About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Post 0

Saturday, October 30, 2004 - 12:27amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

One could be tempted to call the author all sorts of names for this article...but considering that Leonard Piekoff has supposedly proposed leaving acid free copies of ATLAS SHRUGGED all over the earth, so that if, or when, the world breaks down in an orgy of self destruction, hopefully the survivors will find it and be guided by it...and considering that ANTHEM portrays a similar theme...well, call him what you like. But pot, this is kettle...

Post 1

Saturday, October 30, 2004 - 4:56amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
George, your article is superb! You are a brilliant satirist. And the last part of the article, which is not satire, is beautiful.

Barbara

Post 2

Saturday, October 30, 2004 - 4:58amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

(Edited by Barbara Branden on 10/30, 5:00am)


Post 3

Saturday, October 30, 2004 - 8:35amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
George,

I appreciate your point about all the innovations that were created before Objectivism formally existed.  However, for lack of the label "Objectivism", all those innovations really were the product of people who chose the path of objectivity.

Therefore, I would also call them Objectivists, albeit unacknowledged.  They were following the path that Ayn Rand would later formalize and make overt, and actually give a name to.

I also understand that there are certainly people today who live -- as much as possible -- by the rule of objectivity, but who have never formally heard of Objectivism.  I also confirm this because, when I communicate Objectivist principles to people who seem to value objectivity, these folks in particular love to hear them and confirm their deep appreciation that someone else "gets them".

All of these things are resounding positives... I do not -- and would not -- deny them if I could.  However, objectivity also dictates that I acknowledge that so much of the world outside of all this ain't exactly a bed of roses.


Post 4

Saturday, October 30, 2004 - 9:57amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks George, well done.

No hair spliting from me. ;-)

~E.

(Edited by Eric J. Tower on 10/30, 9:58am)


Post 5

Saturday, October 30, 2004 - 10:00amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
George, that was beautiful. In 4 years of critically analyzing the words of others, I find your psycho-epistemological insight to be unprecedented.

Recall that I still haven't addressed your "pilot version" or "preamble" to this new, fine piece of work that you've created (where you mentioned inevitable progress, etc). You sent me reeling back to the drawing board with that one!

If you weren't so damn insightful, I could more easily address these 2 pieces of work. I wish that I had more time to address your somewhat radical and revolutionary psycho-epistemological writings. I've just been too busy to do so. It is my understanding that these words of yours deserve hours of scrutinizing attention.

Thanks for intellectually teasing me so much, though! I hope to properly address your work soon.

Ed

Post 6

Saturday, October 30, 2004 - 1:21pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
This expresses the essence of why Objectivism appealed to me 40 years ago and the essence of Solo appealed to me this year. Thank you, George. You are a wonderful writer and thinker.

Post 7

Saturday, October 30, 2004 - 10:13amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I very much liked the last paragraph of this. The rest was a little over the top but there is truth in it.

I've met plenty of Objectivists who haven't figured out how to apply the philosophy to their lives. Obvious cases where the worldview Aristotle and Rand are ignored. I'm sorry to see people struggling like that.

But those people don't matter much to me. They're whacky. Just gotta dismiss whacky.

The ones who matter are the couple dozen who are just spectacular and who have applied the philosophy to their lives. Often these people are the one's Orion refers to, they had some unarticulated form of Objectivism going before they began reading Rand.


Post 8

Saturday, October 30, 2004 - 3:55pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I think George's article was spot on. My own apocalyptic tendencies were nicely shaken by it.

Post 9

Saturday, October 30, 2004 - 8:35pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Cameron: "I think George's article was spot on. My own apocalyptic tendencies were nicely shaken by it."

Very appropriate wording, Cameron, and very honest of you. Considering that ATLAS itself is apocalyptic, it's hard for those of us (myself included) who took the story to heart NOT to be waiting for the Randian Rapture.

Post 10

Saturday, October 30, 2004 - 10:45pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I do not lose sight of the noble, I do not stop seeing the beauty and good of humanity, and most importantly – I refuse to make suffering a virtue.

That's because you are radiantly *alive*, George.  Thank you for this wonderful piece.


Post 11

Sunday, October 31, 2004 - 12:26amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
George, if I ever meet you, I'll buy you a beer (or whatever you drink) for this wonderful article! I find it quite funny when I meet Christians that have a better sense of life than some Objectivists.

Have a good one!
Adam

Post 12

Sunday, October 31, 2004 - 12:30amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to thank all of you for your very kind responses.

George

PS: Hey Adam, i'll have a Chivas Regal on ice.


Post 13

Sunday, October 31, 2004 - 5:30amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I appreciate your point about all the innovations that were created before Objectivism formally existed.  However, for lack of the label "Objectivism", all those innovations really were the product of people who chose the path of objectivity.

