TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Ayn Rand
Pages (4): « 1 [2] 3 4 »

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN well, im talking about political philosophy so i must respectfully disagree. and the philosophy i do really hate (the wankey type) certainly served a useful purpose in under-pinning much of western culture (i am pretty unfamiliar with philosophy outside europe). but im still with you. its why i dropped philosophy in favour of political science. much more fun and (to me) relevant.

eh i was reading the wiki for objectivism and thought it was a total waste of time...


Political philosphy is fine, it helps define a greater force, that of many people. Individual philosphy, while helpful in that search, usually is too narrow and specific to find any common ground amongst all people and cultures. That is why I find it stupid.

There was once a video in which Christopher Hitchens summed up my view of Rand's work.. or at least some of the problems I have with her.

I find her novels thoroughly awful as attempts at literature - and probably quite good as acts of demagoguery (which to me is an indictment as much as anything).

With regards to The Virtue of Selfishness, which is somewhat more impressive in my view. I simply don't think there is any more need to encourage humans to be selfish than there is to encourage humans to fuck.

As an attempt at philosophy her writing is also incomplete it is at most a collection of axioms that remind me more of religious dogma than philosophical theory.

quote:

Originally posted by astroboy With regards to The Virtue of Selfishness, which is somewhat more impressive in my view. I simply don't think there is any more need to encourage humans to be selfish than there is to encourage humans to fuck.

Certainly not, but Rand encourages humans to be selfish in a self-serving and self-sufficient way. A majority of the selfishness we see in current societies is directly related to taking advantage of others.

However, this is one reason her work falls down; there is no conceivable way that you are ever going to convince people to stop taking advantage of one another. Communism has never worked for that very reason, and for the same reason laissez-faire capitalism could never work.

Any Rand totally sucks ass. Sorry had to say it. Don't feel like I need to make any explanations or justifications. If you've read her tripe you will understand.

yes i misspelled her stupid ass name on purpose

quote:

Originally posted by Zild Any Rand totally sucks ass. Sorry had to say it. Don't feel like I need to make any explanations or justifications. If you've read her tripe you will understand. yes i misspelled her stupid ass name on purpose

I'd expect that from someone who thinks that calculus is more creative than essay writing and that humanities are soft subjects for idiots.

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated I'd expect that from someone who thinks that calculus is more creative than essay writing and that humanities are soft subjects for idiots.

plain and simple it IS. if you don't have the capacity to understand that well i'm not surprised.

i don't have the time nor do you have the desire for me to properly educate you but i can guarantee given that education you would realize there is much more creativity and beauty in upper level mathematics than you will find in all of Da Vinci's works of art.

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated Certainly not, but Rand encourages humans to be selfish in a self-serving and self-sufficient way. A majority of the selfishness we see in current societies is directly related to taking advantage of others. However, this is one reason her work falls down; there is no conceivable way that you are ever going to convince people to stop taking advantage of one another. Communism has never worked for that very reason, and for the same reason laissez-faire capitalism could never work.

The laissez faire Rand talks about isn't complete "hands off" anarchy that most people think it is. Like most libertarian thinkers she believes that laws and mechanisms must be in place to prevent compulsion...that fraud, theft, and violence must be banished from all human relationships. In that respect capitalism is vastly different from communism. Does this type of system mean men won't try to "take advantage" of others? Of course not. It just means they can't use FORCE on others. Initiation of force violates the central tenet of objectivism.

quote:

Originally posted by Zild plain and simple it IS. if you don't have the capacity to understand that well i'm not surprised. i don't have the time nor do you have the desire for me to properly educate you but i can guarantee given that education you would realize there is much more creativity and beauty in upper level mathematics than you will find in all of Da Vinci's works of art.

Well, if you spend enough time and effort on practically anything you'll tend to want to justify it to yourself by saying that it's better than everything else.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Well, if you spend enough time and effort on practically anything you'll tend to want to justify it to yourself by saying that it's better than everything else.

Why would I want to justify mathematics which I've spent a small amount of time on when my career goals are to be a paratrooper in the US Army?

I'm just calling it as I see it. A spade is a spade is a spade. Unless you want to lie to yourself and call it a club.

actually if i remember correctly you're getting a philosophy degree, so i don't even know why i dignified your post with a response... i must be fucking drunk

What's your problem with philosophy?

