[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 421 KB, 791x1024, ayn_rand.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1494648 No.1494648 [Reply] [Original]

So /lit/.. what is wrong with Rand's works? I mean her WORK not Rand herself (ad hominem). Please elaborate. Not by just saying that its:

1) Shit
2) tl;dr
3) impractical
4) illogical

Remember: You have to explain.

>> No.1494652

Rule 4.

The answer is that she has horrible prose, writes dimensional characters and is too busy making her point rather than writing a story.

>> No.1494650

>You have to explain
http://www.4chan.org/rules#lit
bu t not really

>> No.1494655

>>1494650
The fountainhead come heavily recommended to me. I know a propaganda book when I see one. I need to find out some SENSIBLE opinion before I start reading. Hence the post.

In case of a stupid flame war I will delete the thread.

>> No.1494658

>pie in the sky
>formulated to directly stimulate the basal greed of retards
>shit

>> No.1494664

>>1494652
Its Okay. I am a veteran of War and Piss.

>> No.1494667

>>1494648

1. Learn anything at all about philosophy and ethics.
2. Realize "objectivism" is completely bunk for copious reasons:
2a. the most glaring of which is her strict promotion of laissez faire or "free market" capitalism. Capitalism in general, and especially capitalism free from popular/government restrictions, has been proven to be hazardous to the environment, wasteful of resources, and to create an increasing gap of power between those with wealth and those without, which of course greatly restricts the "complete personal freedoms" that Rand claims to believe in so dearly.

She may hold some ideal version of capitalism in her head where no one is poor and everyone is both free and equal, but that's never happened in the real world. So fuck her. Objectivism is just rationalization of avarice.

>> No.1494671

>>1494667
>capitalism

Please do not consider yourself qualified to talk about technical subjects. Thank you.

>Objectivism
Please qualify. I am listening intently.

>> No.1494673

She has no subtlety whatsoever, all of her books end up being long rants about her personal philosophy. Her writings about politics are just one big, insufferable exercise into apologetics for how selfish she is.

And worst of all, she spawned a whole generation of uneducated frat-boy 'Objectivist' morons who slap the word 'objective' into every sentence, as if that makes what they're saying even remotely true.

Oh, and rule 4.

>> No.1494675

it's retarded.

>> No.1494676
File: 48 KB, 365x214, 1296047404811.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1494676

>> No.1494679

>>1494675
Everyone out there. Here's what starts flame wars. Avoid it.

>> No.1494680

http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2010/05/garbage-and-gravitas-on-ayn-rand.html

>> No.1494681

>>1494671

Are you...are you seriously trying to tell me that I'm not "allowed" to talk about capitalism and how Rand viewed it? On what grounds? Capitalism is a "technical subject"? Yeah, because only some qualified expert can understand economics, right? I'm well-read on a lot of random shit, and I'll talk about what I please. Where do you get off, suddenly trying to restrict the rules of a conversation? Arrogant!

You asked about Rand, I told you about Rand; specifically, the way that she incorporates free market capitalism in her philosophy is impractical and detrimental to human freedom and welfare. I've only read three of her books, and it was off the top of my head. If you don't want debate, what are you here for?

>> No.1494682

>babby's first philosophy

>> No.1494683

>>1494679
it's true facts. shut up.

>> No.1494685

>>1494681

Dude, he's an Ayn Rand fan . . . he heard an argument which challenged his position so now he's trying to curb discussion so he can ignore everything you said. Just another reason to hate Ayn Rand and her minions.

>> No.1494686

>>1494680
Did you actually read it?

Its one large piece of Ad Hominem. Honestly. Have a look.

>> No.1494689

>>1494681
Fine. Talk about capitalism all you want.

>> No.1494690

>>1494686
yea and rand doesn't deserve much more than that. the phenomenon of the rand cult is the proper subject, not the status of rand as a cultish hack figure.

>> No.1494691

>>1494690
.....

Ohkay.

>> No.1494692

I have not read anything by Rand, but I think everyone around here hates her because her name brings up obvious connotations of the 16 year old who read one of her books and then felt the need to tell everyone about how great objectivism is. My first year philosophy professor when asked stated that he didn't teach Rand because, despite being historically irrelevant and just general shit tier, young people seem to grasp onto her writings and hold them as absolute truth.

>> No.1494694

http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2009/03/now-heres-a-tough-poll-to-answer.html

proof that rand cannot into philosophy

>> No.1494696

>>1494692
So do you think its like some form of religion?

>> No.1494697

Is this whole Rand business an American thing? Over here I have never heard of her before Bioshock came out.

>> No.1494700

>>1494697

Neither did most Americans . . .

>> No.1494699

>>1494694
Allright. But there is just one problem. I am not a philosopher and I am still allowed to vote against her there.

>> No.1494702

>>1494696
There's obvious differences between Rand followers and religion, and to call objectivism religion would be pretty transparent rhetorically, but her followers do seem to have the sort of dogmatic intensity that's often found in religion.

>> No.1494704

>>1494699
yea well the true percentage is probably like 90% rand then.

>> No.1494705

>>1494702
What attracts them so much? Are they are harmful as Christians?

>> No.1494706

>retarded daydreams of a greedy jewess who grew up in poverty

>> No.1494707

>>1494692
If I had a penny for every time this happened...

Ayn Rand is a narcissistic, egocentric piece of work that, by the way, lived in a completely different era. Think of the now, imagine Ayn Rand having a facebook profile, or a twitter page. Do you feel it clashing in your head? If everyone lived by the principles of Ayn Rand, we would found out very fast why capitalism and token-based capital systems in general don't and can't ever work. It'll just take us fifty years, a couple of wars and a LOT of death by poverty, famine and thirst to get there. Oh, wait, Africa. Rand's principles are celebrated more than they want to you know.

>> No.1494710

Does anybody give a shit about rand except for murrican students?

>> No.1494711

>>1494705
I don't know what attracts them as I have not read Rand. Probably being young and stupid is enough. Free market capitalists are, imo, a lot more dangerous and harmful than Christians, but most Rand followers will probably just grow out of it. I don't think many people take them seriously.

>> No.1494713

>>1494710
The drummer from rush

>> No.1494715

>>1494648
She looks in that photo like if she Derped.

>> No.1494718

>>1494681
>You asked about Rand, I told you about Rand; specifically, the way that she incorporates free market capitalism in her philosophy is impractical and detrimental to human freedom and welfare.

My first post here, but why?

So far, it seems nobody has been able to answer the OP's question, except when it comes to Rand as a novelist.

>> No.1494722

>>1494718
Its fine. My needs have been satiated. More coming in a minute.

>> No.1494726

>>1494718
Probably because no one wants to sift through that much shit for a mostly irrelevant "philosopher". We have better things to do.

>> No.1494730
File: 255 KB, 1366x866, 1.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1494730

>>1494722
All right People of /lit/. Thank you for your participation in our lulzy game of proving that Ayn Rand haters actually don't know shit about her ideas. We just wanted to collect some proof about the claim we had and I am particularly glad to announce that we have it.

I am happy to tell you that we are pleased with the gentleman who argued about his knowledge of 'a lot of random shit', despite our warning him. His ravings were most enlightening. Thank you sir. You are our favorite person of the week. Attached here please find the screen caps up to now (we consider this sufficient evidence for now).

Yours truly,
Lulzguy(s)

>> No.1494731

>>1494718

It's not up to us to spell out why Rand is a sloppy heap of shit; it's up to you to go fuck yourself.

>> No.1494733
File: 265 KB, 1366x866, 2.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1494733

Hi

>> No.1494735

>>1494730

>babby's first troll

>> No.1494736
File: 260 KB, 1366x866, 3.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1494736

>> No.1494737
File: 199 KB, 898x1195, review_01.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1494737

>> No.1494739
File: 27 KB, 500x380, 129461332451.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1494739

>>1494710
I'm not American. I'm also interested in this. who in the world reads Rand apart from the aforementioned??

>> No.1494738

>>1494667
>2a. the most glaring of which is her strict promotion of laissez faire or "free market" capitalism. Capitalism in general, and especially capitalism free from popular/government restrictions, has been proven to be hazardous to the environment, wasteful of resources, and to create an increasing gap of power between those with wealth and those without, which of course greatly restricts the "complete personal freedoms" that Rand claims to believe in so dearly.

When and how was all that proved? It seems to me that capitalism has been, so far, a lot better than the alternatives in all those things (and especially when it comes to the protection of individual freedoms).

Plus, I doubt anyone would say that the historical capitalism is even remotely close to Rand's capitalism, so that argument is kind of a non-sequitur . Additionally, there's a lot more about objectivism than the defense of capitalism - in fact, anyone who actually read Rand knows that is very far from a priority, which makes you reduction a little absurd.

I think it's very easy to point out some philosophical problems in Rand's work. I'm surprised nobody in this entire thread has been able to do that. This capitalist/anti-capitalis;,red vs. blue, approach is probably the least interesting and fruitful of all.

>> No.1494741

OH YEAH I LOVE SUCKING A MILLIONS DICKS XD

>> No.1494744
File: 255 KB, 1366x866, 4.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1494744

>> No.1494745

Hip hip hoorey!

>> No.1494749
File: 250 KB, 1366x866, 5.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1494749

Its alright. Enough butthurt guys.

>> No.1494747

5th

>> No.1494751
File: 257 KB, 1366x866, 6.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1494751

Fianlly the 6th. We will be uploading the last lulzy climax then.

>> No.1494753
File: 20 KB, 364x344, 1280516816301.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1494753

Somebody is really bored.

>> No.1494755
File: 269 KB, 1366x866, finale.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1494755

Finale

>> No.1494756

Once again thanks and goodbye! Enjoy that butthurt who were a part of this happy gathering... :)

>> No.1494766

>>1494755
>>1494751
>>1494749
>>1494744
>>1494736
>>1494733


Whats your point?

>> No.1494765

whatjusthappenedhere.jpeg?

>> No.1494767

Oh dear, it appears we have just been pwnz0red.

>> No.1494773

>>1494766
Its actually too late for that question don't you think? Lets just let it die.

>> No.1494781

>>1494756
Except despite a few asshats, several key points were brought up about Rand philosophy during the course of this topic and even points about her style of prose. I see nothing available here that I would not expect to see from the very mouth of a college professor in description of Rand's works. Your pathetic attempts at Rand trolling are baseless and ignoring the very merits of this discussion. YOU LOSE SIR. GOOD DAY.

>> No.1494787

>>1494781
>a few asshats
Could you please point them out please?

>> No.1494791

>>1494787
Sure. That tripfag onionring. He has those hearts aroud his name for christsake. A faggot if there was one. Then the dude who was spouting shit a

>>1494692
>I haven't read shit but..
This guy.
bout capitalism.

>> No.1494793

Sorry. This is what I meant.
>>1494787
Sure. That tripfag onionring. He has those hearts aroud his name for christsake. A faggot if there was one. Then the dude who was spouting shit about capitalism.

>>1494692
>I haven't read shit but..
This guy.


Rest were quite precise and cool about their skepticism.

>> No.1494796

>>1494793
That's enough you moron.

>> No.1494798

>>1494726
Good point - I don't think Rand is any sort of must-read, far from it -, but why even reply here though? Why pretend that you actually know something you don't know?

For example:

>>1494667
>She may hold some ideal version of capitalism in her head where no one is poor and everyone is both free and equal

She may hold some ideal version of capitalism in her head where no one is poor and everyone is both free and equal,

This is clearly someone who have never read Rand, doesn't even know her basic, core ideas and yet has written the longest and most ardent reply to the OP question.

>> No.1494804

Has anyone noticed sudden and mysterious departure of the tripfag on this thread?

>> No.1494811

>>1494804
Yep

>> No.1494830

>>1494804

The guy who announced he was leaving and said goodbye?

>>1494755
>>1494756

>> No.1494857

damn. I missed this! :D

>> No.1494887

That's not what ad hominem means.

>> No.1494945

>>1494793
i like the hearts

>> No.1494951

In fact its exactly what it means.

For your convenience:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

An ad hominem (Latin: "to the man"), also known as argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.[1] The ad hominem is a classic logical fallacy,[2] but it is not always fallacious; in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.[3]

>> No.1494955

>>1494690
>>1494685
>>1494681
You're not explaining though, and these types of posts are not helping your argument..you're just saying how much you think it sucks and claiming it does certain things but you aren't explaining why or how.

>> No.1494963 [DELETED] 

Hey, OP. Read her books and fueling your false sense of pride by posting threads about Ayn Rand in which you urge /lit/ to talk seriously. Most of us who have read her don't take objectivism seriously - because we're not stupid.

>> No.1494976

She's boring, flat, and pretentious.

