Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
I happen to know a good number of self-proclaimed liberals (who also happen to consider themselves intellectuals - what a surprise!) who have the standard knee-jerk reaction to Ayn Rand, which tends to be as revealing as the opposite viewpoint's reactions. Perhaps so-called liberals just can't stand the idea of an individual sometimes being more important than the so-called Whole? Sorry folks, it's necessary on most occasions to rise up above the norm; and, more often than not, when one does so, the ones around him/her are attracted by any of a number of things, power, assumed power, aura, whatever - and more often than not, it's NOT what the individual wanted to get Everyone Else to notice in the first place, while factions all round have battles about a variety of items, most of which were constructed for the benefit of a select few (or one), but are portrayed as Global Truths nonetheless. In this way should said movement fail, who can blame anyone for the pursuit of a Global Truth? Rand's portrayal of those Other Than The Individual in "The Fountainhead" is probably what originally pissed off liberals though - its representation of the press is less than God-like, and therefore an insult to those who worship such people and their efforts, right or wrong. I think the argument of having domain over one's creations is a vital point, though. And it's something that's been filling court rooms for decades - look at any suit about Intellectual Property. Secondly there's the issue of the non-creatives of our world, who mostly enjoy creative things - but there's always a small percentage that, lacking the ability to create themselves, will always resort to theft of one kind or another to at least appear to surpass their own limitations. If you don't think there's a difference between people who create, and those who don't, perhaps it's one's own lack of creativity that urges such (ahem) SPURIOUS thinking. Stephen Goodman EarthLight Productions * http://www.earthlight.net ----- Original Message ----- From: <KRosser414@aol.com> To: <Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 8:07 AM Subject: Re: Loopers-Delight-d Digest V00 #74 > In a message dated 3/10/00 7:24:43 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Loopers-Delight-d-request@annihilist.com writes: > > << So, > if you have a feeling that seems irrational, it's really your ideas that > are irrational. I strongly suggest you look into Objectivism, the > philosophy of Ayn Rand. >> > > I had plenty of psudeo-intellectual acquaintences in college, including a > particularly irritating ex-girlfriend (so there's my subjective >angle...), > that constantly trumpeted the philosophy and "genius" of Ayn Rand. These > people all confused their ego with "rationality" and delighted on sitting > around and stroking it ad nauseum. I gave it a shot, but I thought then, and > think now, that it's not only utter garbage but intellectually cowardly. I'm > not going to claim to have read everything by Ayn Rand, but I feel about it > like I feel about eating fried pork chops: if you like it and have no > trouble digesting it, good for you, but I didn't see the point in going any > further than one or two once my stomach was aching. > > If you get something meaningful from it, and I mean this sincerely, more > power to you. But like the more over-zealous followers of any of these > religions you find so offensive, you're making a mistake if you think it > applies to anyone's reality but your own. > > IMHO, of course, and as off-topic as ever, > Ken R >