Comments on: Wide as an Ocean, Shallow as a Puddle: Epistemological Primitivism IV

By: Epistemological Primitivism V: Cargo Cult — The New Clarion

Epistemological Primitivism V: Cargo Cult — The New Clarion — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:49:20 +0000

[...] only difference, is that the ignorance of the South Sea natives was not deliberate. var [...]

By: Paul Marshall

Paul Marshall — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 06:49:43 +0000

As a long-time lurker it’s a bit surreal to see my name in a New Clarion post–but good surreal. Thanks for your kind words.

By: Defending Rand from Dalrymple’s Attack

Defending Rand from Dalrymple’s Attack — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 01:21:07 +0000

[...] May in The New Clarion: “Wide as an Ocean, Shallow as a Puddle: Epistemological Primitivism IV” Posted in [...]

By: Gideon Reich

Gideon Reich — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 17:17:25 +0000

The thing that I find interesting about the Daniel's piece and its response is that in many ways it illustrates that Objectivism is beginning to come into its own as a movement. Think about it: I can now think of several major essays written by the major recognized ideological perspectives, that are trying to criticize or minimize the impact of Ayn Rand's ideas. A few years ago, at the time of the Ayn Rand centennial, there was the Algis Valiunas piece in Commentary, more recently, with the publication of the Burns and Hathaway reviews, Jonathan Chait had a long essay in the The New Republic, then there was the Anthony Daniels piece in the New Criterion, so eloquently demolished by Paul Marshal followed by Roger Kimball's comments in Pajamas Media and finally Reason editor Cathy Young's op-ed. Within a relatively short period of time, conservatives, liberals and libertarians all have seen fit to attack the new rising star. At the risk of psychologizing, I think they are getting worried. And I think they have reason to be worried.

By: clay barham

clay barham — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 17:03:03 +0000

Ayn Rand has little affinity for the Soviets or the Republicans, allied more with the libertarian 19th century Democrats who followed Jefferson and Madison. (See The Changing Face of Democrats on Amazon and claysamerica.com). The modern Democrats follow Robespierre and Marx, while Republicans hang with Hamilton, Clay, Lincoln and TR, all interventionists. She identifies with the result and not the cause, when we consider the Pilgrims, their Geneva Bibles and the foundation of American law.

By: Myrhaf

Myrhaf — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 15:59:35 +0000

Thanks for pointing out Paul Marshall’s essay. Somehow I had missed it. It’s good that someone took the time to write a thoughtful response that gets to the essence of Daniels’s errors.