Do you like Ayn Rand's Philosophy? Why or why not?

I like what I know of her philosophy, That the individual is the smallest minority and that cooperation is a higher value than coercion. I have not read her novels because fiction does not interest me a great deal. Many people have a hard time with the idea of an entrepreneur being a hero, but anyone who stands against injustice is a hero regardless of their occupation. I think Ayn Rand is probably one of the most misunderstood people in recent history and her philosophy has been blamed for the failure of an ideal that has never been realized. The free market.

Strange, I know, but I actually enjoyed her writing for literary purposes alone.

But, to assume her philosophies would be good in practice would be sheer insanity, IMO. They are mostly self defeating, cowardly and hopeless. We can, are, and will do better. We usually have (believe it, or not).

Like most philosophies I like bits and pieces of it.

I wouldn't say that I agree with every part of her philosophy,but some of what she said is in fact valid.The government does seem to be over-shadowing everything these days,and that should not be it's role!
However,what she had to say in no way validates a Romney/Ryan Presidency!Obama is in fact more on the left,but he is more trustworthy in general!We don't need the Super-Rich running the government either,as Rand herself would probably agree!

she saw things as they were, and demanded others do the same ... where her vision failed was in her inability to see God's scheme in the midst of the seemingly chaotic world

It depends on her philosophy regarding which particular topic? Her religion? Not so much. Her politics? Yes. Her economics? Yes. Her social? Not so much.

portions made sense but she carried to the level of absurdity

In a televised interview Ayn Rand once said that what America really needs is a separation of government from economics.

I think she was right about that.

Her worship of individualism is extreme, inhuman and unnatural. Humans are social beings, we rely on each other, and we should look after each other. Ayn Rand and her followers seem to believe that they live on Islands, separate from everyone else - a foolish delusion. They also believe that entrepreneurs are morally superior to non-entrepreneurs. Not only is that foolish, its patently false, there are myriad examples of immoral entrepreneurs.

The institutions of state bureaucracy are no place for social beings. There's no more human interaction in the administration of your public sector establishment than there is between the master and his slave. Government bureaucracy places no value or personal ownership of one's equities of expertise, accomplishment or even basic human dignity. There is only slavish worship of a fellow human with an official government title.

HAHAHA, using big words to try to sound intelligent and failing miserably! "The institutions of state bureaucracy are no place for social beings." What are you talking about? State bureaucracies are FULL of social beings, they fit in very well.

"There's no more human interaction in the administration of your public sector establishment than there is between the master and his slave. "

Huh? where do you get such weird ideas? There's plenty of "human interaction in the administration of your public sector establishment" You think flight safety experts who investigate the cause of airplane crashes dont interact? You think doctors at CDC tracking infectious diseases dont interact? You think border patrol agents dont interact? You really should get out in the world more and learn a thing or two before making such absurd statements.

"equities of expertise, accomplishment or even basic human dignity. " When speaking the English language, throwing random words together is not how you construct a meaningful sentence.

"There is only slavish worship of a fellow human with an official government title." Clearly you have NO idea what you are talking about.

Your whole argument completely falls apart at "HAHAHA". You just enjoy your safe and comfortable life as a precocious little brat hiding behind the skirts of state bureaucracy if you like and never feel under any pressure to become more educated, mature or independent. The state will always provide for you with the fruits of somebody else's labors and nobody will ever take your childish chattering noises seriously.

Your whole argument falls apart at "Your." You just enjoy your safe and comfortable life as a precocious little brat hiding behind the skirts of your rich daddy if you like and never feel any need to become more educated, mature, or independent. Your daddy will always provide for you with the fruits of somebody else's labor and nobody will ever take your childish meandering rants seriously.

My daddy died when I was 14. I provide for myself. While you mimic like a an ignorant ranting 4 year old. No excuse for your immaturity.

I am sorry for your loss, but its sadly pathetic of you to try and use your father's death to elicit sympathy when you are losing an argument. Somehow I doubt your dad would be proud of that. My father also passed away, but I dont go around using his death to try and emotionally manipulate others. Shame on you.

It happened a long time ago and it's no shame of mine. It's just sadly pathetic of you to make ignorant assumptions about people's lives when you're losing the argument. But you reveal everything about your own lack of class right here on SH through your dishonesty and cowardice. You stepped in it so no sympathy for you. Consider yourself schooled, punky.

Of course its no shame, I never claimed is was. As for making sadly pathetic and ignorant assumptions about people's lives when you are losing the argument, and demonstrating dishonesty and cowardice: hello pot, meet kettle. I stepped in nothing and certainly need no sympathy from the likes of you. You couldn't school a kindergarten class, punky, but keep telling yourself that you schooled me since its clearly what you need to make you feel good about your pathetic life. Your dad must be proud...

My pot's stainless steel and you've got a loose bolt rattling around in your kettle. Color's not an issue with me. I'm just saying all you're accomplishing is making a racket. Try coming up with your own original material if you think you can flame me without mimicking mine. Try really hard if you can.

Being social does not mean enslaving others or sacrificing them to your own cause. Rand did not believe people lived on islands separate from everyone else, she just believed in voluntary cooperation rather than government coercion or mob force. Of course she wasn't perfect. Show me any philosopher who is.

I didn't realize until recently so many were actually behind her philosophy so I didn't really make it a priority to delve into it. I saw a small clip of a few prominent politicians speak of it in high regard which makes me want to. I'll be doing that very soon. There is SOME truth to what she says so I urge people to consider some thoughts, even if you disagree in whole. SOCIALISM IS THE DEATH OF THE AMERICAN DREAM!

As much as she went on and on about Objectivism, she ended up on welfare. So much for the individual's right to live or die on their own efforts

In desperate situations people will throw their philosophy aside just to survive. I think that is one thing Rand overlooked. Parasitism is human nature and it doesn't seem to be going away anytime soon.

Hey thank you, Foxhound, for posting this question. When I find a free copy or very cheap copy of one of her books I put it back on the shelf. I would rather read Tolstoy or something else. She just seems like too much work. So you just gave me a course in Ayn Rand here. Free!

You are welcome Gloria.

The books are tedious. I slogged through The Fountainhead because I started it and hate not to finish what I start. I broke my own rule however after several chapters of Atlas Shrugged and put it down.......read Tolstoy!

Hey thanks. Now I don't feel so lazy! I love Tolstoy!

you're welcome.....happy reading!

Her objectivist epistomology does not leave room for people who are born with or who develop disabilities. Huge flaw in her reasoning is the lack of compassion for such beings.

so true, to my mind its just a restatement of the law of the jungle which will leave us all in mushroom cloud.

Or better yet, the total lack of compassion for anyone except the strong in tooth and claw

Exactly! Anywhere else, that would be considered a sign of psychosis.

That would seem to describe her well. A little megalomania perhaps?

Yes. I agree with the TC and most sociopaths seem to have quite a bit of that.

Her basic core philosophy is "self-interest above all else" and as I do not subscribe to such ideology, (mostly because I see only stark black and white with nothing in between), I would never have considered her a mentor on how to live my life.

That's why we love you!

lol