WHO IS JOHN GALT? (A survey on Ayn Rand)

by Terry 58 Replies latest social entertainment

• 

  zen nudist

  I read Anthem first which is the cliff notes for Altas....

  it dramatically altered my conceptions about communism and many other collectivist forms of organization...

  however, later reading Atlas, I was struck by her complete rejection of any notion of family...like she was a test tube baby without

  a single connection to anyone at all....which explains a lot of her own personal malfunction...

  as someone noted her personal life was nothing to brag about.

  I have met some hard core RANDroids and they are just as scary as any BORG drone
• 

  EvilForce

  I'm with you Zen!
  
  She brings up some good points but some of her hard core believers are scary. Just like Thereou and Walden.... she writes in a Utopian fashion. While things might be interesting if they actually worked a certain way, it is not the way the "REAL" world works. So to dwell on it endlessly is a bit silly.
• 

  Terry

  Where objectivism broke down for me was in her concept of man as a rational being. That was the sum of her message. Be rational, and everything will be ok. The meaning of your life is whatever inspires you. The problem is that man is not capable of being consistently rational. Man is only capapable of being rational from time to time, and in certain circumstances. Experience has taught me that man is a reliabley irrational, self-destructive, malleable, murky and muddled being.

  For me, I look at the alternative. If I'm sometimes rational AND I have a strategy for improving my life I'm better off than if I have an irrational and illusory view.

  Take two people, Person A and Person B.

  Person A uses religion. If Person A is irrational part of the time PLUS uses the illusions of religion when in his "right" mind; what is the total benefit?

  Person B uses objective and rational life strategies when consistent and then lapses the other % of the time. Compare the results of B and A and see who comes out ahead.

  Consistency is difficult because circumstances change. Life is change. Using a rational philosophy to test your ideas and approach to life will (more often than mere superstition) place you in an advantageous position.

  T.
• 

  Terry

  I guess the best test of objectivism is how it worked for it's creator. Was it a practical system for her? Was Ayn Rand a happy person? I paraphrase Ms. Rand as saying that if a person is unhappy it is because they are not living according to their values. From what I understand she spent many years as and died a very lonely, bitter, and unhappy person

  Ayn's husband (hero) was Frank O'Conner and he died before she did. She was left a widow. She lived by herself in her NY apartment. Whether or not she was "bitter" is beyond our knowledge. How can we know that? "Unhappy?" I don't know. I suspect having her philosophy rejected after years of laboring to produce the ideal novel that embodied her work was disappointing.

  But, from all reports, she was indomitable. Nobody, as far as I know, reports hearing her lament her fate or express regrets for actions taken. Everybody (friends and foes alike) report she was extremely consistent with what she spoke (philosophy) and her standards were rigorously enforced. She would not tolerate people around her who pretended to accept objectivist standards of behavior who went on to violate them in every day life. Ethics was her top priority. This made it difficult to sustain close friendships.

  Surely she was relentless in her standards and people around her found it hard to express their imperfect side. She was, perhaps, too damned intelligent for her own good. Finding a peer is quite frustrating at that level of intelligence. But, she enjoyed her self when Frank was alive and entertained friends every night. When she came down with cancer I suspect the pain of it was what she dealt with mostly. I believe she actually died of heart disease. (Remember, she was a chain-smoker!).

  T.
• 

  Terry

  From what I know about you, and the discussions we have had, I really think you would get a kick out of The True Believer by Eric Hoffer

  I have that book and think every ex-JW should read it---at least more than once. Much to chew on there, I agree.

  T.
• 

  Terry

  however, later reading Atlas, I was struck by her complete rejection of any notion of family...like she was a test tube baby without

  a single connection to anyone at all....which explains a lot of her own personal malfunction...

  as someone noted her personal life was nothing to brag about.

  I have met some hard core RANDroids and they are just as scary as any BORG drone

  Family, in her view, has to be a choice and not a duty. For many women, the end of their career and dreams of bettering themselves end when a child comes. It doesn't have to be that way; but, often it is not as much a choice as an accident one owns up to.

  The Randians (Objectivists) I've met online were not my cup of tea. I think Objectivism attracts borish pedants (such as myself) who often forget to express human emotions in a light-hearted manner when online. The Objectivists I've met in person were very bright and funny and opinionated; interesting to talk to. But, all in all, I've not met that many.

  Consistency comes best from a long life lived in accord with a principle well-understood. Converting at a late date to a philosophy of rationality still requires years of rooting out the crap between the cracks in one's skull to get to ground zero.

  T.
• 

  Nathan Natas

  For some reason, I often look closely at the people at the top of a heap when I'm trying to decide if the heap is for me. Consequently I familiarized myself with Ayn's treatment of her "hero," Frank O'Connor, while she was married to him and conducting an open affair with Nathaniel Branden, who was married to Barbara Branden. All good objectivists, with the possible exception of Frank, who seemed to me to have a "yeah, OK Ayn, what-ever" embracing of objectivism.

  I guess it is easier for Ayn (or anyone; me, even) to write about how other people - or imaginary people - find a utopian existence while rationalizing the harm that is done day-to-day to real people.

  I like that term - RANDroids. I never got to the point of associating with any members of the Alice Rosenblum cult. I find it hilarious that for them smoking cigarettes was practically a sacrament.
• 

  logansrun

  Funny that most psychological research -- and many people's personal experience -- show that humans are happiest when they are not self-centered, which is totally opposite to the core of Rand's philosophy. Where would the world be if Ghandi, Mother Theresa, Albert Schweitzer and other great figures who gave tirelessly and selflessly to humanity had followed the "ethical egoist" path advocated by Rand?

  B.
• 

  Robert K Stock

  logansrun:

  "Ethical egoism" is not a callous disregard for others. Ethical egoism allows for helping others if an individual wants to help others but recognizes there is no obligation or duty to help others. Sacrificing your self for others is always self destructive.

  Christopher Hitchens has written an entire book that unmasks that old fraud and parasite Mother Teresa.

  Adam Smith pointed out over two hundred years ago that people looking after their own self interest benefits others. Give me a misnamed, much maligned, Robber Baron over a Social Worker any day.
• 

  Satanus

  Wouldn't it be nice to have the text for fountainhead, atlass shrugged and anthem? Pm me if you think so.

  S