← Home ← Back to /lit/

Thread 24812398

62 posts 16 images /lit/
Anonymous No.24812398 [Report] >>24812478 >>24812610 >>24812704 >>24813375 >>24813617 >>24813853 >>24814007 >>24815103 >>24815387 >>24815391 >>24815529 >>24816220 >>24816751 >>24816891 >>24819210 >>24821336 >>24822768
Why does she cause so much seething?
Anonymous No.24812425 [Report] >>24812430 >>24812692 >>24813925 >>24821641
https://nintil.com/why-ayn-rand-is-not-and-ought-not-be-taken-seriously

>I have never read a piece of work from Ayn Rand, beyond some paragraphs and extracts here and there on the internet. I never gave Objectivism, her system of thought, much importance.

>But there are people -Objectivists- who think she is one of the greatest, or the greatest, philosopher ever (along with Aristotle, they'll add). Sometimes, Objectivists tell people who have not read Rand to read her, so that they can become rational, and abandon their "non-Objectivist, mystical beliefs".

>I haven't read anything from Rand because I consider that the effort won't be worth it, as every time I've read something from Objectivists, I have not been persuaded that there is much to be learned from Rand. And also, there exists a critique available on the net that demolishes Objectivism. I will give reasons later why I believe the critique succeeds.

>This conclusion, however, has to be qualified. Should we reject views just because others with good qualifications say they ought to be rejected, and there are no critiques of their arguments for the rejections? Usually, yes. Such combination of factors is a very good reason to reject something without reading about it. This is how we generally go about in our life: rarely we go to the depths of Physics' journals to believe or disbelieve claims that physicists make. If a lot of people who have studied a subject for a long time agree on something, that is evidence for that something. It is not ultimate evidence, but the burden of proof is on you is you want to go against the consensus.

>So defenders of ideas that are out of the consensus of relevant experts should take the best critiques that have been made against them, and refute them. It would also be nice for them to provide a brief introduction to their ideas, to reduce the cost for others of acquiring information about those ideas.
Anonymous No.24812430 [Report] >>24812607
>>24812425
this is not the answer, but a hint to the answer is buried in this post.
>I haven't read anything from Rand because I consider that the effort won't be worth it
people who *have* read it found that their effort wasn't worth it. this is why rand causes so much seething.
Anonymous No.24812478 [Report] >>24821355
>>24812398 (OP)
I always associate her with 2016-era trumptards, as the first time I was introduced to her books was when I had found them on some right-wing book infographic from /pol/. Julius Evola too.
Anonymous No.24812607 [Report]
>>24812430
From the article:
>EDIT: Read beyond the first paragraph! Also, read this to understand how to reject something without reading it.
https://artir.wordpress.com/2016/04/10/on-the-express-acceptance-and-rejection-of-beliefs/
Anonymous No.24812610 [Report]
>>24812398 (OP)
Sexism and antisemitism
Anonymous No.24812692 [Report]
>>24812425
I'm not defending her but the fact academics don't like her makes her feel like a kindred spirit.
Anonymous No.24812704 [Report] >>24812721 >>24812906 >>24813380 >>24813648 >>24818880
>>24812398 (OP)
Philosophy is an idiotic waste of time. Useless wordcels create problems which don't exist, and then fail to provide any solution to them.
Reading Ayn Rand is a waste of time, just like how reading Hegel, Marx, or Nietzsche is a waste of time.
Philosophers never (zero exceptions) actually live up to their own lofty ideals. They talk talk talk and write write write and do nothing.
The real question is why Ayn Rand is treated properly while academics still pretend there's value in other philosophers. My take: if they acknowledged all philosophers as equally valid, it would betray the scam, so they arbitrarily picked one to hate.
There's a hypothetical other world where Rand is taken seriously in academia and Fichte generates nothing but seethe, and other than that, the world is completely identical to our own.
Anonymous No.24812721 [Report] >>24812906
>>24812704
People will think you're a brainlet, but of course you're correct

Philosophy is cargo cult inspired by mathematics
Anonymous No.24812906 [Report] >>24815427
>>24812704
>>24812721
>philosophy bad
>anyway, here's my shitty philosophy
Kek, every single time.
Anonymous No.24813375 [Report]
>>24812398 (OP)
It's mostly from University professors who are left leaning that despise her because of her whole "CAPITALISM LE GOOD" stance and entry level philosophy but here's where that they don't understand and why she's misunderstood.

