About Central Oklahoma Objectivism Group

I. The Purpose and Value of the Group

My purpose in forming and running Central Oklahoma Objectivism Group (COOG) is to help spread Objectivist ideas into the culture. This group helps me do this on a local scale, primarily through helping to educate others who are interested about Objectivism. (This, in turn, helps me increase my own understanding of Objectivism and improve my skills in communicating it.)

Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism can be summarized as follows: metaphysics: objective reality; epistemology: reason; ethics: self-interest; politics: laissez-faire capitalism; esthetics: romantic realism.

Objectivism's view of philosophy holds that philosophy is needed for only one fundamental purpose: living on earth. Thus, for those who are interested in Objectivism, the main value that this group has to offer is that it will help increase your understanding Objectivism primarily for the purpose of guiding your own life. Increasing your understanding of Objectivism will also help you communicate it better to others.

A secondary benefit to members is the opportunity to meet other, like-minded individuals with whom you can plan other activities.

I, as organizer of this group, support (but am not affiliated with) the Ayn Rand Institute. Some links to some Objectivism-related organizations I support can be found here. Further, some items of current interest to students of Objectivism can be found here.

---

II. Conditions of Membership

As anyone who is well acquainted with Objectivism knows, it is a very big philosophy, and no one today can be expected to rationally agree with the whole of it after just a short period of reading or study. Accordingly, full agreement with Objectivism is not required for membership. Each member should judge for himself, rationally and honestly, whether or not he agrees with any particular Objectivist idea. COOG welcomes anyone as a member who has rational, honest interest in Objectivism, who rationally recognizes some value in Objectivism as a guide to living. However, the following are conditions of membership and are geared toward maintaining my purpose in running this group. These are based on my studies of Objectivism and my experience in participating in forums.

a. Accuracy of Representation

As Leonard Peikoff writes in the preface of Objectivism: the Philosophy of Ayn Rand (OPAR), "Objectivism" is the name Ayn Rand gave to the philosophy presented in her works and the works she endorsed as accurately presenting her ideas. Accordingly, Objectivism is a "closed system," as indeed is any philosophy after its author's death. Thus, whether or not you agree with Objectivism, you will be expected to represent it and its various ideas accurately, to the best of your ability. A corollary of this is that you will be expected to represent yourself accurately: if you agree with some principles of Objectivism but not others, an accurate designation for oneself is "student of Objectivism" rather than "Objectivist." Since Ayn Rand (unlike some philosophers) presents her philosophy in very clear, simple terms, accurately representing it and oneself is usually not very difficult. The broader principle here--which you should observe in practice consistently--is that intellectual responsibility and honesty requires that one do one's best to represent any idea, theory or philosophy accurately, whether or not one agrees with it.

b. Rationality

Rationality, according to Objectivism, is the primary action that is good for one's life, and as such, the primary moral virtue. While membership in COOG does not require that a member be rational in every single area of his life (though this is certainly good for the member), a member is expected to conduct himself rationally as a member of COOG (i.e. at COOG meetings). What this requires, fundamentally, is using your mind, honestly, to the best of your ability, to guide your actions. Rationality, intellectually, requires that one recognize only reason (grounded in the evidence of the senses) as the means of determining whether any idea is true or not. This means recognizing that the means is not blind emotion, faith, ESP, memories of one's past lives, etc. In terms of making claims, rationality fundamentally requires that they are based on evidence, and not just asserted arbitrarily.

c. Knowledge of Logic

Ayn Rand once said that "'[c]ommon sense' is a simple and non-self-conscious use of logic." (See "Common Sense" in the Ayn Rand Lexicon.) As such, common sense is okay for making simple, concrete-bound connections, but is inadequate for dealing with theoretical issues, especially those as abstract as the questions of philosophy. To deal with the abstract ideas of philosophy with consistent rationality, one should know (or make an effort to learn) the basics of logic (i.e., classical, Aristotelian logic) to self-consciously guide one's mind. One need not be an expert in logic, but one should know such basics as what, in principle, constitutes a valid induction or deduction. If any member has any questions about logic, he can ask me.

A crucial application of this is recognizing the need to justify testimonial claims of knowledge or evidence. And while establishing good credentials of the author of the testimony is relevant, it usually is not sufficient to justify the testimony as reliable.

d. Civility toward Other Members

One should always be polite to other members. This is possible even while making a negative evaluation of some other member's idea or action. Logically irrelevant personal attacks have no place in rational discussion or debate.

Here is another area where the knowledge of logic is important. In any discussion or debate with a member, you should strive to represent the member's position or argument accurately, whether or not you agree with it. Failure to represent positions you oppose accurately will usually be a commission of what is called the "fallacy of constructing a straw man." Further, if you disagree with an opponent's argument, it is essential that you work to identify the root logical error(s) in (or behind) the argument, rather than just assert that "it's wrong." Similarly, if your opponent responds to one of your arguments by identifying what he thinks its root logical error(s) is, it is not acceptable to just reiterate your argument as though nothing had been said to criticize it. If you think the criticism is wrong, you need to identify the root logical error(s) that make it wrong.

e. Never Using COOG to Promote Ideas Opposed to Objectivism

COOG is not to be used as a vehicle for promoting any idea, ideology or philosophy opposed to Objectivism.

