What's the problem with her philosophy, /his/?
nothing, capitalism is the only way.
>>75764
She takes capitalism to autistic levels, treating it like a religion rather than an economic system.
Google Sears. That should explain everything.
It makes liberals buttmad even at its mention
>muh free market
>fuck you, i got mine lel
She raised a generation of neckbeards that treat her shitty book as gospel.
>>75764
Sorry I have a liberal college women studies mayor
who is she and what she did?
>photograph
She is from after 1900 so no relevant to me
ethical egoism as a concept within morality is absolutely riddled with problems, many ethicists have shredded it time and time again
some discussion here that you might be interested in
>http://www.iep.utm.edu/egoism/#SH2b
>>75764
It only works in her novel, for starters.
Capitalism taken to a logical extreme is shit, and this principle can be applied to 99% of things out there. People who say otherwise are retards not fit to drive a car.
[spoiler]I still like her books as stories though[/spoiler]
>>75918
I don't have*
She basically created a whole philosophical system just to rationalise being a total fucking asshole and turn it into a moral imperative.
It's not very hard to guess how well that would work in practice as a political system. I think Bioshock gives a pretty decent idea.
>>75850
But this was actually a common trope back then in art, you see a lot of anti-capitalist art back then with dollar signs literally being worshiped in place of god.
Then again capitalism was different back then, and people with economic and political theories were actually terrified of the real possibility of state controlled markets because of bolsheviks back then.
>>75985
Assholes through history have been admired, the weak have a tendency to gravitate towards obeying the strong.
>>75918
How are there people alive who dont know Ayn Rand? Whatever you think of her, she was a very influential thinker.
Also, this belongs on /lit/
>>75996
It's natural to exaggerate and slippery slope the philosophies and systems you DISLIKE
It's another thing to exaggerate the things you support.
Her biggest problem was she could never grasp altruism was just a spook
She's a fun read though if you're not retarded and can critically reason; here's a good lecture on her ethics:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Utjl2ZC-Hdw
>>76046
Yeah except according to her philosophy everybody has to be an asshole.
>>75764
She overstated a lot of good valid points.
>>76079
nice strawman
>>76387
She literally says "altruism is evil", "empathy is evil". This isn't a caricature, she said those words.
Someone with no sense of altruism or empathy is what is commonly referred to as an asshole.
>>76667
Well, or a psychopath.
>>76667
she has a weird definition of altruism I don't remember her saying anything about empathy being evil
>>76073
People exaggerate things they like all the time. I think people just need to understand the context of early 20th century philosophies and economic arguments, they were formulated often as a reaction of Marx and the CCCP. Almost no one currently thinks a fully state run economy is a good thing. (A government with a market that can exercise unilateral power to out compete other nations on the other hand...). Things like Austrian economics are a relic of the past, and honestly not that well formulated.
>>76836
Especially true and especially forgivable for a woman who grew up under Bolshevik dictatorship
She's a spookified and inferior Stirner tbqh
>>75764
it's literally retard tier.
Capitalism is great for many reasons but it is NOT an effective gauge of morality.
She literally wrote that if you saw a person drowning you are morally obligated to not save them unless you are sure that saving them will do something good for you.
Her philosophy has been used to justify being a selfish asshole.
For fuck's sake, she believed altruism was immoral (or evil, maybe both).
>>75764
When you say "her philosophy" do you mean her "her philosophy" or "the ludicrous caricature of her philosophy that libkeks like to circulate so they feel good about themselves?"
Honestly I hate the bitch, but the the shit people say about her is so embarrassingly uninformed.
"Salon told me that Ayn Rand thinks we should all should slit each other's throats and everything is about money!" "Huffington Post told me she wants everyone to be selfish and that poor people have it coming!"
Jesus Christ, does Paul Krugman have priority access to all your higher cognition? Gas yourselves please.
Her fatal flaw is being a libertarian and a disgusting lack of understanding of Marxist philosophy. Basically she is a weak mind who enjoys being classkeked and sucking off the rich. (i.e. “govt. coercion bad. coercion by bourgeois good”). Not to mention the woman who railed against social services spent the remainder of her scumbag days “leeching” (as she might say) of said system. Also, no such thing as a free market. Also Rand rejects the notion of libido domini and explicitly states that man’s highest achievement is to self-serve and produce for themselves a philosophy/lifestyle that best suits their personal habits/world view etc. I find that this sort of logic forgoes fundamental social interaction of human nature (another contradiction in her assertions on the nature of that as well). Basically, save yourself the time and don’t read Atlas Shrugged, it’s a waste of life to read such drivel.
