/lit/ - Literature

>>11330735

>30,000+ word John Galt speech in the most tortured amphetamine prose known to man

Personally, I hate her because she is an aesthetic disaster.

>>11330735
I like her, But there's definitely some parts of objectivism that are irrational. Rather than dismissing everyone except Aristotle, you have to contend with other ideas. Its badass to have all your values as absolutes, but not all values can be maintained that way, and in such cases its better to " be like the fox" a la Machiavelli, otherwise you're trying to solve new problems with ill fitting solutions.

>>11330735
>Logic is much more important than emotion
>I like capitalism because I get to masturbate to the captains of industry saving everyone from socialism

>>11330735
>libtards
amerifat please go

>le tricky hook meme
But still guaranteed replies because /lit/ still falls for a Rand thread every time. And why not, she solved philosophy and they don't like it because it discredits their fancy professors. And obviously Atlas Shrugged is actually readable unlike shit like Joyce

Love that this board is still reading children's books, never change boys.

I’m pretty much a libertarian. Ayn Rand was a hack

>>11330876
eh if you can't read joyce that's on you buddy

>>11330735
>libtards
>implying
Everone who doen't had lobotomy hates her.

>>11330892
Libcuck. Refute her

>>11330985
It's impossible to know anything and you can't prove cause and effect. Refute me

>>11330735

>libtards

American. Discarded.

>>11330892

pretty much nailed it, bro

Inb4: I flunked 9th grade algebra 3 times and I have a talk radio diploma, but debate me about Rand

>>11330735
>but they never actually refute her

I think this poor sap is actually serious.

>>11331048
See. All you can do is say "are you kidding me?!?!?" without refuting her

>>11330735
Ayn Rand was a libtard

>>11331129
The only needed refutation is that complete positivism is impossible within any closed system. Godel proved this and her entire philosophy is based off of this. As an individualist she simply strikes me as a wannabe egoist who needed validation from science to prove what she was incapable of

>>11331129

>>11330985
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ayn-rand/

"Whereas Rand’s ideas and mode of presentation make Rand popular with many non-academics, they lead to the opposite outcome with academics. She developed some of her views in response to questions from her readers, but never took the time to defend them against possible objections or to reconcile them with the views expressed in her novels. Her philosophical essays lack the self-critical, detailed style of analytic philosophy, or any serious attempt to consider possible objections to her views. Her polemical style, often contemptuous tone, and the dogmatism and cult-like behavior of many of her fans also suggest that her work is not worth taking seriously.[2] Further, understanding her views requires reading her fiction, but her fiction is not to everyone’s taste. It does not help that she often dismisses other philosophers’ views on the basis of cursory readings and conversations with a few philosophers and with her young philosophy student acolytes."

The reason why she can actually be a little hard to refute is she never really argues for anything, she just asserts them and ignores any attempt to defend them. Since she never really tried to make an argument for her viewpoint it is the role of objectivists to do so, not on everyone else to fault it. That being said the article still shows how many of her most important positions can't be accepted in their current form and need to be defended. At the end of almost every headlined section there is a quick run-down on what doesn't work about each idea.

"Pleasure is the only inherent good, so the rational man would pursue self-interest, no man should kneel to another"
"The only way to instate this is MY WAY. No economic restrictions, except I need a few exceptions to prevent me from being labeled an anarchist. I threw in a bunch of half-assed baby's first epistemology and unrelated aesthetic theory to distract.you from how ridiculously contradictory this is.
"Isn't my philosophy sooooo objective? Clearly I have reached absolute truth. I'm definitely not projecting any resentment towards the USSR in my godawful prose."

Libertarians could do so much better than this. All of her justifications could just as easily be used to promote anarchism. After all, what's more laissez-faire than that?

>>11331182
godel don't love you

>>11330735
Boring writer with PHI 101 depth

>>11330735
But they did refute her with shitty cowashooty.

>>11330994
A is A.

what "point" did she make that requires a refutation

>>11330735
You should read the book and then make your own assumptions, instead of reading a summary and thinking DUDE CAPTIALISM XD.

>>11330735
Leftshits constantly "debunk" her claims

I've never read a single word she wrote and never will. Nobody should read anything written by a woman, ever.

Was she a libertarian or something?

>>11330735
>libtards
Of course, who needs rational debate with the opposition? Speaking as a liberal, fuck you for ruining political discourse by throwing debate away and simply calling us "libtards" in lieu of actually discussing issues.
You have successfully managed to ruin politics. Well done.

all her books are the same book
if you ever want to read Atlas Shrugged, just read Anthem and youll save yourself the pain

>>11330735
Objectivism is the ideological equivalent of self-insert shadow the hedgehog recolor sonic OC

The name of her homebrew ideology is all you need to know to figure out that it's some daft edgelord shit.

>And obviously Atlas Shrugged is actually readable unlike shit like Joyce
>le tricky hook meme

>>11333494
You don't know that

>>11334077
t. racist sexist homophobic xenophobic problematic fascist literally hitler inbred flyover state dwelling deplorable

>>11334348
You started the shitflinging with Limbaugh, dude

>>11334362
>shows clip
>fox news logo
>HA YOU DUMB IDIOT
>sarcastic remark about bush
>HYSTERICAL LAUGHTER FROM AUDIENCE

Heh, Bush is a dummy and I am smart

>>11334375
>comedy show makes fun of a retard for doing retarded things
Defending Dubya is a really bad hill to die on, anon. Are you sure you want to do this?

>>11334077
Why are you here pussy?

>>11334391
>you started the shitflinging
>wait no okay we did but it was okay cuz bush was dumb
okay basedcuck

>>11334414
>strawmanning
Are you really defending Dubya here?

>>11334456
>deflecting the argument to whether or not bush was "smart" because you are obviously wrong on your original claim
Never change libshits, never change

>>11334465
>continues to call liberals insults
>wonders why bipartisanship is dead in Congress

>>11334528
>bipartisanship isn't happening because of MEAN WORDS