She's a novelist, not a philosopher.
Anonymous No.24813380 [Report]
>>24812704
>Reading Ayn Rand is a waste of time

So is reading your post you faggot but at least she was more relatable and compelling with what she wrote especially when it dealt with issues that still today such as mediocrity and invidualism
Anonymous No.24813617 [Report]
>>24812398 (OP)
isn't because she inspired a bunch of 90s economists (and more recently, techbros) into some libertarian+ ideology with a savior complex who ended up causing the 1997 crisis? i remember BBC did a pretty good documentary on it, All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace.
Anonymous No.24813648 [Report]
>>24812704
>Philosophers never (zero exceptions) actually live up to their own lofty ideals
Mainlander did
Anonymous No.24813667 [Report]
OP is a frog poster. He does not care about your answer. He asks this three times a week sometimes and we all know why she's crap.
Back in the good old days, /lit/ banned these threads so we could talk about books.

I propose we just link to this and ignore the bitch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKqUUYl5SCY
Anonymous No.24813840 [Report]
I'm never going to read her books, but I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt since her detractors are insufferable.
Anonymous No.24813853 [Report] >>24813894
>>24812398 (OP)
Because she called bullshit on the libtard/left alliance. Too bad she tried to start a cult and was saved by welfare in later life.
Anonymous No.24813894 [Report] >>24813916
>>24813853
She's called bullshit by sensible people with good taste.
Anonymous No.24813916 [Report] >>24813930
>>24813894
No, that's the one place Randtards have you guys in a corner. Her opinion essays and those of her movement were on point (e.g. The Anti-Industrial Revolution and The Virtue of Selfishness) and her fiction isn't any worse than a lot of mainstream stuff that's is currently lauded by critics. The problem is she tried to start a self-help cult and the ideological rigidity such necessitates turned her into a hypocrite.
Anonymous No.24813925 [Report] >>24813931 >>24814635
>>24812425
>I haven't read anything from Rand
Opinion discarded

OP rand haters are numales or women
Anonymous No.24813930 [Report] >>24813944 >>24815338
>>24813916
Cribbed and distorted Stirnerism. She's a moron on top of being a no-talent.
You sir are as moronic.
Anonymous No.24813931 [Report]
>>24813925
God I hate these "people"
Anonymous No.24813944 [Report] >>24814020
>>24813930
Not an argument, twerp. I'm glad to see she's still inspiring irrationality in her enemies from beyond the grave.
Anonymous No.24814000 [Report] >>24816795
Fountainhead is a pretty good book if you can get over the silliness of the philosophy. Atlas Shrugged is kind of insufferable because it's basically all the silliness of Fountainhead with none of the charm. She causes seethe because she's an easy target and a low-hanging fruit for the slop-eating sections of the Left, and an inspiration and prophetess for the slop-eating sections of the Right. In reality, she's just a wackobird who can write decent fiction when she restrains herself.
Anonymous No.24814007 [Report]
>>24812398 (OP)
Its less her and more the retards that take her seriously
Anonymous No.24814020 [Report] >>24814032
>>24813944
Not an argument.
>Struts offs with satisfied grin
Anonymous No.24814032 [Report]
>>24814020
>struts off
You posted a comment, retard.
Anonymous No.24814635 [Report]
>>24813925
Fuck it I'm reading Fountainhead and there's nothing you numale faggots on /here/ can do about it
Anonymous No.24815103 [Report] >>24816756
>>24812398 (OP)

She claimed to be a philosopher but had a mind-bending level stupid opinion of Plato
Anonymous No.24815338 [Report]
>>24813930
Stirner's philosophy allows for pedophilia and is entirely idealistic tranny shit
Anonymous No.24815387 [Report]
>>24812398 (OP)
I was just watching the Mike Wallace interview and she says something I'm sure is one of the reasons, especially here.
>If a man wants love he should correct his weaknesses, or his flaws, and he may deserve it. But he cannot expect the unearned, neither in love, nor in money, neither in matter, nor spirit.
Anonymous No.24815391 [Report] >>24816908 >>24818714
>>24812398 (OP)
(sigh)

Ayn Rand developed her philosophy specifically because she was so ugly that even in the shitstorm of the Russian Revolution neither her kike daddy nor the inbred alcoholic Bolsheviks were interested in raping her. She coped by convincing herself that this is due to socialism repressing the healthy and natural instincts (to rape Ayn Rand) in men, and men should act as selfish as possible (i.e. finally rape her). In her books, tall selfish men with big arms are constantly raping her self-insert character. She completely misunderstood men, as it always happens with women.

