No, she is an opportunistic sociopath.
but egoist_capitalist seems to like her...
he might show up, who knows.
----------------
It's libertarian, capitalist propaganda for impressionable teenagers bar-none. All her arguments are straw men
"LOOK! This is the way the world is! Lazy, fat people in charge! I'm the capitalist messiah of talent and reason to save us all from this inefficiency and socialism!"
Her scholarship, when it does happen, is simplistic and selective -- she doesn't address hegel, marx, or really any philosphers passed who? Aristotle... Objectivity is a joke.
I could explain more but it's like everything else here.. why do I have to defend something that doesn't need defense, such as atheism, evolution, human existence, history, science...
I always wonder how much people in her position, getting wealthy pandering to the wealthy, mythologizing Reasons behind their corporate domination, actually come to believe their own bullshit.
2006-08-07 18:52:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by -.- 6
·
1⤊
3⤋
I'm a fan and my youthful enthusiasm for her has waned somewhat. However I don't totally reject her views, it's just that I have a little more perspective as I'm older now. Rand's philosophy is derived from Platonic idealism, so take it for what it's worth. I still enjoy the band Rush which has found inspiration in Ayn Rand.
Her lover Nathanial Branden went on to found the self-esteem movement. I doubt very many people realize the connection between instilling self-esteem in children and Ayn Rand.
2006-08-07 18:55:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by michinoku2001 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ayn Rand substitute right into a utopian. She longed for a financial gadget of, by using and for the interest creators completely divorced of any attachment to the underlying society, which existed only to serve the desires of the heroic interest creators. She substitute into adamantly adversarial to social courses. She was greater a stay and enable die sort of gal with a paint-by applying-numbers writing style and nil.33-cost economic theories. Have a passable Monday!
2016-11-04 02:49:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think one of Ayn Rand's small errors, was in using the word selfish as a virtue and she has been accused of this before, even by her fans.
She could of strengthened her work, by substituted the word selfish, with something like rational self interest... Which when you read her work, is actually a better definition of what she meant, in her writing.
Selfishness is not virtuous. Selfishness means pursuing ones own self interests, often at the expense of others. But when one reads her books of fiction, the heroic characters she chooses, are never selfish in this manner. She simply seems to have misappropriated the word selfish... which, for someone who is such a skilled mental gymnast with words as Rand clearly was, is very surprising.
However, I think this is a minor quibble. Her philosophy of Objectivism, which I suspect is yet to be fully realized, is a major, philosophical achievement. I think her time is yet to come... and she will be considered, as one of the greatest thinkers, the World has ever seen.
Her major ideas such as art, capitalism, reality, reason, happiness, government, concept formation, sense perception etc - are spread across many books and lectures. After her death, what was needed, was for someone to come along and grab all the essential key concepts of her philosophy and integrated them all together in one book. That is exactly what has been done, in Leonard Peikoff's excellent book Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand.
Peikoff himself, admits that he has added nothing to the essentials of Rand's philosophy, in this book. He has simply clarified those essentials and brought them together in one place. Indeed, Peikoff has done such a good job, that to fully grasp Rand's philosophy of Objectivism one only need read this book. Of course, if you have already read her books of fiction: We the Living, Anthem, The Fountainhead, atlas Shrugged... Then you will find the book easier to integrate, digest and understand. I would particularly recommend reading The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, in preparation of reading this book, at the very least.
It would be a great shame for individuals to avoid Rand's writing just because of her comments on selfishness. This is after all is only a small corner of her philosophy. This would be like throwing a cake away, with a cherry on top, just because you don't like cherries, you can remove the cherry and still eat the cake.
2006-08-09 20:26:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by atheist_secular_humanist 1
·
6⤊
0⤋
I like Ayn Rand a lot. Her books to me are inspiring. I want to be the best, and expect everyone else to be the best they cam be.
Translating this to policitcal philosophy, it is too simplistic. I would agree it is uncaring.
2006-08-07 21:43:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by salvador m 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I read all her books when I was around 17 and, therefore, brilliant. She impressed me deeply. Then I got older and reconsidered my affection, as you have. Then I got older yet, and actually a bit wiser, and understood better how she hated Communism, and how she wanted to teach folks to stand on their own principles and two feet. She's hardly perfect, but do save her works for a good read further down the road, 15 or 20 years from now maybe?
2006-08-07 18:54:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by dragonwych 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I actually never liked her writing. In addition to being a bit of a selfish psychopath, I thought her to be a bit hysterical. My sister admired her, though.
2006-08-07 19:01:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