Replies

You are giving me another issue raised by detractors and critics. How about you read the book, examine the ideas for yourself, and then reach a conclusion as to the quality of the ideas. Keep in mind that rejecting an idea based on a personal attack on who espouses it is a logical falacy.

I know a little about the objectivism of Ayn Rand, and I know a little about her personal life. I think it is also a mistake to embrace an idea espoused by a flawed individual as your lifelong philosophy. If her philosophy was so good, why was her personal life so messed up? Are you saying it wasn't messed up? Shouldn't objectivism (the be all to end all for Rand sycophants) have manifested itself in Rand's life in such a manner as to make objectivism desirable for its effects?

You posted an article that uses Ayn Rand as an authority. What makes her an authority? What exactly are the manifestations of objectivism that make it so desirable as a philosophy? What will it do for your life? I really would like to know (honestly).

I attempted to post an article that uses the ideas Ayn Rand proposed interpreted by me. I did not cite her as an authority, but used one of her ideas as a stimulus to the points I raised. I still think you can use ideas put forth by people who may have flaws. Is there a perfect person putting out perfect ideas?

The problem with Rand is that she was a better critic of political control systems than she was a philosopher of political economy. In her writings she never addressed the need to manage externalities of production, educate the poor, or care for the sick. Hank Reardon's factory made no pollution, the fire there produced no injuries, Francisco's mine produced no tailings, and Dagney never got pregnant.

That oversight never dealt with the entire justification for intrusive government. It is thus an incomplete philosophy and is thus rendered merely a powerful form of political criticism, all the cheerleading for free-markets to the contrary.

You posted an article that uses Ayn Rand as an authority. What makes her an authority?

It's not a question of "authority."

That is for each to determine when they read her ideas and judge them for themselves.

This is not about personal annointments.