I don't have any problem with math, btw, and I agree that there's a lot of beauty to be found in it. I made that comment mostly just to mess with you.

quote:

Originally posted by Zild Why would I want to justify mathematics which I've spent a small amount of time on when my career goals are to be a paratrooper in the US Army? I'm just calling it as I see it. A spade is a spade is a spade. Unless you want to lie to yourself and call it a club. actually if i remember correctly you're getting a philosophy degree, so i don't even know why i dignified your post with a response... i must be fucking drunk

Holy unfounded view on science batman!

Ayn Rand is a fantastic writer, which is why everyone loves her novels - but the philosophy, if viewed through a critical lens, is utter tripe.

Pkc nailed it in his first post - it's impractical and dangerous to base a society on the needs and desires of the individual. I attended a lecture by the President of the Objectivist Society last year, and it literally frightened me when he described his view of the future.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles She didn't really know much about the philosophers she attacked. Just to give one example, she had a well-known hatred for Kant and Nietzsche, yet for some reason Kantian and Nietzschean ideas pop up repeatedly in her books.

Haha, yeah, this is especially true for Nietzsche.

quote:

Originally posted by Zild plain and simple it IS. if you don't have the capacity to understand that well i'm not surprised. i don't have the time nor do you have the desire for me to properly educate you but i can guarantee given that education you would realize there is much more creativity and beauty in upper level mathematics than you will find in all of Da Vinci's works of art.

This is probably the best place to share this thought too...

I've been doing a criminology subject this year at university, where we've been looking at capitalism as a pathological structure. It's interesting, it made me reconsider my views of how effective western society really is. I did an essay on the beltway snipers (remember them?) and came to the conclusion that they were motivated mainly by the inherent pressures imposed by a capitalist system.

However, we also know that socialism and communism aren't successful in the long run, and this has led me to believe that we are yet to discover a societal structure worth maintaining. Thoughts?

What was it that Churchill said, "Democracy is a terrible societal structure, but it's the best we've found yet."

The economic system is obviously imperfect as well (credit bubbles, rampant inequality and poverty, etc.), but in practice free-market capitalism somehow works about as well as anything else we've tried. Except for Scandinavian state-led capitalism maybe.

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated However, we also know that socialism and communism aren't successful in the long run, and this has led me to believe that we are yet to discover a societal structure worth maintaining. Thoughts?

isms are outmoded. there is no single social or political theory that can encompass the needs of all the people. you can't possibly tie millions of individuals with completely different ideals, motivations and goals into a social order where everything is peachy for everyone.

a mixed economy balanced by democratic government is the best i think we'll find until long after we're all dead.

Personally, I think any form of government or economy led by Barack Obama is the best, but I'm just a sheep.

I haven't read anything by her, but Atlas shrugged sounds like a colossal load of crap.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov What was it that Churchill said, "Democracy is a terrible societal structure, but it's the best we've found yet."

Democracy is one of the worst systems ever, but it's only advantage lead to it's popularity. It's stable. Democracy is a system of mediocrity, where a decisions actual worth, quality and usefulness has lost any relevance compared to it's popularity. And ironically it's stable because people believe they all have a certain influence, when indeed everybodys voice has been diluted to nothing at all.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN isms are outmoded.

Indeed.

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated led me to believe that we are yet to discover a societal structure worth maintaining. Thoughts?

After reading The Fountainhead a second time, I've come to the conclusion that she has a ridiculously wooden prose, which made the second reading a lot more of a strain. Hummm...

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN maybe one day, when my young hatred of her has died down. im not sure how many pages i could get through though, she makes me so angry.

That's funny, because when I picked up Atlas Shrugged I was determined to hate it, and her. After 3 pages I was in love (with the book).

We must also remember the regime that Rand lived under before going to America. I think you can forgive some of her more extreme ideas knowing that.

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie That's funny, because when I picked up Atlas Shrugged I was determined to hate it, and her. After 3 pages I was in love (with the book).

The book is an interesting read (though not quite what The Fountainhead was), but honestly, how can people think this is a practical philosophy?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN maybe one day, when my young hatred of her has died down. im not sure how many pages i could get through though, she makes me so angry.

LOL thats funny cause Atlas Shrugged is like 1200 pages and the font is like this small

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.