home studios equipment staff/friends booking/rates for sale forum contact

Person who wrote things: Ayn Rand

Vote and debate.

Moderators: kerble, Electrical-Staff

Ayn Rand/Objectivism/all that stuff

CRAP
122
88%
NOT CRAP
17
12%
 
Total votes : 139

Person who wrote things: Ayn Rand

Postby bumble on Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:44 pm

She has been the anti-bumble since bumble's bumbling high school years, but what do you all think?
User avatar
bumble
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
 
Posts: 4272
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 1:50 pm
Location: chicago

Postby tmidgett on Mon Feb 07, 2005 2:03 pm

painful-to-read crap
User avatar
tmidgett
Greatest Man Who Ever Lived
Greatest Man Who Ever Lived
 
Posts: 8973
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 1:30 pm

Postby placeholder on Mon Feb 07, 2005 2:05 pm

Redacted.

CRAP.
Last edited by placeholder on Tue Aug 17, 2010 11:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
placeholder
Power Incarnate with Endless Creativity
Power Incarnate with Endless Creativity
 
Posts: 7974
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 2:06 pm

Postby Mark Lansing on Mon Feb 07, 2005 2:45 pm

Not a good writer, and her philosophical viewpoint pisses me off.

CRAP.
User avatar
Mark Lansing
Best leader Who Realized Human Wisdom
Best leader Who Realized Human Wisdom
 
Posts: 2605
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 3:16 pm
Location: Somewhere In The Midwest

Postby Jeremy on Mon Feb 07, 2005 2:52 pm

selfish crap. fun-less crap. prideful crap.
User avatar
Jeremy
retail therapist
retail therapist
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 10:20 am
Location: Charlotte, NC

Postby bumble on Mon Feb 07, 2005 3:01 pm

placeholder wrote:The writing itself is often quite tedious, but I think much of her ideology makes perfect sense.


Hey placeholder! What do you dig in Ayn Rand?

Everybody else: what part(s) of her ideology do you not care for?

No free for all or throwdown, citizens! Aww, who the hell am I talking to?
User avatar
bumble
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
 
Posts: 4272
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 1:50 pm
Location: chicago

Postby placeholder on Mon Feb 07, 2005 3:23 pm

bumble wrote:Hey placeholder! What do you dig in Ayn Rand?


The idea of rational self-interest makes perfect sense to me. I may be misunderstanding it, but it stands to reason that no one will do anything without it benefitting them in some way. I certainly live my life that way, though I don't consider myself an Objectivist by any stretch. I don't believe in altruism, nor do I believe that truly selfless acts exist. Though I don't have any sort of pride or self esteem, I still live my life exclusively according to my own self-interest, as I believe everyone does.

I haven't read any Rand in a long, long time, so I may be getting things confused, but that's what I like. I feel like a complete heel now, being in the minority on this topic...
User avatar
placeholder
Power Incarnate with Endless Creativity
Power Incarnate with Endless Creativity
 
Posts: 7974
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 2:06 pm

Postby Noah on Mon Feb 07, 2005 3:41 pm

placeholder wrote:it stands to reason that no one will do anything without it benefitting them in some way.


There is no act on earth that does not benefit everything in some way or another.


-Noah
your an idiot
User avatar
Noah
"amarillo slim" preston
"amarillo slim" preston
 
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 9:16 pm
Location: Vermont

...

Postby gio on Mon Feb 07, 2005 3:41 pm

I have never read Ayn Rand, but I've read a number of things about her infamous philosophy. Sounds like a load of egotistical crap to me. I've always preferred conscientiousness to self-satisfaction.

Yes, rational self-interest "makes sense." Just look at the title. But so ugly!
User avatar
gio
forced to change shirt
forced to change shirt
 
Posts: 1940
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 10:43 am

Postby tmidgett on Mon Feb 07, 2005 3:56 pm

placeholder wrote:
bumble wrote:Hey placeholder! What do you dig in Ayn Rand?


The idea of rational self-interest makes perfect sense to me. I may be misunderstanding it, but it stands to reason that no one will do anything without it benefitting them in some way. I certainly live my life that way, though I don't consider myself an Objectivist by any stretch. I don't believe in altruism, nor do I believe that truly selfless acts exist. Though I don't have any sort of pride or self esteem, I still live my life exclusively according to my own self-interest, as I believe everyone does.