Therefore, I would also call them Objectivists, albeit unacknowledged.  They were following the path that Ayn Rand would later formalize and make overt, and actually give a name to.

Orion,
You would call the founding fathers objectivists? Martin Luther King Jnr? Ludwig von mises (who rejected objectivism outright)? I'm not attacking you I'm genuinely asking if you would.

 


Post 14

Sunday, October 31, 2004 - 10:49amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Joe M wrote:

... leaving acid free copies of ATLAS SHRUGGED all over the earth, so that if, or when, the world breaks down in an orgy of self destruction, hopefully the survivors will find it and be guided by it...and considering that ANTHEM portrays a similar theme...

Considering that ATLAS itself is apocalyptic, it's hard for those of us (myself included) who took the story to heart NOT to be waiting for the Randian Rapture.


Atlas Shrugged is written to the vision that rational, productive, and proud men will flourish (not just survive) through whatever vileness and destruction wrought by the irrational.

That they will do so on their own efforts, physical and intellectual, on this world. That they shall not wait for such havoc to visit their part of this world, however banished they are, to act. That they shall not wait on an act of God, on this world or any other, to do so.

For any parallels there are to be seen between Atlas Shrugged and any Book of Apocalypse, do not mistake the style for the theme.

If in taking the story to heart, you contemn the book as apocalyptic... If in taking the story to heart, you find yourself waiting for the rapture - perchance reexamine your heart.

Or take the story to MIND.

Post 15

Sunday, October 31, 2004 - 5:43pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
George: “If your life is built on pessimism, you are not an Objectivist. If you hold the majority of humanity in contempt, you are not an Objectivist. If you have become so jaded that your sanction of a person or concept requires perfection, you are not an Objectivist.”

Well said, George, although it’s interesting that you feel the need to spell out these sentiments. I guess it’s not surprising that young Objectivists in particular should take a pessimistic view of the world. Right from the opening line of “Atlas Shrugged”, for instance, we are given a view of the world as a cesspool, where the villains are irredeemable sub-humans, the heroes god-like beings, the common people bovine and passive. It’s not surprising that when some young readers adopt this schema as their world-view they fail to find happiness.

A good part of the problem is a failure to adopt a critical attitude. Most Objectivists take at face value Rand’s claim that AS belongs to a genre of art called “romantic realism”, art that tells us something about the world the way it is and the way it should be.

The assumption underlying realism in novels is that the setting, themes and characters will more or less resemble the real world. For example, the reader can believe that the events in Tolstoy’s “War and Peace” may well have happened or could happen in the way the author outlines.

AS is not this sort of novel. It’s more akin to the dystopian literature of the likes of Butler’s “Erewhon” and Orwell’s “1984”. Of course, novels of this type may have much to say about the world, but they are not meant to replicate the world that we know. In fact, their power comes from their very strangeness, their peculiar perspective on the world.

When AS is taken as a piece of realism, it’s not hard to see why young Objectivists opt for pessimism. The antidote is to regard AS for what it is, a piece of dystopian literature that shows us the author’s perspective on human beings and their world, rather than as a realist novel that shows us the world “as it is”.

Brendan


Post 16

Sunday, October 31, 2004 - 7:02pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
num (?) writes:
"If in taking the story to heart, you contemn the book as apocalyptic... If in taking the story to heart, you find yourself waiting for the rapture - perchance reexamine your heart.

Or take the story to MIND."

I have, and I have. I am speaking personally of my past when I say that was how I felt. I was acknowledging that I was one of the people the article referred to, that what he wrote about exists.

Post 17

Monday, November 1, 2004 - 8:15amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
George, hello. Excellent article. You remain one of the handfull of those at whose postings I smile in anticipatory pleasure when I sign on to SOLO.

Thanks.
(As a fellow inhabitor of the Florida Wasteland, I will buy you a Chivas - if Teddy Kennedy has left any for us to drink)

Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 18

Monday, November 1, 2004 - 8:42amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
George, wonderful article.  This should become required reading for all Objectivists. 

The best marketing anyone can do for the Objectivist worldview is to practice it in their daily life, which means being confident in who you are, unapologetically successful in what you do, sensibly tolerant of others who don't agree with you, and above all be happy and enjoy each waking moment of the day.  Life is a limited time offer.   


Sanction: 1, No Sanction: 0
Post 19

Monday, November 1, 2004 - 10:56amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"Life is a limited time offer."

Pete, that was excellent! And, if your words mirror your soul, then you're excellent. Thanks for the frosting on this intellectual dessert that we've been treated to - courtesy of Chef Cordero.

Ed

Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.