AsburySkinsFan Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 One can still be a good, practicing Christian and enjoy her fictional writing, and even appreciate the nuances of the politics within as well. One cannot be a Christian and an Objectivist...without redefining one or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 One cannot be a Christian and an Objectivist...without redefining one or the other. I agree, and that isnt what I said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 One cannot be a Christian and an Objectivist...without redefining one or the other. He said fictional writing. He's right. A lot of the fiction I enjoy is in no way shape or form in line with Christian morality. (horror!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 I agree, and that isnt what I said He said fictional writing. He's right. A lot of the fiction I enjoy is in no way shape or form in line with Christian morality. (horror!) I'll reply to both since they are both on the same issue. Ayn Rand didn't write a pure fictional novel, she wrote the philosophy of Objectivism in the form of a narrative. So, Atlas Farted isn't "just" fiction, in the same way that for Dan Brown "The Da Vinci Code" isn't fiction, as well as Philip Pullman's "Golden Compass" isn't "just" fiction, and for the sake of fairness C.S. Lewis' Narnia Chronicles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 I'll reply to both since they are both on the same issue.Ayn Rand didn't write a pure fictional novel, she wrote the philosophy of Objectivism in the form of a narrative. So, Atlas Farted isn't "just" fiction, in the same way that for Dan Brown "The Da Vinci Code" isn't fiction, as well as Philip Pullman's "Golden Compass" isn't "just" fiction, and for the sake of fairness C.S. Lewis' Narnia Chronicles. Yea, but you can like the book and not agree with everything in it. I'm exhibit 1 of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Yea, but you can like the book and not agree with everything in it. I'm exhibit 1 of that. But this isn't the same as saying "Hey I read the latest Clancy novel, I liked most of it except the part where Jack Ryan kills the President." This is like saying "Hey I read Mein Kampf and I like most of it." queue the over reaction in 3....2.....1..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Don't you think Rand would frown on accepting her ideas as truths instead of coming up with your own? I ask because reading this book three times seems like you're somewhat reliant upon it for direction. No, Rand would love this. In her personal life, she was one of the biggest narcissists that ever lived, and demanded that her followers be almost cult-like in their devotion to her and in total agreement with everything she ever uttered. She did not want her followers to "find their own answer." She wanted them to accept her answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 She did not want her followers to "find their own answer." She wanted them to accept her answer. She even says as much in the video when she talks about presenting her new morality, she's not hoping people search their own way through life, she is evangelical about her way, her Objectivism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Ok, I didn't say the post was wrong or dumb, first off.But what I find ironic about it is that I think Rand would say to come up with your own ideas and inspire yourself through your own logic and reason. Don't take everything she says as truth. And I'm not saying you're doing that, but you said that you liked to read her book for its own thought-provoking philosophy and story. I think its ironic because I think - based only on my reading of A.S. - she would say not to do that. Honestly, no, she really wouldn't have. She would want you to take everything she says as truth. And she would mock you if you didn't, because to her, the "truth" of her beliefs was so self-evident that anyone who disagreed was not intellectually worthy of further attention. Ann Coulter used to quote Ayn Rand to me as though it automatically concluded the argument by its undeniable truth. It was like talking evolution with a bibilical literalist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." Attributed to Paul Krugman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." Attributed to Paul Krugman That truly is one of the greatest rips of all time. Positively Churchillian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Attributed to Paul Krugman Incorrectly. He only quoted it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 I'll reply to both since they are both on the same issue.Ayn Rand didn't write a pure fictional novel, she wrote the philosophy of Objectivism in the form of a narrative. So, Atlas Farted isn't "just" fiction, in the same way that for Dan Brown "The Da Vinci Code" isn't fiction, as well as Philip Pullman's "Golden Compass" isn't "just" fiction, and for the sake of fairness C.S. Lewis' Narnia Chronicles. You can enjoy Ayn Rand's work without agreeing with it. I've read both Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead, and I don't agree with most of her philosophical teachings besides a few. My Dad (and one of his closest friends) are huge fans of The Fountainhead and could care less about Objectivism. They enjoyed it for completely different reasons (they are both architects). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Honestly, no, she really wouldn't have. She would want you to take everything she says as truth. And she would mock you if you didn't, because to her, the "truth" of her beliefs was so self-evident that anyone who disagreed was not intellectually worthy of further attention.Ann Coulter used to quote Ayn Rand to me as though it automatically concluded the argument by its undeniable truth. It was like talking evolution with a bibilical literalist. Well, I haven't done the research on her interviews, etc. I was just basing it on my reading of Atlas Shrugged. She definitely had a disdain for sheep. She wanted people to think for her own, in A.S. So, take that for what its worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 You can enjoy Ayn Rand's work without agreeing with it. I've read both Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead, and I don't agree with most of her philosophical teachings besides a few. My Dad (and one of his closest friends) are huge fans of The Fountainhead and could care less about Objectivism. They enjoyed it for completely different reasons (they are both architects). I guess. I'm an attorney but I can't stand Scott Turow and the other "legal thriller" writers. But I guess that makes sense. Nevertheless, objectively speaking ( ) Rand is a horrible, turgid writer. My 15 year-old writes better prose than Rand did. The only writer who ever lived that got away with that kind of run-on sentence structure and rambling repetitive prose was James Joyce, and I still suspect that Joyce is really an elaborate troll foisted on the world by a secret society of literary critics who are giggling at what they got away with. ---------- Post added January-18th-2012 at 01:39 PM ---------- Well, I haven't done the research on her interviews, etc. I was just basing it on