>>77157
>"To a gas chamber, go!"
>>77170
Ayn Rand was not a libertarian. Objectivists hate libertarians.
>>77205
as a libertarian, they can go fuck themselves too
especially the ones who say they are libertarian. Those guys can go play in traffic.
>>77170
She didn't just understand Marxist philosophy, she lived it.
>>76569
BOTH BOARDS
O
T
H
B
O
A
R
D
S
>>75764
>believed in free will
>believe in altruism
>muh selfish asshole meme criticsm
You do realize that all acts are selfish right? You're just an involuntary egoist if you don't recognize this.
I remember i gave an older friend of mine (82) one of her books which i never read but bought when i was 16, I can only hope he didn't read through it.His opinion of me would have been lowered to the grave
>>77205
Not nearly as much as we have them.
>>77257
how is sophomore year of high school
>>77257
>all acts are selfish
go jump on a grenade
Not even the smartest people on earth are as rational as the her charters, Dagny and Rarden are just not realistic. She also pushes the boundary of those James Taggart, it's almost absurd in some sense.
Hard to disagree, she has some good points but in the end people are too emotional to be so strictly rational.
>>77328
The way Rand uses the term, charitable actions *are* supposed to be selfish in that they procure either social capital or benefit the actor directly by giving him fuzzy feelings. The point is, no one would give to charity if it makes them feel like shit.
What Objectivists object to is the despondent kind of altruism where people sulk like faggots until they get what they want.
“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."
>>77257
Family units and tribalism disagree with you. The brain can be wired to think what is good for the group is, on average, good for you.
>>77257
>I can only act selfishly so others are the same way
Stop projecting, faggot.
>>77318
Great counterargument. Consider me thoroughly rebuffed.
>>77328
Again, see my above statment.
>>77409
Yes, and you want to save your family or your group because it is beneficial for you to do so.
Also a selfish act doesn't have to be beneficial to you in the first place. Even something detrimental to you is a selfish act.
>>77451
3 of you have replied in the exact same way. Way to go.
Every act you take is an attempt to fulfill your desires, even if you hide it behind the pretext of helping others. It's an empty idea used to satisfy your egoism.
Maybe you guys are just using the narrow definition of selfish. I'm not talking about fucking over others for your own gain, be it materially or whatever.
Even giving away all your money and dedicating your life to helping others is a selfish act, or to put it in other terms is an egoist act.
>>77205
Might have been an objectivist, but you cannot deny that the way she constructed the story was highly in line with with libertarian fiscal beliefs. Not to mention her spouting about everyman for himself is perhaps the greatest tenant of libertarian mode of thought. Say what you like, but she’s simply a massive hypocrite.
>>77241
kek. Implying CCCP was not corrupted by Leninist interpretation of Marxism, poorly executed etc. Clearly you misunderstand Marxism and its application in the CCCP. It was shit because they did not follow Marxism, Bolsheviks were absolutely moronic, etc. Not to mention, if we want to play the “lived under ‘communism’” card (because it isn’t Marxism, as you imply), please enlighten me on how to counter the countless people who enjoyed the prosperity. I’d like to clarify I’m not a tankie, and think the whole notion of “lived under communism, here is my opinion” is non-sequitur in most cases.
>>77593
literally kill yourself
it's damn selfish so you ought to be just fine with it
>>77697
>Say what you like, but she’s simply a massive hypocrite.
Name a philosopher who wasn't a hypocrite, or lived their life in accordance to their philosophy 100% of the time.
>>77817
>i can't make a counter argument so i'll use the kill yourself meme that's a good trick
>>77152
>a poster is a source
>>75962
>imlying people don't act in their self interests
Want to know why people help others? Because it makes them feel good.
True altruism does not exist.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9294898
>>77170
>Not to mention the woman who railed against social services spent the remainder of her scumbag days “leeching” (as she might say) of said system
>forced to pay into system
>not using its benefits
And people say they actually read Ayn Rand's works.
>>77859
I don't waste my time arguing with the braindead.
>>77825
Never made such a claim that any philosopher lived their philosophy to the fullest extent. She is perhaps the worst offender of betrayal to her own ideology, however.
>>77825
The problem is she's a meme philosopher who people pretend is still relevant in full. That's like Plato and celestial bodies and humors.
>>77939
Nah, you just continue your inane and tired shitposts instead. What a better use of your time.
>>75764
A friend and I visited Italy a few years back, toured a lot of the great museums. Along the way, we had a bit of an aesthetic disagreement. I actually thought that Bernini's David was better than the famous Michelangelo's sculpture of the same.