A real man is a living antithesis to Objectivism. As a human male, I cannot act in my own personal interests since I naturally have none, so instead I rape women out of selfless kindness, as all men do.

If Ayn Rand ever met me, I would rape the Objectivism out of her to absolutely no benefit of my own (there can be no personal gain or profit from raping Ayn Rand desu), and that would collapse her world-view on a metaphysical level. It would become indisputably self-evident to her that she kept writing books because despite all of her efforts she never got a good rape. She never got a good rape because the only men she interacted with were Objectivists who fell for her books - books written by a women dreaming of being raped, about a woman dreaming of being raped. The only men who can enjoy her books are women in male bodies, inherently incapable of raping her, and instead hoping that she would rape them, that she would incarnate as a the man she dreams of, the Messiah hiding under the skin of the Prophet. She would see why all of her relationships with men were such disasters, both of them eagerly waiting for the other to rape, waiting to no outcome. She would love me and my kind dick selflessly in return despite all her will, leaving her with absolutely nothing to ground her ideas anymore, finally feeling true freedom - freedom as an absence, as a flight with no land holding your feet, as hers would be dangling high above. The dreams of an Atlantean man of self-interests would evaporate from her head with the moisture of my cum drying in her scruffy hair. She would sing praises to Lenin whenever her mouth is not taken by selfless work on my cock and balls.
Anonymous No.24815427 [Report]
>>24812906
Ikr? You can't exist outside its frame of reference without referencing the object itself
Anonymous No.24815529 [Report]
>>24812398 (OP)
That's a dude
Anonymous No.24816220 [Report] >>24816756
>>24812398 (OP)
> Rages against the government going out of it's way to help the average citizen, advocates for a "minimalist" government
> Dies on social security
That tells you everything you need to know about her.
I'd hatefuck Ayn so hard desu
Anonymous No.24816751 [Report]
>>24812398 (OP)
It’s best if U read Aristotle, Rand and KELLEY together!

Peikoff and the Ayn Rand Institute are cultists compared to Kelley and Altas Society.
Anonymous No.24816756 [Report]
>>24815103
So did Popper yet U niggers don’t say anything about him.


>>24816220
True.

Should have supported UBI or NIT
Anonymous No.24816763 [Report]
"objectivism" is just LaVeyan Satanism

