Fore more urdu books visit www.4Urdu.com

More oxford books @ www.OxfordeBook.comFore more urdu books visit www.4Urdu.comBIG SISTER IS WATCHING YOU 187ability, yet acknowledged Rand as his equal, perhaps even his superior:“The combination of intellectual vigor and native logical acuity whichyou possess are truly awesome. It is academic philosophy’s loss that youdid not choose this as the field of your concentration.” 37 He went on toexpress disagreement with Rand’s political and economic position, notingthat her arguments were thought-provoking, if not convincing.Lean also touched on what he called “communication difficulties.”Some of their disagreement, he thought, stemmed “from the factthat certain words and statements have a customary technical meaningamong contemporary professional philosophers that differs fromthe historical use.” Rand and he had different understandings of suchterms as “volition” and “volitionality,” he noted. Lean also suggested thatPeikoff had mischaracterized Wittgenstein and other linguistic philosophersand offered to make a formal presentation to clear up the confusion.Throughout 1961 Lean and Rand corresponded occasionally andhad at least one more meeting of their “small discussion group.” Leandeclined an invitation to attend the opening of an NBI lecture series butdid deliver the promised presentation of Wittgenstein in a session thatproved to be, in Rand’s words, “indecisive.” 38As Lean noticed, it was undoubtedly true that Rand had her ownunique definitions for common philosophical terms. In a designationthat must have shocked Rand, he even joked that he was “not as much ofa Kantian” as Rand. 39 Instead of believing all questions could be resolvedby fact and deductive logic, a position he attributed to Kant, Lean suggestedthat subjective factors might play a role. Hospers had the sameexperience with Rand: “I had to be careful that she not misinterpret oroversimplify what a philosopher was saying; she was so ‘out of the loop’of the give-and-take of contemporary philosophers that she found eventhe basics to be elusive.” 40 If she truly wanted to make an impact on thefield, Hospers told her, she should publish in an academic journal andrespond to her critics; a dialogue would start, and she would be on herway. But the normal push and pull of academic life was alien to Rand.Her friendship with Hospers ended dramatically when he invited herto present at the 1962 American Aesthetics Association meeting, held atHarvard University. Rand must have felt she was finally getting her due,speaking to Ivy League philosophers as an equal. But after her presentationHospers took the floor and made a critical commentary on her