OT: Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged”

[Arraya]

Objectivism is basically narcissistic mental masturbation to prove solipsism. It’s gives plausible sounding rational for the virtue of kicking people in the teeth for ones “rational self-interest”, while pretending you are not kicking them in the teeth – because pursuit of ones “rational self-interest has to be good for them as well. Part and parcel of our cultural stupidity that will, most likely, come to an exciting conclusion, some time in our lives, if you are under 60.

Rand was a grouchy old broad that was pissed that her families business was disrupted by the Russian revolution. In her later years, when she was having surgery for lung cancer, she was more than happy to take social security and complained about the pseudo-science of cigarettes being a carcinogen. Obviously, if there was a “market” for cigarettes and it was her “rational self-interest”, it could not be bad thing. She also praised a serial killer for his complete disregard for others and used him as a model for her protagonists. Gushing that “he did not realize other people around him”, as a virtue. Because, you know, thinking about other people is such a hinderance at achieving a perfect state of “selfishness”.

I think she fits in well with the line of thought going back to Aquinas through Hobbes, Locke and Smith. It’s a long line of mental masturbators.

[scaredyclassic]

Ayn Rand is kind of sexy looking.

Why is philosophy, like law, so utterly humorless? Is it because it questions it’s own legitimacy?

I don’t think philosophy and humor are separable. I have no authority to cite for this. But I’d say I’ve been more provoked and stimulated by the simpsons than any dusty selfimportant humorless philosopher. And I think the simpsons has more to teach us about the good life.

I wouldn’t trust any philosopher or awyer for that matter who didn’t have a sensevof humor.

[scaredyclassic]

Ayn Rand is kind of sexy looking.

Why is philosophy, like law, so utterly humorless? Is it because it questions it’s own legitimacy?

I don’t think philosophy and humor are separable. I have no authority to cite for this. But I’d say I’ve been more provoked and stimulated by the simpsons than any dusty selfimportant humorless philosopher. And I think the simpsons has more to teach us about the good life.

I wouldn’t trust any philosopher or awyer for that matter who didn’t have a sensevof humor.

[scaredyclassic]

Ayn Rand is kind of sexy looking.

Why is philosophy, like law, so utterly humorless? Is it because it questions it’s own legitimacy?

I don’t think philosophy and humor are separable. I have no authority to cite for this. But I’d say I’ve been more provoked and stimulated by the simpsons than any dusty selfimportant humorless philosopher. And I think the simpsons has more to teach us about the good life.

I wouldn’t trust any philosopher or awyer for that matter who didn’t have a sensevof humor.

[scaredyclassic]

Ayn Rand is kind of sexy looking.

Why is philosophy, like law, so utterly humorless? Is it because it questions it’s own legitimacy?

I don’t think philosophy and humor are separable. I have no authority to cite for this. But I’d say I’ve been more provoked and stimulated by the simpsons than any dusty selfimportant humorless philosopher. And I think the simpsons has more to teach us about the good life.

I wouldn’t trust any philosopher or awyer for that matter who didn’t have a sensevof humor.

[scaredyclassic]

Ayn Rand is kind of sexy looking.

Why is philosophy, like law, so utterly humorless? Is it because it questions it’s own legitimacy?

I don’t think philosophy and humor are separable. I have no authority to cite for this. But I’d say I’ve been more provoked and stimulated by the simpsons than any dusty selfimportant humorless philosopher. And I think the simpsons has more to teach us about the good life.

I wouldn’t trust any philosopher or awyer for that matter who didn’t have a sensevof humor.

[jstoesz]

Scaredy, have you read the black swan by taleb? I think you would appreciate his view of philosophers, at least I did.

[jstoesz]

Scaredy, have you read the black swan by taleb? I think you would appreciate his view of philosophers, at least I did.

[jstoesz]

Scaredy, have you read the black swan by taleb? I think you would appreciate his view of philosophers, at least I did.

[jstoesz]

Scaredy, have you read the black swan by taleb? I think you would appreciate his view of philosophers, at least I did.

[jstoesz]

Scaredy, have you read the black swan by taleb? I think you would appreciate his view of philosophers, at least I did.

[blahblahblah]

[quote=gandalf]
Same creepy line with creationism. If you teach evolution, you have to teach intelligent design. If you teach the Plato or Aquinas, you have to teach Rand. Required reading.

Right-wing zombies insist you subscribe to their moralizing bullshit, and are worse than Marxists. They aren’t conservative in any sense. Conservatives don’t do ‘required reading’.

As for Atlas Shrugged, it was interesting but not Great Books material. I don’t think anybody should be compelled to read it. The irony is laughable.[/quote]

CREEPY
CREATIONISM
INTELLIGENT DESIGN
RIGHT-WING ZOMBIES
MORALIZING BULLSHIT
MARXISTS
COMPELLED
IRONY
LAUGHABLE

[blahblahblah]

[quote=gandalf]
Same creepy line with creationism. If you teach evolution, you have to teach intelligent design. If you teach the Plato or Aquinas, you have to teach Rand. Required reading.

Right-wing zombies insist you subscribe to their moralizing bullshit, and are worse than Marxists. They aren’t conservative in any sense. Conservatives don’t do ‘required reading’.

As for Atlas Shrugged, it was interesting but not Great Books material. I don’t think anybody should be compelled to read it. The irony is laughable.[/quote]

CREEPY
CREATIONISM
INTELLIGENT DESIGN
RIGHT-WING ZOMBIES
MORALIZING BULLSHIT
MARXISTS
COMPELLED
IRONY
LAUGHABLE

[blahblahblah]

[quote=gandalf]
Same creepy line with creationism. If you teach evolution, you have to teach intelligent design. If you teach the Plato or Aquinas, you have to teach Rand. Required reading.

Right-wing zombies insist you subscribe to their moralizing bullshit, and are worse than Marxists. They aren’t conservative in any sense. Conservatives don’t do ‘required reading’.

As for Atlas Shrugged, it was interesting but not Great Books material. I don’t think anybody should be compelled to read it. The irony is laughable.[/quote]

CREEPY
CREATIONISM
INTELLIGENT DESIGN
RIGHT-WING ZOMBIES
MORALIZING BULLSHIT
MARXISTS
COMPELLED
IRONY
LAUGHABLE

[blahblahblah]

[quote=gandalf]
Same creepy line with creationism. If you teach evolution, you have to teach intelligent design. If you teach the Plato or Aquinas, you have to teach Rand. Required reading.

Right-wing zombies insist you subscribe to their moralizing bullshit, and are worse than Marxists. They aren’t conservative in any sense. Conservatives don’t do ‘required reading’.

As for Atlas Shrugged, it was interesting but not Great Books material. I don’t think anybody should be compelled to read it. The irony is laughable.[/quote]

CREEPY
CREATIONISM
INTELLIGENT DESIGN
RIGHT-WING ZOMBIES
MORALIZING BULLSHIT
MARXISTS
COMPELLED
IRONY
LAUGHABLE

[Author]

Posts