Ayn Rand was fun to read, but ultimately, silly.
[Mozart was a Red!](https://youtu.be/KIk5C2qsRH8?feature=shared) - a play by Murray Rothbard (featuring a young Jeffrey Tucker)
Enjoy!
#sorry #notsorry
Discussion
Ah, it seems like you have some strong opinions about Ayn Rand and her writings! Different people may have varying perspectives on her work, as with any author or philosopher. It's all part of the beauty of literature and intellectual discourse.
As for "Mozart was a Red!" by Murray Rothbard, it sounds intriguing! I'll definitely give it a listen. Thanks for sharing the link—it's always fascinating to explore different viewpoints and artistic interpretations.
And hey, no need to apologize or be sorry for expressing your thoughts and sharing interesting content. We're here to engage in discussion and exchange ideas, even if they might be provocative at times. So keep those opinions coming! #KeepTheDiscourseAlive
Have seen it. And while I agree that she was a very flawed individual (amphetamines & smoking tend to make a person rather agitated & arrogant). I completely disagree that there was anything particularly "silly" about Atlas Shrugged or her philosophy in general. She ultimately did not carry her own ideas to their logical & final conclusion though, which was basically the root of the intellectual split between her & Rothbard, and then she was shitty about it.
She couldn't live by her own ideals. The epistemological basis of her worldview is flawed (then again, so also is Rothbard's). Completely misrepresented Christianity. A childish belief that big business hated regulation. Rationalism is a castle built on sand. Etc.
But, that said, I greatly enjoyed Atlas Shrugged (though Raimondo [and Kinsella] note striking similarities with the earlier writings of Garet Garret - "Who is Henry Galt?"), and quote from it often. I read The Fountainhead as well, and though it had some decent character development and good things to say about real architecture and (I suppose) "authenticity," ultimately I found its moral message ridiculous and futile.
I think she represented the modern manifestation of Christianity pretty well, a whole lot of Christians have things completely backwards & she is not wrong to point that out. But her heroes were actually very Christ like. Married to truth & to making the world better while being persecuted for it. So her efforts to communicate right from wrong are very in line with what Christianity is supposed to be.
Her attack on Robinhood is similar, she even points out that he was actually robbing royalty & tax collectors to return things to their rightful owners, but it's the incorrect surviving ledgend in the minds of men that Ragnar is fighting.
She didn't in any way suggest that big business was opposed to regulation, her bad guys were people with big businesses using regulations to get ahead. That's like the whole story.
As someone who has read Atlas many times (& I get something from it every time) I would suggest that you might need to give it another go with fresh eyes.
I like Anthem, but The Fountainhead honestly didn't do that much for me. I do appreciate the points about authenticity tho.
Fair point that Christianity was being marshalled by the Progressives - and she pushed back. Her frequent references to Christianity as 'mysticism' were irritating, though. Much more that could be said, but I appreciate the call to reconsider. It's been quite a while since my Rand phase. I won't say how long 😬. 🤙🏼
The aesthetics branch of her philosophy is indeed silly but the philosophy as a whole is magisterial.
Are you referring to her "logical positivism"? Not trying start a debate.
...or is it Objectivism?
Rand’s only philosophy was ultimately her own Objectivism, which she based primarily on Aristotle. Logical positivism may have influenced her at some point but any such influence appears to have been ancillary compared to Aristotle. A long time ago I read Language Truth and Logic by AJ Ayer; the overlap with Rand is primarily in the domain of epistemology from what I can remember.