I was browsing Google News today, and came across this editorial. The best part:

I feel obligated to point out the fundamental flaws in the Objectivist Club as a forum for discussing ideas…. The Objectivist Club’s constitution states that its mission is “to study, discuss and debate, using reason, the content, validity and application of Objectivism, and to disseminate Objectivist ideas.” In contrast, in its constitution, the Philosophy club states that its aim is to host, “events [that] will allow for thought-provoking, respectful discussion with peers and professors in the absence of classrooms, grades, competition, or judgment, for in such a context, people may best develop and clarify their thoughts to themselves and others… Does [the Objectivist Club] sound like a place where a free exchange of ideas occurs without competition or judgment?”

I don’t know about Drexel, but I went to a number of philosophy and agnostic club meetings at A&M. The usual format is usually as such: a speaker, usually a professor, wows the audience with an unintelligible attempt to prove that X is a “social construct” using enough logical calculus to make even a math major cry for mercy. Afterwards, the members (who have no clue what was just said, but feel enlightened already) gather into a circle and utter pronouncements such as “I get physically sick at seeing the suffering of others” (direct quote) at which point all the other members wow and feel even more enlightened. If there are enough upperclassmen who haven’t dropped out yet, the members usually proceed to one of the local bars and proceed to reach new levels of self-actualization with the aid of large volumes of booze, but without the aid of “judgement” or “reason.”