Like a dark-haired girl in community college.

>> No.1494991

>>1494976
laughinggirls.jpeg
As opposed to a blonde you mean?

>> No.1494996

From a literary perspective, her books are poorly written, have one-dimensional characters, are overly long and overly didactic, have poor prose, and very little depth. This is true even of books like Fountainhead which have some redeeming qualities; it's more true of Atlas Shrugged which is, from a literary standpoint, absolutely fucking worthless.

Examining her political or philosophical views, they seem to be in many ways twisted versions of what has gone before (her claims to be influenced by no one since Plato are laughable) and they also seem to be a strikingly bad ordering principle for society. What Rand values is not what is good for society. In fact, her worldview seems to deny the existence or importance of society; in claiming that absolute selfishness is a desideratum, she dissolves society. The fact is that even the Captains of Industry are best served by a world in which there are restraints on violence and individual malfeasance. In other words: Thomas Fuckin' Hobbes told me she was wrong.

>> No.1495008

>>1494996
There are quite a few artists in her books that are shown Heroic. The Hero of the book Fountainhead is an Architect for god's sake.

>> No.1495018

>>1494648
Ayn Rand is a pen name(though her real name escapes me, Alyssa something) She was the daughter of a russian pharmacist who lost everyting due to the nationalizing of his business. She held a special hate towards communism and advocated "objectivism" which someone here pointed out was an idiotic philosophy. She even used it to justify an affair, and when the man (also forget, he founded N.B.I.)cheated on her for a younger woman she set to tear everything he had built for hate of him, even though he had helped propogate her philosophy(N.BI.).

She's a bitter, grudge holding russian who thinks she understood capitalism because she was a victim of Bolshevik Communism. For proof her theories on Laissez faire capitalism, one only needs to look towards the 1920's stock market crash and the economic chaos following.

>> No.1495025

>>1495018

More ad hominem and ignorance of capitalism.

In case you failed to notice, this was a trap thread for people like you. Go through it. It become suddenly very funny.

>> No.1495027

>>1495008
>>1495008
What the hell does that have anything to do with anything that I said. Seriously. Is it just because I used the phrase "Captains of Industry". Are you seriously going to use that to ignore all my other criticisms. Fuck you.

>> No.1495029

>>1495025
Since I'm guessing this was you, I'm reporting it. It's as idiotic as everything else you post.

>> No.1495031

>>1495029
goodgoodletyourbutthurtflowthroughyou.jpeg

>> No.1495032

>>1495031
Dude, I am stylin on you all the time.

>> No.1495033
File: 98 KB, 763x350, 527384.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1495033

Ayn Rand is shit. Only 17yr old virgin American school boys buy into her peculiar brand of ideological dysentery.

Pic Related provides quantifiable proof of this.

>> No.1495039
File: 8 KB, 250x253, funnyhemorrhoids.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1495039

>>1495033
>ibanyou, muhahahahaha
Riight. But still that did not answer my skepticism.

>> No.1495042

>>1495039
I didn't even post anything that incendiary. I think I asked how many people red rand outside of murrica.
I'm not really iterested in the subject matter.

>> No.1495046

>>1495042
Let's be sensible here, shall we?

"IT does not matter who reads her books or how her life was to decide the quality of her work. "

Is it that hard to comprehend?

>> No.1495049

>>1495039
You think objectivism = capitalism and you expect people to have a debate accepting this? Are you mental?

>> No.1495055

>>1495046
Who are you quoting? It's a nonesensical preposition. Of course its relevant that only middle class, white, male american students (in general) buy into this shit. In the rest of the world nobody's even heard of her. Does that not warrant some consideration?

>> No.1495060

>>1495049
I must be as I do not recall having said that.

>> No.1495065

>>1495055

It's similar to considering Orson Scott Card's work being influenced by his magic underpants religion.

>> No.1495076

>>1495060
>More ad hominem and ignorance of capitalism.
Replying to an attack on Ayn Rand's philosophy...

>> No.1495077

>>1495065
That makes no sense. inadequate allegory is inadequate.

So I was thinking of studying abroad for a year. U.S.A is one of my options. Is hanging out with american students basically like lurking on /lit/?

>> No.1495097

no ad homs here, just people sensibly insulting rand.

>> No.1495102

>>1495097
She was a total idiot.