detract from Roark’s accomplishment, or highlight It? Why, and how? [127-128;117]

26. What words does Austen Heller use in describing what he wants but didn’t get from Snyte’s presented design? How does Roark demonstrate that he understands Heller? [129-130;118-119]

WHERE:
Jackie & Lyman Hazelton’s Home
480-516-3281
Use http://www.mapquest.com/ to get directions from your location.

QUESTIONS:
Jackie Hazelton
(c) 480-516-3281
(e) AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net

RSVP:
Reply to this message to AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net or
Call Jackie Hazelton at 480-516-3281

BRING:
Snacks or beverage to share or a monetary donation.

WHEN:
SATURDAY, January 21, 2012 at 7 PM Arrival Time

TOPIC:
Ayn Rand and Humor

SUMMARY:
Some have suggested that Objectivism and Objectivists could do with more humor.  Rand had this to say about humor in the question period following Lecture 11 of Leonard Peikoff’s series “The Philosophy of Objectivism” in 1976.

“Humor is the denial of metaphysical importance to that which you laugh at.  The classic example: you see a very snooty, very well dressed dowager walking down the street, and then she slips on a banana peel…What’s funny about it?  It’s the contrast of the woman’s pretensions to reality.  She acted very grand, but reality undercut it with a plain banana peel.  That’s the denial of the metaphysical validity or importance of the pretensions of that woman.”

“Therefore, humor is a destructive element–which is quite all right, but its value and its morality depend on what it is that you are laughing at.  If what you are laughing at is the evil in the world (provided that you take it seriously, but occasionally you permit yourself to laugh at it), that’s fine. [To] laugh at that which is good, at heroes, at values, and above all at yourself [is] monstrous…The worse evil that you can do, psychologically, is to laugh at yourself.  That means spitting in your own face.”

Jackie will briefly present other views on Rand and humor and lead the discussion.

WHERE:
Jackie & Lyman Hazelton’s Home
480-516-3281
Use http://www.mapquest.com/ to get directions from your location.

QUESTIONS:
Jackie Hazelton
(c) 480-516-3281
(e) AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net

RSVP:
Reply to this message to AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net
BRING:
Snacks or beverage to share or a monetary donation.

WHEN:
TUESDAY, January 3, 2012 7:00 PM Arrival Time

TOPIC:
The Fountainhead Session 1
We will discuss Ayn Rand’s epic novel The Fountainhead in one session per month in 2012.

READINGS:
The Fountainhead, Part 1, Chapters 1-5
Pages 3-68 in the Centennial Edition

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:
Will be provided in the reminder email.
John Kannarr has been at work on them for a few months now.  Thanks in advance to John.

SCHEDULE FOR 2012:
Part 1 Peter Keating
Jan     Chapters 1-5           p. 3-68            66 pages
Feb    Chapters 6-11         p. 69-134        67 pages
Mar    Chapters 12-15       p. 135-200      66 pages

Part 2 Ellsworth M. Toohey
Apr     Chapters 1-6          p. 203-271      69 pages
May    Chapters 7-10        p. 272-328      57 pages
Jun     Chapters 11-15      p. 329-401      73 pages

Part 3 Gail Wynand
Jul      Chapters 1-4        p. 405-466    62 pages
Aug    Chapters 5-9        p. 467-523    57 pages

Part 4 Howard Roark
Sep     Chapters 1-5          p. 527-578    52 pages
Oct     Chapters 6-10        p. 579-628    50 pages
Nov    Chapters 11-15      p. 629-685    56 pages
Dec    Chapters 16-20      p. 686-727    42 pages

WHERE:
Jackie & Lyman Hazelton’s Home
480-516-3281
Use http://www.mapquest.com/ to get directions from your location.

QUESTIONS:
Jackie Hazelton
(c) 480-516-3281
(e) AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net

RSVP:
Reply to this message to AZObjectivists_at_cox_dot_net or
Call Jackie Hazelton at 480-516-3281

BRING:
Snacks or beverage to share or a monetary donation.