3 ms·
This seems needlessly divisive and the author's apparent obsession with unhinging Rand makes their point much less clear. It also shows a very shallow and unin
by AndrewUnmuted 9y ago
This seems needlessly divisive and the author's apparent obsession with unhinging Rand makes their point much less clear.
It also shows a very shallow and uninformed understanding of Rand's epistemology. She explored the concept of 'definition' in her epistemology:
> It is important to remember that a definition implies all the characteristics of the units, since it identifies their essential, not their exhaustive, characteristics; since it designates existents, not their isolated aspects; and since it is a condensation of, not a substitute for, a wider knowledge of the existents involved.
The above demonstrates that Rand was in favor of boiling a concept down to its fundamentals. She was against understanding a concept from the perspective of a non-essential trait, such as the kind of trait one with a big stick up their butt would apply to UI design, as the 'Ayn' character in the submitted webpage does.
- s73ver_ 9y agoRand's epistemology is shallow and uninformed itself, so it seems to work out.
- trapperkeeper74 9y agoCall a spade a spade. It’s nutty, libertarian, billionaire propaganda.
- jngreenlee 9y agoYour comment's not backed up by evidence. I can think of more right-wing (Koch, et al) and left-wing billionaires (Soros, et al) with much more influence than...who exactly? Also worth noting that libertarian != objectivist. There's many who espouse only one of those. Religious gun-focused libertarians for example. And nutty propaganda is just mud slinging. How Diogenian of you!