4 ms·

Rand built "exaggerated" characters, that's true. Unfortunately the style results in a bunch of cheesy straw men. The business leaders like Rearden are hard-wo

Rand built "exaggerated" characters, that's true. Unfortunately the style results in a bunch of cheesy straw men. The business leaders like Rearden are hard-working, smart, and good looking. The villains are stupid unattractive leeches, or at best weak and cowering pushovers. Nowhere in those books will you find an intelligent argument in favor or utilitarianism or moderate altruism. Rand was guilty of disingenuous representation of opposing views, which shouldn't be totally excused under the guise of the romantic style.

lake99 13y ago
> ... leaders ... are ... good-looking, villains are ... unattractive Neither true of Howard Roark nor of Keating. She described them several times in Fountainhead. > Nowhere in those books will you find an intelligent argument in favor or utilitarianism or moderate altruism. And why would you her expect to do that? Those were not her positions. > Rand was guilty of disingenuous representation of opposing views. Rand was guilty of inaccurate representations of all kinds of views, scholarship was not her forte. And you are guilty of disingenuous representation of Rand.
- wonderzombie 13y ago
  And why would you her expect to do that? Those were not her positions. It's the difference between one-sided propaganda and reasoned argumentation or discussion. It's fair enough that it's fiction, and thus perhaps unfair to hold it to a standard. But making an intellectual argument using your characters as a mouthpiece and then declaiming responsibility for propagandizing strikes me as trying to have it both ways.
- api 13y ago
  Probably her biggest fallacy was in only considering the most extreme of views, such as fanatical religious altruism and authoritarian communism, and then contrasting them with her own. To her anything between was simply a compromise, a mixture of good and evil. (I am aware of her views on this matter.) The problem is that reality disagrees. Very, very often the optimum in a complex system is found somewhere between a large number of polar attractors. I'd say the optimum is rarely near a pole. It seems that so far the human societies that maximize happiness and well being are those that are somewhat altruistic, but not to the point of smothering individual initiative or removing the incentive for productivity.

lake99 13y ago

> ... leaders ... are ... good-looking, villains are ... unattractive Neither true of Howard Roark nor of Keating. She described them several times in Fountainhead. > Nowhere in those books will you find an intelligent argument in favor or utilitarianism or moderate altruism. And why would you her expect to do that? Those were not her positions. > Rand was guilty of disingenuous representation of opposing views. Rand was guilty of inaccurate representations of all kinds of views, scholarship was not her forte. And you are guilty of disingenuous representation of Rand.

wonderzombie 13y ago
And why would you her expect to do that? Those were not her positions. It's the difference between one-sided propaganda and reasoned argumentation or discussion. It's fair enough that it's fiction, and thus perhaps unfair to hold it to a standard. But making an intellectual argument using your characters as a mouthpiece and then declaiming responsibility for propagandizing strikes me as trying to have it both ways.
api 13y ago
Probably her biggest fallacy was in only considering the most extreme of views, such as fanatical religious altruism and authoritarian communism, and then contrasting them with her own. To her anything between was simply a compromise, a mixture of good and evil. (I am aware of her views on this matter.) The problem is that reality disagrees. Very, very often the optimum in a complex system is found somewhere between a large number of polar attractors. I'd say the optimum is rarely near a pole. It seems that so far the human societies that maximize happiness and well being are those that are somewhat altruistic, but not to the point of smothering individual initiative or removing the incentive for productivity.