4 ms·

Of course, that's what everybody said about Watchmen. I've never read the book, but I've heard a lot about Ayn Rand's philosophy, none of it good.

by arakyd 18y ago

unalone 18y ago
Well, obviously. People who hate Rand loathe her, and people who love Rand are annoying and misphrase her stuff and say stupid things. At the core of her philosophy is the belief that you should live for yourself, that you should do things not because other people want you to but because you want to, that you should never feel guilty for the things that you can do that other people can't, and that the worst kind of person is the person who leeches off of other people. Is that none good?
- electromagnetic 18y ago
  The philosophy behind the book is good, the politics are stupid from whatever point you look at it. It typifies both stereotypes of capitalism, for the left wing 'capitalism = evil' and for the right wing 'capitalism = glorious'. From a literary stand point, Rands work is the pulp fiction of politics. It plays the traditional stereotypes and helped make the woman famous (specifically in the USA, I believe the word is infamous elsewhere) without contributing anything truly new or unique to the discourse.
  - Devilboy 18y ago
    I always think of Bob's take on it all: http://www.angryflower.com/atlass.gif http://www.angryflower.com/atlass.gif
    - unalone 18y ago
      Ugh, such a gross misinterpretation. One of Rand's big points is that it doesn't matter what you're doing as long as you do it well. One of her physicists becomes a janitor, and when the misguided protagonist expresses horror at that, he says that there's nothing wrong in doing menial tasks. Bob is incredibly stupid because he makes fun of something that Rand expressly says is a good thing. Furthermore, the Rearden parody ("I only know how to pay people to invent alloys") ignores that in the book, Rearden is the scientist who invents the alloy himself. He's portrayed as a very skilled mathematician. So it's a good parody IF you're okay with laughing at something that Rand never actually wrote.
    - jobeirne 18y ago
      This is a perfect testament to the masses of people who think they understand (and thus have license to lay valid criticism on) Rand because they read the first 30 pages of Atlas Shrugged. I'm so sick and tired of hearing some pseudo-sophisto unload on Rand at a cocktail party, their insults and blind lambasting only to abate when confronted with questions about Rand's actual philosophy and works as opposed to her reputation.
  - unalone 18y ago
    But it takes a much more friendly approach to some pretty heavy philosophical things. I and my friends moved from Rand to Emerson. Reading Emerson (or his contemporary Thoreau) at 16 is a pain unless you have motivation to read his thoughts, and Rand provides that motivation.
    - deleted 18y ago
      [deleted]
- vitaminj 18y ago
  I've got nothing against her philosophy in the abstract, it's how people interpret it that I have a problem with. The "selfishness" in living for yourself is supposed to be open ended, but often people interpret this as taking as much as they can for themselves, without thought of the consequences to others. Rand positioned the major protaganists in Atlas Shrugged (eg. Dagny, Rearden, Galt, etc) as real producers, who through their selfishness, were actually acting in the public interest (railroads, steel, etc). The same can't be said for a selfish sub-prime mortgage lender. Rand's ideas are more or less amoral, and probably need to be coupled with some other moral framework for it to be described as "good".
  - grandalf 18y ago
    Dude the sub prime lender is nothing at all like Rand's ideas... First, the idea of the virtue of selfishness is that we should question the "virtue of self-sacrifice". Really what she means is "the virtue of self-actualization". The idea is that the idea that we should all somehow do what we don't want (being selfless) is what she attacks, and her argument makes perfect sense. Second, someone who is part of the home/mortgage industry is not really a capitalist. The industry is full of subsidies, tax breaks, transfers, etc., and is home to Fannie and Freddie, which are government created, Enron-style entities that allow the government to do things "off the books". You're absolutely right that there is nothing the slightest bit similar between the mortgage industry (or most big, entrenched business in the US) and Rand's heroes...
    - miked 18y ago
      >> First, the idea of the virtue of selfishness is that we should question the "virtue of self-sacrifice". Really what she means is "the virtue of self-actualization". Good point. Rand called one of her books _The Virtue of Selfishness_, apparently either as a marketing idea or just to get a rise out of people (she seemed to enjoy controversy). "Self-actualization" is more new-agey, and she would probably have disliked it, but it's clear from her writing that that's exactly what she meant.
  - unalone 18y ago
    Exactly! That's the problem with lots of her fans. I tried joining an Objectivist forum once - big mistake. I think the closest to a real Objectivist scene you get is a scene of entrepreneurs, actually.
- arakyd 18y ago
  I was taking about Rand's philosophy in general, not just Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead. http://groups.google.com/group/sci.philosophy.tech/msg/8cb6b00e1261ace6 http://groups.google.com/group/sci.philosophy.tech/msg/8cb6b... http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/12/ayn-rand.html http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/12/ayn-rand.html The values you describe are good ones for the most part (the devil, as ever, is in the details), but I have little interest in Rand's development of them given what I've about the rest of her work, and the fruits thereof. Maybe that's unfair, but life is short.

Of course, that's what everybody said about Watchmen. I've never read the book, but I've heard a lot about Ayn Rand's philosophy, none of it good.

by arakyd 18y ago

Of course, that's what everybody said about Watchmen. I've never read the book, but I've heard a lot about Ayn Rand's philosophy, none of it good.

unalone 18y ago

Well, obviously. People who hate Rand loathe her, and people who love Rand are annoying and misphrase her stuff and say stupid things. At the core of her philosophy is the belief that you should live for yourself, that you should do things not because other people want you to but because you want to, that you should never feel guilty for the things that you can do that other people can't, and that the worst kind of person is the person who leeches off of other people. Is that none good?

electromagnetic 18y ago
The philosophy behind the book is good, the politics are stupid from whatever point you look at it. It typifies both stereotypes of capitalism, for the left wing 'capitalism = evil' and for the right wing 'capitalism = glorious'. From a literary stand point, Rands work is the pulp fiction of politics. It plays the traditional stereotypes and helped make the woman famous (specifically in the USA, I believe the word is infamous elsewhere) without contributing anything truly new or unique to the discourse.
- Devilboy 18y ago
  I always think of Bob's take on it all: http://www.angryflower.com/atlass.gif http://www.angryflower.com/atlass.gif
  - unalone 18y ago
    Ugh, such a gross misinterpretation. One of Rand's big points is that it doesn't matter what you're doing as long as you do it well. One of her physicists becomes a janitor, and when the misguided protagonist expresses horror at that, he says that there's nothing wrong in doing menial tasks. Bob is incredibly stupid because he makes fun of something that Rand expressly says is a good thing. Furthermore, the Rearden parody ("I only know how to pay people to invent alloys") ignores that in the book, Rearden is the scientist who invents the alloy himself. He's portrayed as a very skilled mathematician. So it's a good parody IF you're okay with laughing at something that Rand never actually wrote.
  - jobeirne 18y ago
    This is a perfect testament to the masses of people who think they understand (and thus have license to lay valid criticism on) Rand because they read the first 30 pages of Atlas Shrugged. I'm so sick and tired of hearing some pseudo-sophisto unload on Rand at a cocktail party, their insults and blind lambasting only to abate when confronted with questions about Rand's actual philosophy and works as opposed to her reputation.
- unalone 18y ago
  But it takes a much more friendly approach to some pretty heavy philosophical things. I and my friends moved from Rand to Emerson. Reading Emerson (or his contemporary Thoreau) at 16 is a pain unless you have motivation to read his thoughts, and Rand provides that motivation.
  - deleted 18y ago
    [deleted]
vitaminj 18y ago
I've got nothing against her philosophy in the abstract, it's how people interpret it that I have a problem with. The "selfishness" in living for yourself is supposed to be open ended, but often people interpret this as taking as much as they can for themselves, without thought of the consequences to others. Rand positioned the major protaganists in Atlas Shrugged (eg. Dagny, Rearden, Galt, etc) as real producers, who through their selfishness, were actually acting in the public interest (railroads, steel, etc). The same can't be said for a selfish sub-prime mortgage lender. Rand's ideas are more or less amoral, and probably need to be coupled with some other moral framework for it to be described as "good".
- grandalf 18y ago
  Dude the sub prime lender is nothing at all like Rand's ideas... First, the idea of the virtue of selfishness is that we should question the "virtue of self-sacrifice". Really what she means is "the virtue of self-actualization". The idea is that the idea that we should all somehow do what we don't want (being selfless) is what she attacks, and her argument makes perfect sense. Second, someone who is part of the home/mortgage industry is not really a capitalist. The industry is full of subsidies, tax breaks, transfers, etc., and is home to Fannie and Freddie, which are government created, Enron-style entities that allow the government to do things "off the books". You're absolutely right that there is nothing the slightest bit similar between the mortgage industry (or most big, entrenched business in the US) and Rand's heroes...
  - miked 18y ago
    >> First, the idea of the virtue of selfishness is that we should question the "virtue of self-sacrifice". Really what she means is "the virtue of self-actualization". Good point. Rand called one of her books _The Virtue of Selfishness_, apparently either as a marketing idea or just to get a rise out of people (she seemed to enjoy controversy). "Self-actualization" is more new-agey, and she would probably have disliked it, but it's clear from her writing that that's exactly what she meant.
- unalone 18y ago
  Exactly! That's the problem with lots of her fans. I tried joining an Objectivist forum once - big mistake. I think the closest to a real Objectivist scene you get is a scene of entrepreneurs, actually.
arakyd 18y ago
I was taking about Rand's philosophy in general, not just Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead. http://groups.google.com/group/sci.philosophy.tech/msg/8cb6b00e1261ace6 http://groups.google.com/group/sci.philosophy.tech/msg/8cb6b... http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/12/ayn-rand.html http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/12/ayn-rand.html The values you describe are good ones for the most part (the devil, as ever, is in the details), but I have little interest in Rand's development of them given what I've about the rest of her work, and the fruits thereof. Maybe that's unfair, but life is short.