7 ms·
Finishing "Atlas Shrugged". While ideas and the spirit of the book have aged only slightly, the way of writing seems way too pretentious for our times. But over
by sabon 17y ago
Finishing "Atlas Shrugged". While ideas and the spirit of the book have aged only slightly, the way of writing seems way too pretentious for our times. But overall the book is interesting. From historic and ideological point of view.
- brownegg 17y agoFor a time, I considered this my bible. But it's too idealistic, and goes a long way on some fairly iffy assumptions. It's still compelling as hell, though.
- quantumhobbit 17y agoAyn Rand was a philosopher. And like most philosophers, she started out with some good ideas and over applied them to everything in life, which leads to some scary conclusions. My favorite Rand book was Anthem. It was short and therefore didn't have space to extrapolate Rand's ideas to their scary conclusion. I just finished reading Les Miserables, by Victor Hugo. It is just as long and pompous as Atlas Shrugged, but of the exact opposite philosophy. Those two books make for some interesting comparisons.
- DanielBMarkham 17y agoI once listened to a 80-hour overview of the world's great philosophers, given by modern professors. What amazed me was how many of them came up with a good idea that was new and revolutionary -- and then spent the rest of their life taking the damn thing too far. I guess great people fall so much in love with their great ideas that it never occurs to them that the most important piece is finding the boundaries for where their work applies and where it does not.
- stevenj 17y ago>I guess great people fall so much in love with their great ideas that it never occurs to them that the most important piece is finding the boundaries for where their work applies and where it does not. Well said. I think many ("normal") people would benefit from listening to this, but more importantly, by practicing it.
- derwiki 17y agoLink for the interview?
- matt1 17y agoWhat's the series called?
- DanielBMarkham 17y agoLink for those who requested: http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/CourseDescLong2.aspx?cid=470 http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/CourseDescLong2.aspx?cid=470 Looks like it's on sale -- you download audio or pick up the CDs for around a hundred bucks (DVD also available)
- philwelch 17y agoThen there's Wittgenstein, who did the same thing, except twice and with entirely separate ideas. He's the philosophical equivalent of one of those bands that makes a major stylistic change halfway through their career, lose a bunch of their fans, and pick up an entirely different set of fans.
- nonrecursive 17y agoWhat's interesting is that Ayn Rand thought Victor Hugo was the best novelist ever. She also thought that the philosophy in Les Miserables was at odds with his "sense of life".
- philwelch 17y agoShe also thought that Frank Lloyd Wright's philosophical and political ideas were at odds with his architecture.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- NoBSWebDesign 17y agoAyn Rand was able to name so much of what I've felt growing up. While she may have used the literary technique of exaggeration to heighten the contrast between her philosophical views of moral vs. immoral, I don't think she took it "too far" as others are commenting. I think that's like saying Philip K. Dick took the ideas of technological advances and psychic ability too far in his story, "Minority Report", or like saying Pablo Picasso took multi-perspective simplicity too far in his Cubist paintings. Of course they did, it's part of their literary freedom. Exaggeration helps to make an underlaying principle become self-evident by speeding along conclusions that could eventually be drawn from observation.
- fauigerzigerk 17y agoI took her meritocratic stance seriously until I heard her defend inherited wealth, which is ridiculously inconsistent.
- perfectlyfrank 17y ago"Only the man who does not need it, is fit to inherit wealth--the man who would make his own fortune no matter where he started. If an heir is equal to his money, it serves him; if not, it destroys him." - I think she's still basing it on merit. While I disagree with some of what she says, and she says a lot, she does a decent job of staying consistent.
- fauigerzigerk 17y agoIt would be consistent if everyone who was fit to inherit actually did inherit. But that is not the case. Some of those who are fit do not inherit and others do. What is the basis for this inequality? Birth. She destroys the idea of meritocracy that she herself presented so eloquently and discredits libertarianism as yet another excuse for those born wealthy to keep their wealth. If an hair is not equal to his money it destroys him? Come on, what does it even mean to be "equal to money"? And how can someone who does not inherit wealth even prove that he or she is "equal to the money"? That's just the kind of fluffy nonsense that moral philosophers are so infamous for.
- _glass 17y agoReading the same thing at the moment. But right after reading The Fountain Head, which I like way more. Maybe because than these ideas were all fresh and new for me. But now it is just too romantic. I can understand why she takes this idealistic approach, but it is just that it doesn't read that good in this great length. I am at the point where she discovers Atlantis and they think they live in the old US.
- neoclassical 17y agoConsider reading the originals upon which she almost certainly based her ideas: Plato "The Republic" and Nietzsche "Human, All Too Human"