15 Nov 11
Originally posted by finnegan"She is simply peddling common sense claptrap in support of an idological position."
I have an Ayn Rand book which I have read thoughtfully and it is a challenge to remain thoughtful without exploding. Sometimes she appears to be building up a coherent argument and then it descends to nonsense again. Called "The Virtue of Selfishness - A New Concept of Egoism" it attracted me because I have always been interested in Max Stirner, a C19th phi ...[text shortened]... considered worthy of serious discussion academically. Her "work" has no merit whatever.
Just wondering what "common sense claptrap" is? I sort of value common sense. Also wondered what a idological position is. Didn't know Rand was into idolatry.
I'd be interested in reading the Stirner work. Is that a correct spelling? Of course you are entitled to your opinion about Rand. Lots of people see value in her work.
15 Nov 11
1 edit
Originally posted by normbenignMy typos are fair game. I do not defend them.
"She is simply peddling common sense claptrap in support of an idological position."
Just wondering what "common sense claptrap" is? I sort of value common sense. Also wondered what a idological position is. Didn't know Rand was into idolatry.
I'd be interested in reading the Stirner work. Is that a correct spelling? Of course you are entitled to your opinion about Rand. Lots of people see value in her work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ego_and_Its_Own has a very succinct account of the book so I have cut and pasted it -
The work states the individual is dominated by illusory concepts ('fixed ideas' or 'spooks'😉, which can be shaken and undermined by each individual in order for that person to act fully. These concepts include primarily religion and ideology, and the institutions claiming authority over the individual. According to him, not only is God an alienating ideal, as Feuerbach had argued in The Essence of Christianity (1841), but so too are humanity itself, nationalism and all such ideologies. According to Stirner, individuals should only entertain temporary associations between themselves, agreeing in mutual aid and cooperation for a period of time, but only when in each individual's interest (perhaps anticipating cooperative games):
I have owned two copies, both "borrowed" and not returned. Says something!
As regards "common sense" it is a feature of dominant ideas that they avoid criticism by appealing to common sense. Common sense is a very good way to ensure that we deal with situations in accordance with our ability to think sensibly. It helps avoid bull####. However it is not a naive capacity - it refers to our experience of the past and our learned ways of thinking. Common sense in a child is very different to that of a teenager (heaven preserve us) and that of a mature adult (if you encounter one let us all know). Sadly it is a very tricky guide and often deceives us. We typically have great difficulty seeing anything that conflicts with settled opinions and beliefs. That's not because we are inherently stupid - it is because for much of life it is a good strategy to assume everything is as it seems.
An example of common sense claptrap is the false idea that economics can work in the same way as a household budget. No matter how much evidence to the contrary it suits many people to think that way because it is a nice story to cloth a political atittude. Sadly our natural bull### detector often leads us to be suspicious of evidence and indeed of the scientific method generally.
15 Nov 11
Here's a funny read on Ayn Rand and her followers [posted 6 months ago here by Bosse de Nage].
https://www.readability.com/read?url=http://www.gq.com/entertainment/books/200911/ayn-rand-dick-books-fountainhead?printable=true
I think even normbenign will be able to have a little giggle over this one.
15 Nov 11
Originally posted by FMFAha I found in this article a response to a question by normbenign [ Didn't know Rand was into idolatry. ] and it rescues me from the consequences of my typing error:
Here's a funny read on Ayn Rand and her followers [posted 6 months ago here by Bosse de Nage].
https://www.readability.com/read?url=http://www.gq.com/entertainment/books/200911/ayn-rand-dick-books-fountainhead?printable=true
I think even normbenign will be able to have a little giggle over this one.
"...Ayn Rand's idolization of Mickey Spillane and cigarettes and capitalism..."
I wanted to quote another passage but the automatic censor prevented me. I can't really argue with the decision to be fair.
16 Nov 11
Originally posted by FMFI haven't had a chance to read that, but I found The Fountainhead almost unreadable, and certainly lacking in the clarity of Atlas Shrugged.
Here's a funny read on Ayn Rand and her followers [posted 6 months ago here by Bosse de Nage].
https://www.readability.com/read?url=http://www.gq.com/entertainment/books/200911/ayn-rand-dick-books-fountainhead?printable=true
I think even normbenign will be able to have a little giggle over this one.
16 Nov 11
Originally posted by finneganI ordinarily don't jump on typos except when they resemble other words and there is no understanding the intended meaning.
My typos are fair game. I do not defend them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ego_and_Its_Own has a very succinct account of the book so I have cut and pasted it -
[i] The work states the individual is dominated by illusory concepts ('fixed ideas' or 'spooks'😉, which can be shaken and undermined by each individual in order for that person to act f ...[text shortened]... n leads us to be suspicious of evidence and indeed of the scientific method generally.
So, the word was ideology? But I still am wondering about "common sense claptrap" in support of an ideology. I highly value common sense. Sometimes it far exceeds the value of intellectual sophistry. The other thing about Rand's ideology, is that in a political sense she didn't advocate for either party. She found fault with both, rather consistently. In fact I recall at my local chess club making the mistake of saying she was close to libertarian beliefs, and got a huge argument from another objectivist member, an argument we never really settled.
The illustration of common sense differing with age, exemplifies that our premises change as we get older and learn different truths. One of Ayn Rands most repeated advises was to "check your premises". I think it may have been P.J. O'Rourk who said "At 30, I was amazed at how much my father had learned in the past decade."
In the summary pasted I don't see a lot of conflict with Rand, but I would enjoy reading this work, if I can find it. Shame it isn't available on my Kindle.