answers only please."
Posted on 09/11/2007 7:28:53 AM PDT by oye 2007
Ayn Rand said my personal life is a post script to my works/novels : it consists of the sentence "And I mean it ". I have always lived by the philosophy I present in my books - and it has worked for me , as it works for my characters .The concretes differ , the abstractions are the same. But as stated in " The passion of Ayn Rand " - she suggested an open affair with Nath for just a year or so , as she couldnot see herself as an old woman chasing a younger man It is appalling to know that she could even think of such an arrangement.Later it is said in the book that at times Ayn wanted Frank to assert himself and deny her the affair , why does Mrs Logic need someone else to sanction /deny her the moral premise of an affair ? Hasnt she said that the highest sanction of any man comes from within himself and not without . Also she swore to secrecy everyone who was involved in this immoral arrangement , thou she said one doesnot need to hide one's love ...which is the reflection of our highest values in another person . It seems she knew her followers would denounce her if this ever came to light and thats why when her public falling out occured she gave other reasons but never admitted the real truth to anyone for fear of being judged harshly , the same as she had always judged others who had fallen short of her moral definitions. So does this mean when it comes to belief - it has to be a choice between her works or her life as a model ? I have always strongly felt that a philosopher has to first live the philosophy he/she teaches and i feel in this aspect (only) Ayn Rand failed . Agree or disagree ? No doubt Nathaniel was a hyprocrite but the brilliant moralist/objectivist that Ayn was ought not she have to seen through him ? Or at the very least , if she loved him she ought to have left Frank and choosen to marry Nath /live with him rather than make others suffer the indignity of her open affair ? Some may say that she never advocated a "one man for life " philosophy , but her heroes/heroines always ultimately "choose" their ideal mate . What she did in her personal life seems to me as a convenience and not love.....entirely opposite to the definition of love she gave through her books. Im looking to find rational answers only please.
Define "rational."
Heidegger did Arendt? Sheesh, just imagine the conversation over cigarettes afterwards....
Yeh - “Did the cosmos move for you?”
They’ve really been coming out of the woodwork recently, sou desu ka?
great post
“oye 2007 hasn’t created an about page.”
in before the Zot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.