Members may rationally and honestly bring up ideas opposed to Objectivism regularly, as objections, to see whether Objectivism could rationally and effectively answer them. Indeed, if one is seeking to independently understand Objectivism, and especially if one is new to it, raising such objections often will often be very necessary. Such objections, as part of a rational, honest effort to judge the truth of Objectivist ideas, are always welcomed at COOG meetings. (A member is asked only not to digress too often from the topic(s) of the meeting.)

However, there is a difference between that and using COOG as a vehicle for the promotion of your particular idea, ideology or philosophy that is opposed to Objectivism. Examples of activities that clearly indicate this are: persisting in discussing your particular position that is opposed to Objectivism, when it is not logically relevant to the subject and hand; and passing out literature or other sorts of media to other members to promote your position. Any promoting of positions opposed to Objectivism will have to be done on a member's own time, through his own means.

Since I, as organizer of COOG, am interested in maintaining its integrity (i.e. making sure the group does not veer from its purpose), please always consult me before distributing any literature (or media of other sorts) to members at COOG meetings.

In connection with this, two ideologies, in particular, need to be mentioned: conservatism and libertarianism. Superficially (especially to someone just discovering Objectivism), these ideologies may seem to be similar to or compatible with Objectivism (since both claim to advocate liberty). However, Objectivism regards the claim of both of these to be fundamentally wrong (and indeed worse than the claims of the avowed enemies of liberty). Conservatism bases its alleged advocacy of liberty on traditionalism and/or religious faith, rather than reason. Often, part of such an alleged basis is a religious ethics of self-sacrifice. (This, in Objectivist terms, is an "intrinsicist" approach to claiming to advocate liberty, a commission of one of two fundamental epistemological errors). Libertarianism claims that genuinely advocating liberty requires no necessary basis in any particular metaphysics, epistemology and ethics, that such advocacy is compatible with any basis (or no basis). (This, in Objectivist terms is a "subjectivist" approach to claiming to advocate liberty, a commission of the second of two fundamental epistemological errors.) I say that both ideologies "claim to" advocate liberty because, from an Objectivist perspective, one cannot genuinely advocate liberty (or any other value) without the proper, objective grounding. (Indeed, without the right grounding, one works to undercut the case for the value.)

For more detailed discussions of Objectivism's opposition to these two ideologies, I will refer the reader to two articles: (1) Ayn Rand, "Conservatism: an Obituary" in Ayn Rand, et. al., Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal; and (2) Peter Schwartz, "Libertarianism: the Perversion of Liberty" in Ayn Rand, et al., The Voice of Reason: Essays in Objectivist Thought.

Of course, ideologies like modern, welfare-state liberalism, Marxism, and Nazism are also opposed to Objectivism. However, no honest person with any significant knowledge of those ideologies and Objectivism would mistake any of them as being essentially the same as or compatible with Objectivism. Such an error, however, can be made by honest newcomers in regard to conservatism and especially libertarianism, and contribute to misrepresenting Objectivism, and/or using COOG to inadvertently and inappropriately promote such ideologies as the same as or allied with Objectivism.

The above does not preclude a professed conservative or libertarian from being a member of COOG. What is necessary is that such a person recognizes that conservatism and libertarianism are incompatible with Objectivism, and that (like other members) he respects my purpose in running COOG and recognizes the need to adhere, as a member, to the provisions on this "About" page.

Finally, given that the state of the culture is such that there is no major candidate today that can be definitively supported on Objectivist grounds, COOG is not be used for the promotion of any political campaign, whether or not you think the campaign is in line with Objectivism. (I can almost guarantee it isn't.) Any promoting or supporting of political campaigns will have to be done on a member's own time, through his own means.

---

III. Modifying this "About" Page

Whenever I make a significant modification to this "About Us" page, I will e-mail all active members about it.

Suggestions about modifying this page can be sent directly to me, and if you prefer, to the other active members. Naturally, the more considerate a suggestion is of the purposes of this group, and the better it is reasoned, the more I will be likely to accept it.

---

IV. Disclaimers

1. I'm not at the point where I can be an effective spokesperson for Objectivism, and it is unlikely that any other member will be. Thus, leaving aside some unusual membership in the group, no member should ever be taken as a spokesperson for Objectivism. We, as I indicated, should all strive to represent Objectivism accurately. But you should determine for yourself whether any claim made by any member about Objectivism is consistent with the works on Objectivism.

2. COOG is a local but private group. As such, it is not affiliated with and does not speak for any other group or organization, whether Objectivist or otherwise. I, as organizer of COOG, support the organizations and the individual featured on the COOG links page. However, I am not in any way affiliated with, nor have I received any endorsement from, nor do I speak for, any of them.

3. No organizer of this group (which right now includes only me) has any control over the advertisements, or full control over the links, on the Meetup pages of the group. Thus, COOG does not in any way endorse the advertisements or links on these pages.

4. No member of this group (including any organizer) has the ability to edit any other member's profile. In particular, no member can alter any other member's memberships in other Meetup groups or change the other member's option of whether to display his other Meetup memberships. COOG therefore in no way endorses any of the statements made in any member's profile, nor any other Meetup or other groups to which any member belongs. Each member is solely responsible for all statements made in his
profile.

5. Whenever a member e-mails one or more other members, there is no guarantee as to whether the statements in the e-mail message are (a) true, or (b) consistent with Objectivism. The reader of the e-mail message should determine for himself what the case is with regard to both of these issues.