my reading of Atlas Shrugged. She definitely had a disdain for sheep. She wanted people to think for her own, in A.S. So, take that for what its worth. Sure. I was just saying that Rand in real life didn't resemble her purported ideals, not in the least. She thought she did, but she pretty much was delusional. Kind of like Objectivism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 That truly is one of the greatest rips of all time. Positively Churchillian. It is one of my faves. I like a lot of his quotes. Not to go OT, but at least somewhat relevant and for my more dedicated left-leaning amigos, here's another of his: “I believe in a relatively equal society, supported by institutions that limit extremes of wealth and poverty. I believe in democracy, civil liberties, and the rule of law. That makes me a liberal, and I’m proud of it.” And something I have been saying for decades with my "Willful ignorance + loud arrogance" theme as describing so many compulsive but cognitively crippled "opinionaters" in every venue, he says much more eloquently: “In our country, learned ignorance is on the rise.” So to support the "more-informed" option and tie back to the topic again, here is a link for readers who would like some objectively detailed background/summary of Ayn Rand, from one of my favorite sources: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ayn-rand/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 I guess. I'm an attorney but I can't stand Scott Turow and the other "legal thriller" writers. But I guess that makes sense.Nevertheless, objectively speaking ( ) Rand is a horrible, turgid writer. My 15 year-old writes better prose than Rand did. The only writer who ever lived that got away with that kind of run-on sentence structure and rambling repetitive prose was James Joyce, and I still suspect that Joyce is really an elaborate troll foisted on the world by a secret society of literary critics who are giggling at what they got away with. Atlas Shrugged is probably the most painful reading I've ever done. I eventually couldn't go sentence to sentence and pretty much had to weed out several portions (something I never do). I thought the Fountainhead was an easier read than Atlas Shrugged, probably because I enjoyed the story a lot more. I have no idea how SS has read Atlas Shrugged three times already. Once was enough for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Ayn Rand is an intellectual dwarf. See which books people like John Adams and Thomas Jefferson found appealing. Read them. Stop wasting your life on juvenile immature crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 And yet so many Christians flock to her message blind to the fact that she stood against the very good news that Jesus preached.Ayn: People should only be loved if they have earned love thus making them worthy of love. Jesus: Love even the least of these, for when you do then you love me. Ayn wouldn't know love if it hit her in the head. she's more anti-Buddha than she is anti-Jesus. If helping people makes you happy, then according to her view of objectivism, you should help people. What she is saying is that you need to make your own happiness; don't expect others to do it for you. It was plain in that interview that the interviewer had no grasp on what she was saying and kept trying to put words into her mouth, especially on the topic of love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 she's more anti-Buddha than she is anti-Jesus. If helping people makes you happy, then according to her view of objectivism, you should help people. That's not Jesus though, that is self serving, because it is what you get out of the "helping" that is important to Rand. That is only confused with Jesus' teaching if you bash your head against a train a dozen times. What she is saying is that you need to make your own happiness; don't expect others to do it for you. It was plain in that interview that the interviewer had no grasp on what she was saying and kept trying to put words into her mouth, especially on the topic of love. I think she spoke very clearly, her version of altruism is not altruism at all but is serving self. The New Testament says that we are to die to self, that is clearly against Ayn's Objectivist nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 ASF have you read Atlas Shrugged or any other book written by her? Asking this out of pure curiosity, and not as a taunt. (I'm pretty neutral in regards to Rand, don't care either way). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 ASF have you read Atlas Shrugged or any other book written by her?Asking this out of pure curiosity, and not as a taunt. (I'm pretty neutral in regards to Rand, don't care either way). Nope, and won't for the same reason that I don't read Hitchens. I have heard her speak about her Objectivism and I've read what proponents of Objectivism have to say. For me I don't need to wallow in a pig pen to know I'm gonna be covered in crap, as such there is no need for me to read Ayn's Objectivist propaganda to know I'll be covered in her crap. People approach stuff like this too lightly, in that they discount how much investing that much time into contrary philosophies does shape our thinking even if you don't want it to shape it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 That's not Jesus though, that is self serving, because it is what you get out of the "helping" that is important to Rand. That is only confused with Jesus' teaching if you bash your head against a train a dozen times.I think she spoke very clearly, her version of altruism is not altruism at all but is serving self. The New Testament says that we are to die to self, that is clearly against Ayn's Objectivist nonsense. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying her objectivism is in line with Jesus, but just not anti-Jesus. Anti-Jesus would be exploitation of others for the purpose of your own happiness. She's more of the thought that everyone is in charge of their own happiness, and that they do not owe happiness to others, and others do not owe it to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying her objectivism is in line with Jesus, but just not anti-Jesus. Anti-Jesus would be exploitation of others for the purpose of your own happiness. She's more of the thought that everyone is in charge of their own happiness, and that they do not owe happiness to others, and others do not owe it to them. Her Objectivism is about using others for your own interests, that is anti-Jesus. What's more is that Jesus tells us that loving others is a mandate even if we receive nothing in return. She would have rejected that out-right, just like she says in the interview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Her Objectivism is about using others for your own interests, that is anti-Jesus. What's more is that Jesus tells us that loving others is a mandate even if we receive nothing in return. She would have rejected that out-right, just like she says in the interview. She doesn't really say that first part. I didn't get that from A.S. Nothing about using others. Its about standing on your own and advancing your own interests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.