I mean, Kira Peikoff didn't turn out that bad, did she?
Peikoff's Philosophy of Education course (1985, according to the Russian Radical bibliography I have right here, and around the time daughter Kira is born). Integrate with observable concrete outcome of such an approach, 27ish years later. (Additional exercise: integrate Understanding Objectivism and The Romantic Manifesto with observable concrete outcome of the UO and TRM approach, namely: this here blog. Integrate; assign A+ grade, a.k.a.: "Perfective." [Further exercise: Integrate the foregoing with The DIM Hypothesis. Earn perfectivist medal badge. Await further instruction, from self, of course.]) Compare/contrast to the Comprachico alternative, which pretty much exemplifies what the educational Left has to offer to the young - and, in turn, the caliber of minds emerging from our current, non-Jefferstotelian public school system.
Check, and mate.
(About the only thing that the Chicago Bozo and I agree on is the need for a philosophically-educated citizenry and - in generic terms - about the current cultural bankruptcy in America. But I "get" Rand and he clearly doesn't, while I also know when to keep my own yap shut about Nietzsche. The Reginster book (Affirming Life) was quite helpful, BTW, for understanding Nietzsche. Why won't the Chicago Bozo even bother to read secondary Rand literature that has a clue about Rand? It's Salon.com and Alternet.org hit pieces, when it could be Russian Radical, OPAR, Virtuous Egoist, and Gotthelf. Vice of one-sidedness, I declare for all with wisdom-loving ears to hear! My knowledge of Nietzsche could totally kick the ass of his "knowledge" of Rand (which amounts to: jack shit), and my study so far has been secondary literature only - Kaufmann and Reginster - in addition to that Fountainhead intro describing the author's sense-of-life similarities to Nietzsche, which ties in with a Kaufmann editorial footnote to a key aphorism, referencing Aristotle and the noble soul as a lover of self, which sheds crucial light on the egoist character of Rand's perfectivist eudaimonism. All of a sudden, Rand looks like an Aristotelianized post-Nietzschean, which sounds way cooler than what Bozo-Boy evidently has to offer, which reeks of a politicized, Us-vs.-Them, pathologically elitist, mean-spirited, and - worst of all - malevolent-universe-ish mindset. Consider: Is it some kind of effing accident that the American cultural dialectic is evidently converging on Ayn Rand, an avowed neo-Aristotelian? No, it is not. Ayn Rand is for children, and adults, all of whom have a vital need to integrate mentally. I mean, duhhhh! Also, my knowledge of the film canon vastly exceeds the Chicago Bozo's, and aesthetics is central to philosophy (just like Nietzsche would have said, Bozo-Boy). So clearly I'm a vastly superior philosopher than he, at this time. Also, Aristotle is the obvious perfectivist trump card in philosophical debate, and I'm definitely more Aristotelian than he! And also much more capitalist in ethos, as anyone with a clue ought to be. I blog about individualism (and in connection with eudaimonism, a moral theory with uniquely deep meaning-of-life resonance); he does not. Strike three, the Bozo's out!)
Two more months of checkmating guaranteed! And then what? ;-)
|A Real-Life Heroine, in Perfectivist Terms|