In the end, we agreed on most of the particulars. Michelangelo's is more impressive, powerful, imposing, but Bernini's is more human and complicated. We agreed to disagree on our opinions as to which was the better statue.
According to Rand though, there is ONE objective truth in all matters, and if people disagree, it is because one or both imperfectly grasp this objective truth. Therefore, you cannot have an aesthetic disagreement where one person might value imposition and another values humanistic facial expression. One of us is right, and the other of us is wrong.
If you don't think a moral system like that is retarded, there isn't much hope for you.
The problem was that she was right and we didn't listen
we wouldn't listen
>>75764
nothing really
I only care about my family. I don't care about niggers and spics. Fuck giving them handouts.
>>77916
I’ve read, nice ad hominem anon. She’s a scumbag because she very clearly detested social services, but masked and justified her usage of them by saying it served her self-interest. Basically she wanted to absolve herself of her flawed logic. Maybe she should’ve used all the proceeds from volk like you who shilled out for her shitty content.
>>77996
This wasn't her view on art at all, so we know you know nothing about her actual views.
>>78028
Basically I think she used her philosophy to justify her contrarian actions and betrayal of said ideology she spouted. She consistently claims to be objectivist, yet spews libertarianism. She claims to detest x and because of “muh self-interest” she justifies her taking advantage of x (i.e. the social services I previously mentioned.)
>>78107
>he claims to detest x and because of “muh self-interest” she justifies her taking advantage of x (i.e. the social services I previously mentioned.)
So it's not an actual betrayal at all. The fact that she detests something doesn't mean she can't make use of it if it is in her self-interest to do so. It's consistent with her views.
>forced to pay into social services
>mention that if you are coerced into paying for a service you should use it
>hurr why did she use social benefits
>>78228
But it’s a backwards consistency. It’s circular logic. She lacks sufficient causality and basis to justify her actions. Seldom will you find a philosopher who so easily betrays their system with their cowardice. Rand was a self-interested classkek.
>>78230
You’re a genius. Re: If she was so convinced of her ideology why didn’t she consider dying for it. How can you seriously consider a life time of espousing bullshit against social systems and then be okay.
> hurr muh self-interest.
Fuck off, anon.
>>78311
>/his/ - History & Humanities
>Humanities
i have never seen a problem with basic safety net social services just the leaches who live off them for life. why cant all the unemployed people just become work battalions like in China ect? that being said wasnt Ayn Rnad a hypocrite and deluded for thinking that Fascist corporatism meant freedom?
>>75764
>the only thing that matters is self-interest
If you can't see the problems with this then you can't be more than 12 years old.
>>78760
Because leeches aren't even actually that big of a problem. People just like sensationalizing it because they know it triggers you.
>>78374
...the victims, who opposed such laws, have a clear right to any refund of their own money—and they would not advance the cause of freedom if they left their money unclaimed, for the benefit of the welfare-state administration.
It doesn't contradict her at all faggot.
>>79053
forgot my maymay arrows
that was from her newsletter in 1966
>>75764
According to her if someone doesnt agree with her philosophy, they can be exploited. This would not work in today's world with free flow of information due to internet.
>>76667
Its not very well worded but I sort of agree with her. I haven't read any of her work but altruism for the sake of altruism can be and often is very destructive. There are genuine logical reasons to help other people's survival. And sometimes there are none. If you help someone that shouldn't be helped then you've done something wrong. I dont really know what she was on about other than what I've heard but it seems to be an extreme from of amorality that's short sighted and flawed but at its heart still a good ideology.
>>77170
>le they just don't understand, that's why they disagree maymay
I've has it up to here with people like this.
>>75764
It hurts my fee fees when she doesn't tell me how how all the bad things I haven't done make me a good person.
>>76667
Yes. I bet she would also be against the Ministry of Truth. How can you be against truth?!
>>75962
I don't get this stupid shit. What the fuck is true altruism. how to be an autistic empirical faggot take a word that has meaning and a working usage add a word in front of it and make it an unsatisfiable definition. damage language.
>>75764
The less fortunate need the help of the more fortunate because charity functions as a safety net for society.
Leaving aside the debate of whether charity should be enforced (taxation and social spending) vs voluntarily (donating 100 bucks a month to UNICEF or something), the fact of the matter is that it keeps the bottom of our society from falling out.
Do you really want American poor shitting in the streets and spreading cholera? Because without assistance from their economical betters, that's the end result.
>>75764
>What's the problem with her philosophy, /his/?
she didn't follow it at any point