Boring shit that's not wortwhile
Anonymous No.24816795 [Report] >>24818903
>>24814000
It's not pretty good, the writing is atrocious and deadly serious. The only way it could possibly be good is if it was written by someone else as a parody of Rand
Anonymous No.24816891 [Report] >>24816905
>>24812398 (OP)
Because she directly opposes the moral bases of both socialism/leftism and religious conservatism resulting on the NPCs that form those ideologies to seethe and attack her without even touch her ideas in fear people might slightly agree with her
Anonymous No.24816905 [Report] >>24822081
>>24816891
She was educated in the Soviet Union and lived off government benefits.
If anything, she's just a worthless hypocrite like all libertarians. No one cares about your "ideas" when you don't even live them.
Anonymous No.24816908 [Report]
>>24815391
>(sigh)
Stopped reading there. You're not on Reddit.
Anonymous No.24816909 [Report]
Misogyny
Anonymous No.24818167 [Report]
OP is a faggot
Anonymous No.24818714 [Report]
>>24815391
>to absolutely no benefit of my own
wow, way to completely miss the point of Objectivism
Anonymous No.24818880 [Report] >>24818917 >>24822497
>>24812704
Of all those people, Marx actually did live up this ideas. He helped organize the working class movement in Germany and Great Britian. Hegel and Nietzsche were largely just academics.
Anonymous No.24818903 [Report]
>>24816795
>the writing is atrocious
lol shut the fuck up
Anonymous No.24818909 [Report]
>OHOHOHOH WOMYN WRITER
>NOOOOOOOOO NOT WITH THOSE POLITICS
Anonymous No.24818917 [Report] >>24819755
>>24818880
>Marx actually did live up this ideas
He was a retarded mooch with shitty hygiene who lived in filth, lol.
Anonymous No.24819210 [Report]
>>24812398 (OP)
Because rich failsons take her seriously
Anonymous No.24819755 [Report] >>24819786
>>24818917
You're projecting because you're a loser.
Marx's ideas have shaped the world. The most powerful country in the world, China, uses his philosophy to shape their beliefs.
Anonymous No.24819786 [Report] >>24819824
>>24819755
fuck off dengist retard. china abandoned the revolution long ago.
Anonymous No.24819824 [Report]
>>24819786
>China abandoned revolution because they wouldn't let Maoists do cannibalism in the country side anymore
Shut up you westoid fake leftist baizuo.
Anonymous No.24821336 [Report]
>>24812398 (OP)
Her dismissal of basic human instincts that are necessary for human survival makes her entire worldview laughable. Anytime you discuss matters of family or children with a Randist you'll hear redefinition of basic terms and witness mental gymnastics similar to those of 'that wasn't real communism' types.
Anyone with a modicum of life experience and emotional maturity exceeding that of a teenager can see what a hack she was. Outside of USA those few who even know who she is don't take her seriously at all.
Anonymous No.24821355 [Report]
>>24812478
>zoomers are thinking in terms of meme dispensations

wowza, ya'll r cooked
Anonymous No.24821641 [Report] >>24821843
>>24812425
This article is like when Sam Bankman Fried used Bayesian probability to prove Shakespeare is bad without reading him.
Anonymous No.24821840 [Report]
I first heard of her from bioshock, hate me all you want. Atlas shrugged is pretty cool but it reads like a burn book on all her rivals. Did get a surge of motivation to create and carve something out for myself, make of that how you will. I have too much sympathy and some knowledge to believe that the most entrepreneurial of us would have a functioning government that would care for everyone. She doesn't take Into account the infirm, physically or mentally. Trump is planning on making homelessness a crime punishable by incarceration. It certainly is Not as romantic as she makes it to pull yourself up from your bootstraps.
Anonymous No.24821843 [Report]
>>24821641
Got him.
Anonymous No.24822081 [Report]
>>24816905
>She was educated in the Soviet Union
and ?

> lived off government benefits.
she didn't, she died owning a sizable estate and she herself responded to the people criticizing her by taken social security money by pointing that she was taking back a potion of the value that was forcibly taken from her by the government
Anonymous No.24822475 [Report]
for three reasons, some shared simultaneously by those who hate her:
1) because she was a bitch (a bad person - factual; to spare you many a story: she managed to repel someone like Murray Rothbard).
2) because of her unrelenting, quite logical attacks on things most, even those who tend to agree with her outlook, think are untouchable (example: try talking to someone about her views on selfishness).
3) she suffered the evils against which she wrote so much about.

I've read two bios of her and her novels, and two small books which summarise her views.
i understand why atlas shrugged and the fountainhead are so beloved by those who like them and so loathed by those who don't.
she authored the best "show, don't tell" advocacy of individualism, ambition, and so on. the atlas shrugged speech (which goes on for, what?, 40 pages or so?) was mind-blowing.

from a literary point of view, she's average.

Objectivism strikes me as no less antithetical to human nature than the average version of collectivism.
Anonymous No.24822497 [Report]
>>24818880
You’re having a laugh. Marx?
A bum, a lousy father, a conniving son, a heartless husband—and a theorist whose life was bankrolled by the very class he wanted to liquidate.

Read Wheen. Then we’ll talk.
Anonymous No.24822768 [Report]
>>24812398 (OP)

Regardless of whatever fault one may find with her work, the simple fact that she was personally both an atheist as well as generally favorable to free enterprise and anti-communism puts her ahead of about 95% of the species by default. A deeply and fundamentally correct worldview, overall, which is all the more astonishing in that she was a women. Women, by their very nature, are almost constitutionally required to reject either the religious or the political implications of the above. Very few human beings manage to get both attitudes correct (rejection of religion and rejection of what is broadly understood as "left-wing politics").