I haven't read any Rand in a long, long time, so I may be getting things confused, but that's what I like. I feel like a complete heel now, being in the minority on this topic...


the thing i dislike about her, aside from her terrible writing, is that she takes a few self-evident truths (the ones you discuss) and pushes them to ridiculous extremes, promoting industrialism and capitalist expansion at the marked exclusion of any kind of collective conscience.

i totally understand why people are taken by aspects of her 'philosophy.' she's pro-selfdetermination, anti-religion, etc., etc.

but as a whole, her ideas seem ill-thought-out and vague. i think she foisted them on people thru novels b/c they don't hold water as a philosophical construct. she railed against philosophy and philosophers, only to provide a quarter-baked version of a philosophy in her own work.

i have to confess i could never choke down an entire book. i read up on her after my attempts, however, to see what all the blab was about.
User avatar
tmidgett
Greatest Man Who Ever Lived
Greatest Man Who Ever Lived
 
Posts: 8973
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 1:30 pm

Postby Linus Van Pelt on Mon Feb 07, 2005 4:00 pm

placeholder wrote:The writing itself is often quite tedious, but I think much of her ideology makes perfect sense.


I feel exactly the opposite. Objectivism is pretty terrible. Objectivists are just awful. Here's one. Here's another. (Edit: Removed link. I'm not sure if this person is actually an objectivist or not. I thought s/he was, but I didn't find any evidence on the site. Sorry)

But, I do like the writing, what little I've read anyway (a healthy chunk of The Fountainhead, and a little bit of an Objectivism reader).
Last edited by Linus Van Pelt on Mon Feb 07, 2005 4:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Linus Van Pelt
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
 
Posts: 4251
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 11:01 am
Location: Peninsulam Amoenam

...

Postby gio on Mon Feb 07, 2005 4:00 pm

someone who wrote about Ayn Rand wrote:Esthetics
"Art is a selective re-creation of reality according to an artist's metaphysical value-judgments." The purpose of art is to concretize the artist's fundamental view of existence. Ayn Rand described her own approach to art as "Romantic Realism": "I am a Romantic in the sense that I present men as they ought to be. I am Realistic in the sense that I place them here and now and on this earth."


I find this statement overly narrow, like much of her viewpoint. It doesn't seem to leave any room to account for more abstract constructs like metaphor, or creativity. It's a chiseled little package of metallic man-icons with big pectorals--but it's so mechanical that it tastes like crap.
User avatar
gio
forced to change shirt
forced to change shirt
 
Posts: 1940
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 10:43 am

Postby aaron on Mon Feb 07, 2005 10:01 pm

bad bad bad, horrible crap. goddamn, ayn rand is awful.

for some beautiful writing and a more palatable take on romanticism and "rational self-interest" maybe read john ruskin (start with unto this last)
User avatar
aaron
avery fisher
avery fisher
 
Posts: 482
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2003 11:36 pm
Location: france

Postby Justin Foley on Mon Feb 07, 2005 10:43 pm

I don't like Ayn Rand.

Two things about her. First, there's the fifth-grade-first-attempt-at-philosophy realization that "anything that you do must ultimately be based on self interest because why else would you be doing it" observation. Myopic. There's descriptive value in noting some motivations as "selfish" and others not, although both may be rational choices of the self aware individual. Or, to put it another way, there is a moral difference between Ghandi and Sandy Weill.

Second, moral philosophy should be judged not only on whether or not it's consistent. Most importantly, you can evaluate it on "why kind of shit would this let me get away with? Would I want to be on the receiving end of this?" For me, it was pretty simple: any philosophy (like Ayn's) that says there's no moral social obligation against the nightmare of poverty (Ayn cheerfully says "it's your fault, fucker") sure doesn't merit the time it took me to slog through all 800+ pages of Atlas shrugged in High School. So I've been charitable. Which she wouldn't appreciate.

Wait, I just thought of a third. Ayn's a shitty writer. I read "Atlas Shrugged" right after I read "The Plague" by Camus. I was struck that Camus was willing to give his philosophical opponent the space of a worthy character in the priest. Rand, conversely, paints her detractors as retarded slobs, only able to figure out how to wipe their asses as that's where their talking comes from. She must have been lots of fun to argue with. And by fun, I mean a dreadful chore, on par with cleaning up cat spraint.

Spraint. What a great word.

= Justin
Justin Foley
Leader with Extraordinary Personality
Leader with Extraordinary Personality
 
Posts: 2909
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 1:16 pm
Location: NYC

Postby Bradley R. Weissenberger on Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:26 am

May I ask a question, bumble? Why do you use the phrase "[p]erson who wrote things"?

Is that pejorative (i.e., as opposed to "author" or "writer") or are you just being clever?

I ask because the phrase "[p]erson who wrote things" is exceedingly "clever" -- and extremely irritating.

Just asking.

