Talk:Leonard Peikoff

"As of 2004, Peikoff is writing a book called The DIM Hypothesis, where he explains the three alternatives of decision-making and solves the problem of induction."

Does he really solve "the problem of induction" once and for all or does he come up with some interpretable suggestions? Because if he really does solve it he would be a giant among thinkers, and if it's not quite so, the article will need an edit.

I have restored Peikoff to the "Atheist thinkers and activists" category; it is not quite the same as the "Atheist philosphers" category: not all atheist philosophers are also activists.

Oh fine. The category system is one of the places here on WP that really need some top-down direction, but...meh. --zenohockey 23:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Is the lack of biographical detail intentional?

There is no mention of his first wife, Cynthia, of their daughter - Kira - or Amy, his second wife.

Details of this type are not uncommon on other pages and they do humanise the subjects.

The relevant dates of these relationships would add perspective to the progress of his life.

[edit] ==

Actually, before Cynthia, he was briefly married to Susan Ludel.

Before deleting a paragraph, please discuss the contents. I added the paragraph on Peikoff's views on foreign policy, and I would like to see how these views do not deserve attention. --User:mrjahan

They deserve attention—neutral attention, and unpolluted by name-calling. --zenohockey 17:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about bothering you guys while you were at your Bible Study. I did not realize that the faithful are incapable of finding faults with their Saints, living or dead, and they will wage a crushing Jihad against the infidel if they sully the image of the Saints. I leave you to worship St. Leonard. On a different note, try growing up. Maturity is supposedly a required condition of rational thinking, which I was under the impression is an important ingredient for writing in an encyclopedia. mrjahan 8:12, Nov. 21, 2006 (UTC)

I actually disagree with Peikoff's foreign policy views, but my opinion, or yours, is of no import here. What is important is that you said that Peikoff's opinions "strech[] credulity"; you called the Iraq war "disastrous"; and you said "Politically, he comes across as inexperienced, naive, and at times, ignorant." Each of these statements violates the WP:NPOV policy, the tag for which you put at the top of the article.

I will soon re-place the substantive, verifiable parts of your edits, along with my observation, subsequently removed by LaszloWalrus, that prominant Objectivists have come down on both sides of the R/D divide. You may, of course, do it first if you like, if you hew to the guidelines you have so far taken lightly. --zenohockey 04:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

In fairness, it's difficult to write about this sick fuck objectively. He openly advocates mass slaughter of Iranian and Arab civilians, claiming that their killers would bear no blame for their deaths, and justifying his despicable claims with a few libertarian buzzwords and a bizarre farrago of generalized nonsensical smears against their cultures and societies. I'm against European-style "hate speech" laws on principle, but this little Goebbels is a test to that principle if there ever was one. Also, the phrase "prominent Objectivists" is an oxymoron. And you spelled it wrong. <eleland/talkedits> 04:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

This is a BLP, and no matter what your opinions are of this man, you may not describe him in the derogatory manner you have done above. You should seriously consider striking out the comments above, or risk being blocked. NoCal100 (talk) 04:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Peikoff wrote: "Given the choice between a rotten, enfeebled, despairing killer [Democrats], and a rotten, ever stronger, and ambitious killer[Republicans], it is immoral to vote for the latter, and equally immoral to refrain from voting at all because “both are bad.” "

I don't know why the moral aspect of this claim keeps getting removed from the discussion of 2006 politics. This claim is unlike what Objectivists have had to say in earlier elections, but this article seems to keep losing that part.

I've re-added the quote. --zenohockey 17:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Quoting Wikipedia text (25 January 2008): “Peikoff revised his 1976 lecture course on Objectivism into book form, producing Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand ...” Comment: Consider adding that the organization of the material differs from lectures and is original with Peikoff.

Quoting Wikipedia text: “Rand had said that Peikoff knew and understood her philosophy better than anyone else.” Comment: This may be true, but it requires a citation.

Quoting Wikipedia text: “... Peikoff founded the Ayn Rand Institute.” Comment: Many people think that the “Ayn Rand Institute” belies its name, quite apart from the various splits. See the “ARI Watch” website, especially the Torture series of articles, e.g.  State Torture: A Question for Leonard Peikoff.

"Peikoff endorsed John Kerry (while nevertheless thinking of Kerry as a 'disgustingly bad' candidate) against George W. Bush (whom he called 'apocalyptically bad'), on the basis of Bush's religiosity and his refusal to crush Islamic regimes, especially Iran."

Does that mean BUSH's refusal to crush Islamic regimes, or Peikoff's? Because Peikoff is strongly against Iran here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=JoAWCwm-UXw

Brandywinenine (talk) 23:49, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Leonard Peikoff has claimed to be Ayn Rand's "intellectual heir," and such claims can be documented from published sources. What is lacking is a published source showing that Ayn Rand conferred that title on him. I've modified the language about Peikoff's intellectual heirship accordingly. -RLCampbell (talk) 19:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

At present, the article says nothing about Leonard Peikoff's publications prior to Ayn Rand's death. Since his article on "The Analytic-Synthetic Dichotomy" has been bundled with Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology for many years, its omission is peculiar. Peikoff's role as a lecturer during the NBI days is mentioned, but not the lecture courses that he taught. None of his academic positions are mentioned either. I will try to work in some of these details.-RLCampbell (talk) 02:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC)