Why would anyone recommend reading that ugly satanic hag?
Shhh!
Libertarians reading Rand will keep them occupied and happy while the rest of us get to work.
I’ll take the Objectivist philosophy of Rand as the new administration’s guide over the current administration whose guiding force is the Marxist philosophy of Alinsky.
...Because Rand was the foremost advocate of capitalism, and who did so with power, clarity and her experiences living in Russia. You might read Atlas rather than resorting to inane name calling.
Please explain your Satanic comment. Be specific.
Are you kidding?
because it is the philosophy of reason and reality
Well, why did you read it???
Your strong opinion has me assuming that you did, didn’t you?
Why would anyone recommend reading that ugly satanic hag?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yeah, you’re right. It stands to reason that since she was an “ugly satanic hag” she couldn’t possibly have written anything worth reading.
Don’t think I need the /s!
Without a Prayer: Ayn Rand and the Close of Her System
https://www.amazon.com/Without-Prayer-Rand-Close-System/dp/0940931508#customerReviews
4.0 out of 5 starsA mostly excellent job of demolition.
By John S. Ryan on December 30, 1999
Format: Hardcover
John Robbins is unlikely to receive much respect from Objectivists, since he is a devout Christian — a sola-scriptura Biblical inerrantist whose critiques of Rand are mounted on a thoroughly Calvinist foundation and offered for clearly evangelical purposes. The loss is theirs; Robbins knows “Objectivism” better than most of Ayn Rand’s most devoted followers — including its all too numerous flaws.
Nor should Objectivists ignore his critiques merely because they are “religious,” since it is only in their own minds that “religion” is automatically irrational. Robbins is a follower of the late Gordon H. Clark (familiar to one audience as a highly respected scholar of Hellenistic philosophy, and to another as a party to a well-known theological controversy with Cornelius van Til). Calvinism is no friend of irrationality and, especially as interpreted by Clark, assigns a _very_ high place to reason and logic. As a student of Clark, Robbins develops his critiques with more respect for reason than Rand ever showed in her entire life.
The author of _Answer to Ayn Rand_ (a 1970s work that did not receive a like answer from the Objectivist establishment), Robbins has reworked and expanded his critique for this volume, also adding appendices to deal respectively with Leonard Peikoff and David Kelley. His central contention is quite a straightforward one, and in my view it is essentially correct though I would quibble about some details. It is this: Rand started with her conclusions and worked backwards, very badly, to transfer those conclusions onto a foundation that will not support them. As her libertarian, free-market capitalist, limited-government conclusions in fact depend on a view of man and society that properly and in strict consistency belongs to Christianity (I would say to Western monotheism generally), they are — for Rand — “stolen concepts.” It is only a matter of time until some of her followers work her premises _forward_ and wind up with very different conclusions indeed. (And probably anyone who has ever participated or lurked in an Objectivist discussion forum knows that the day Robbins fears has already come.)
His demolition job is mostly an able one, with only an occasional misfire. Space will not permit a full discussion of Robbins’s contentions here, but in my own view his best chapters are his sustained attacks on Rand’s epistemology and theology. With a keen eye for Rand’s numerous self-contradictions, Robbins demonstrates repeatedly that Rand did not succeed even in presenting a coherent position, let alone supporting it with evidence or argument.”