P.S. Fuck Ayn Rand with the rusty, broken-off brakestop of an abandoned wheelchair. Please lather said brakestop with wormy raccoon shit before doing so, Friend.
User avatar
Bradley R. Weissenberger
King Of All The Taverns
 
Posts: 7320
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 1:22 pm
Location: Western Michigan

Postby bumble on Tue Feb 08, 2005 1:05 pm

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:May I ask a question, bumble? Why do you use the phrase "[p]erson who wrote things"?

Is that pejorative (i.e., as opposed to "author" or "writer") or are you just being clever?

I ask because the phrase "[p]erson who wrote things" is exceedingly "clever" -- and extremely irritating.

Just asking.


Ask away.

I wasn't trying to be clever. Pejorative? Maybe, in that I don't think she writes real fiction ("author") and I don't think she is a philosopher. "Writer", sure, but I'm a writer right here - and what did she write, anyway?

I didn't want to make the title "Person I loathe", "Testified at McCarthy Hearings" or "Self-aggrandizing Hack" and discourage postings from people who like Ayn Rand - I was wondering what some of the thoughtful posters here felt about her, her work, Objectivism's continued popularity, whatever.

Also, the above paragraphs wouldn't fit in a subject line.

"Person who wrote things" was thereby my two-second decision of what the heck to call Rand. If "writer" is preferred for syllabic reduction, feel free to change the title of the post. I don't care. Wtf.
User avatar
bumble
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
 
Posts: 4272
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 1:50 pm
Location: chicago

Postby Bradley R. Weissenberger on Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:17 pm

bumble wrote:"Person who wrote things" was thereby my two-second decision of what the heck to call Rand. If "writer" is preferred for syllabic reduction, feel free to change the title of the post.

That decision is perfectly fair. "Person who wrote things" works for me, particularly as a description of Ayn Rand. Her work is not that of an "author" or "writer", and the idea that any smart or decent person would respond positively to her soulless "work" is a very depressing thought to me.

I hope that she dies in a fire. No, wait. I hope that she is severely disabled in a fire and requires extensive government-subsidized medical treatment and the lifelong support of local charities.

Or I hope that she just gets a good old-fashioned Idaho scalping.

But too late for any of that, I guess.
User avatar
Bradley R. Weissenberger
King Of All The Taverns
 
Posts: 7320
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 1:22 pm
Location: Western Michigan

Postby trilonaut on Wed Feb 09, 2005 11:34 am

i have not read an ayn rand book... but i've been preached to by her converts, and i have read excerpts. everything i've encountered has been such pernicious CRAP that it really makes me livid.

i get the impression that nietszche (spelling?) is just as bad... anyone who preaches the celebration of might makes right can basically go to hell with all the republicans.

i read "the plague" by camus but honestly i didn't like it. though yes, it's important to portray opposing viewpoints as bowling pins for your little heroes to strike. i think if i read an ayn rand novel i would explode.
trilonaut
the white ho
the white ho
 
Posts: 1654
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 3:51 am

Postby Linus Van Pelt on Wed Feb 09, 2005 12:14 pm

Nietzsche is bad in his way, but not as bad, I don't think, as Rand. For one thing, he's a hell of a lot more interesting to read, because he's really all about a completely revolutionary new way of thinking. It's a pretty dumb way of thinking, but at least it's crazy. "Might makes Right" doesn't really describe it - any discussion of "Right" is kind of out of place with Nietzsche. Anyway, I recommend it; a lot of his reputation is undeserved, I think.
User avatar
Linus Van Pelt
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
 
Posts: 4251
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 11:01 am
Location: Peninsulam Amoenam

Postby tmidgett on Wed Feb 09, 2005 12:39 pm

Linus Van Pelt wrote:Nietzsche is bad in his way, but not as bad, I don't think, as Rand. For one thing, he's a hell of a lot more interesting to read, because he's really all about a completely revolutionary new way of thinking. It's a pretty dumb way of thinking, but at least it's crazy. "Might makes Right" doesn't really describe it - any discussion of "Right" is kind of out of place with Nietzsche. Anyway, I recommend it; a lot of his reputation is undeserved, I think.


nietzsche was a brilliant writer. and his philosophical constructs were tight.

i don't take his shit to heart, he was crazy there for a while at the end, and he was and continues to be an unfortunate influence on many people. but it's great shit. and as i have said before, often truly if unintentionally funny.
User avatar
tmidgett
Greatest Man Who Ever Lived
Greatest Man Who Ever Lived
 
Posts: 8973
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 1:30 pm

Next

Return to Crap / Not Crap

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Anthony Flack, emmanuelle cunt, Model Citizen, the letter o, Yahoo [Bot] and 16 guests