Changes

Furthermore, an institution devoted to the pure sciences seemed to Stadler the most noble possible use of public money. But what drove Stadler even more than this consideration was his confirmed opinion that the "pure" sciences were "pure" precisely because they had no immediate commercial application. Engineering was "dirty" and mundane. More than that, engineers had to deal with people—and Robert Stadler hated people. To him, only himself, or members of his staff, were "real."

Furthermore, an institution devoted to the pure sciences seemed to Stadler the most noble possible use of public money. But what drove Stadler even more than this consideration was his confirmed opinion that the "pure" sciences were "pure" precisely because they had no immediate commercial application. Engineering was "dirty" and mundane. More than that, engineers had to deal with people—and Robert Stadler hated people. To him, only himself, or members of his staff, were "real."

John Galt was appalled. When Stadler endorsed the establishment of the future Institute, John Galt criticized him severely, and indicated that their friendship was at an end. Galt's criticism was twofold: that the science/engineering dichotomy was false anyway, and that scientific research was not a proper function of government. Stadler was devastated at losing John Galt's friendship, but still felt that he was right. (If Francisco d'Anconia or Ragnar Danneskjold said anything to him on the subject, they never discussed that with any other character, including Hugh Akston.)

John Galt was appalled. When Stadler endorsed the establishment of the future Institute, John Galt criticized him severely, and indicated that their friendship was at an end. Galt's criticism was twofold: that the science/engineering dichotomy was false anyway, and that scientific research was not a proper function of government.

Later, Stadler would claim vindication of his stance, after hearing what became of two of his former students. Francisco d'Anconia became, to all appearances, a [[playboy]] and a subject of [[gossip]], chiefly about how many women he was intimate with. (He would have been surprised to learn that Francisco never was actually intimate with more than one woman in his entire life.) Ragnar Danneskjold became the notorious [[pirate]] who seized government relief cargoes bound for foreign countries. John Galt vanished completely, and now was the subject of a repeated question by laypeople: "Who is John Galt?"

Stadler was devastated at losing John Galt's friendship. (If Francisco d'Anconia or Ragnar Danneskjold said anything to him on the subject, they never discussed that with any other character, including Hugh Akston.) But then again, Stadler never understood any of his three students half as well as he thought he did. In them, he saw himself at their ages. But those three did not share his rage and hostility against the world, nor his monumental contempt for humanity. He thought he had found three acolytes for what he really sought to establish: a cult of hero worship with himself as the focus. Those three were never interested in that, nor did they even conceive of such a thing, much less that this was Robert Stadler's driving motive.

Robert Stadler never admitted to anyone that he could tell them who John Galt really was. If he connected the first instances of the repetition of that question with the accelerated breakdown of the American economy, he never told anyone. He once told [[Dagny Taggart]], when she came to see him, that he suspected that his third student (whose name he did not mention) might have become a "second assistant bookkeeper."

 

 

Robert Stadler never admitted to anyone that he could tell them who John Galt really was. If he connected the first instances of the repetition of that question with the accelerated breakdown of the American economy, he never told anyone. He once told [[Dagny Taggart]], when she came to see him, that he suspected that his third student (whose name he did not mention) might have become a "second assistant bookkeeper." And on another occasion, he said that he once knew a John Galt, but that person was dead. Never once did he admit to Dagny Taggart or anyone else that those two were one and the same.

But of course, Robert Stadler knew better. But he would not have hard evidence that John Galt was anything more than a student who had called him a traitor to his own intellectual capacity until many years later.

But of course, Robert Stadler knew better. But he would not have hard evidence that John Galt was anything more than a student who had called him a traitor to his own intellectual capacity until many years later.