Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: CE2949BB
Leonard Peikoff's Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand is the best introduction.

The Ayn Rand Cult

The all-encompassing nature of the Randian line may be illustrated by an incident that occurred to a friend of mine who once asked a leading Randian if he disagreed with the movement’s position on any conceivable subject. After several minutes of hard thought, the Randian replied: "Well, I can’t quite understand their position on smoking." Astonished that the Rand cult had any position on smoking, my friend pressed on: "They have a position on smoking? What is it?" The Randian replied that smoking, according to the cult, was a moral obligation. In my own experience, a top Randian once asked me rather sharply, "How is it that you don’t smoke?" When I replied that I had discovered early that I was allergic to smoke, the Randian was mollified: "Oh, that’s OK, then."

599 posted on 12/29/2008 4:17:26 AM PST by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Darwinism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 452 | View Replies ]


To: Ethan Clive Osgoode; All
The Ayn Rand Cult

Barf. Lame.

Review from Noble Soul

Review Summary: Muckraking journalism in book form. Walker stretches so far to attack Rand that he damages his own credibility in the process.

Do better! :)

From Leonard Peikoff's site, on smoking:

Q: If Ayn Rand were still alive, would she smoke?

A: No. As a matter of fact, she stopped smoking in 1975. When the Surgeon General in the 50s claimed that smoking was dangerous, he offered nothing to defend this view but statistical correlations. Ayn Rand, of course, dismissed any alleged “science” hawked by Floyd Ferris, nor did she accept statistics as a means of establishing cause and effect. Statistics, she held, may offer a lead to further inquiry but, by themselves, they are an expression of ignorance, not a form of knowledge. For a long period of time, as an example, there was a high statistical correlation between the number of semicolons on the front page of The New York Times and the number of deaths among widows in a certain part of India.

In due course, when scientists had studied the question, she and all of us came to grasp the mechanism by which smoking produces its effects—and we stopped. Doesn’t this prove, you might ask, that she was wrong to mistrust the government? My answer: even pathological liars sometimes tell the truth. Should you therefore heed their advice?

749 posted on 12/30/2008 11:59:48 PM PST by CE2949BB (Fight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 599 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson