Pages: 1

 

2009-10-22 17:01:54
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5873

Ironically, as Heller's biography makes clear, while Rand's philosophy was based on the individual's absolute freedom, Rand herself exercised a dictatorial control over her followers. She would denounce anyone who expressed opinions even slightly diverging from her own. Her chief acolyte (and lover), Nathaniel Branden, once circulated a list of rules for Rand's inner circle to follow; one of them read, "Atlas Shrugged is the greatest human achievement in the history of the world"; another said, "Ayn Rand, by virtue of her philosophical genius, is the supreme arbiter in any issue pertaining to what is rational, moral, or appropriate to man's life on earth." For the leader of a group dedicated to human freedom, Rand didn't allow much of it around her.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/219001/page/2

On January 3, 1889, Nietzsche suffered a collapse which seems to have triggered a psychotic break. Two policemen approached him after he caused a public disturbance in the streets of Turin. What actually happened remains unknown, but the often-repeated tale states that Nietzsche witnessed the whipping of a horse at the other end of the Piazza Carlo Alberto, ran to the horse, threw his arms up around the horse’s neck to protect it, and collapsed to the ground.[21]

In the following few days, Nietzsche sent short writings — known as the Wahnbriefe ("Madness Letters") — to a number of friends (including Cosima Wagner and Jacob Burckhardt). To his former colleague Burckhardt, Nietzsche wrote: "I have had Caiaphas put in fetters. Also, last year I was crucified by the German doctors in a very drawn-out manner. Wilhelm, Bismarck, and all anti-Semites abolished."[22] Additionally, he commanded the German emperor to go to Rome in order to be shot and summoned the European powers to take military action against Germany.[23]
Wikipedia

So do you think both Rand and Nietzsche had deep seated psychological problems and if so do you think it negates their philosophy since they were works of lunatics?

I think Nietzsche was sane up until the end, but I think Rand was suffering from some sort of PTSD.
2009-10-22 17:06:35
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6888|132 and Bush

Why would it negate it?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-10-22 17:07:27
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5873

Kmarion wrote:

Why would it negate it?
Because they're thoughts and views would be that of an insane person.
2009-10-22 17:19:13
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6888|132 and Bush

Macbeth wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Why would it negate it?
Because they're thoughts and views would be that of an insane person.
That does not necessarily mean illogic.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-10-22 17:30:52
Doctor Strangelove
Real Battlefield Veterinarian.
+1,758|6755
Rand philosophy seems to come more out of an hatred of all things even remotely communistic. While given what happened to her, I can't blame her, but to take what is clearly an emotionally driven philosophy that has several obvious holes in it seriously is not a good idea. Rand was a victim of a bad system, and her anger of it caused her to think up a system that is both completely opposite and yet, equally oppressive in its own way.

And Nietzsche was just a nut though.
2009-10-22 17:33:48
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6994|67.222.138.85
Of course they were both lunatics. Anyone that goes against the currents in such a radical direction with such personal conviction is a loony.

article wrote:

I'm one of the few who fall somewhere in between.
faggot

article wrote:

it doesn't include the human needs we have for grace, love, faith, or any form of social compact.
wrong, and faggot

article wrote:

Peter Keating, who appropriates Roark's architectural talent for his own purposes
wrong

article wrote:

Ellsworth Toohey, the journalist who doesn't know what to write until he knows what people want to hear
not even close

article wrote:

I think at a fundamental level many people recognize Rand's essential truth—government doesn't know best.
wrong

More directly to the point, her protege wrote an introduction to an edition of Atlas Shrugged that is at home right now. In it however he talks about how she didn't want to be classified as believing in "Randism" or really wanting to be labeled as anything else. She didn't even like people labeling themselves as "Randites" because the whole point is individualism - such a movement is pretty ironic. From what I understand she wanted other people to believe what she believed, and had reason to believe everything she did believe...but just because she didn't accept any other label and didn't want her name applied to people who held differing views to her own doesn't mean she deserves to be labeled as some cultist leader.

Doctor Strangelove wrote:

what is clearly an emotionally driven philosophy
/has not read Rand
2009-10-22 20:53:51
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5645|London, England

Macbeth wrote:

Ironically, as Heller's biography makes clear, while Rand's philosophy was based on the individual's absolute freedom, Rand herself exercised a dictatorial control over her followers. She would denounce anyone who expressed opinions even slightly diverging from her own. Her chief acolyte (and lover), Nathaniel Branden, once circulated a list of rules for Rand's inner circle to follow; one of them read, "Atlas Shrugged is the greatest human achievement in the history of the world"; another said, "Ayn Rand, by virtue of her philosophical genius, is the supreme arbiter in any issue pertaining to what is rational, moral, or appropriate to man's life on earth." For the leader of a group dedicated to human freedom, Rand didn't allow much of it around her.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/219001/page/2

On January 3, 1889, Nietzsche suffered a collapse which seems to have triggered a psychotic break. Two policemen approached him after he caused a public disturbance in the streets of Turin. What actually happened remains unknown, but the often-repeated tale states that Nietzsche witnessed the whipping of a horse at the other end of the Piazza Carlo Alberto, ran to the horse, threw his arms up around the horse’s neck to protect it, and collapsed to the ground.[21]

In the following few days, Nietzsche sent short writings — known as the Wahnbriefe ("Madness Letters") — to a number of friends (including Cosima Wagner and Jacob Burckhardt). To his former colleague Burckhardt, Nietzsche wrote: "I have had Caiaphas put in fetters. Also, last year I was crucified by the German doctors in a very drawn-out manner. Wilhelm, Bismarck, and all anti-Semites abolished."[22] Additionally, he commanded the German emperor to go to Rome in order to be shot and summoned the European powers to take military action against Germany.[23]
Wikipedia

So do you think both Rand and Nietzsche had deep seated psychological problems and if so do you think it negates their philosophy since they were works of lunatics?

I think Nietzsche was sane up until the end, but I think Rand was suffering from some sort of PTSD.
99% of geniuses are 'insane' to some degree.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-10-22 20:58:46
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5645|London, England

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

More directly to the point, her protege wrote an introduction to an edition of Atlas Shrugged that is at home right now. In it however he talks about how she didn't want to be classified as believing in "Randism" or really wanting to be labeled as anything else. She didn't even like people labeling themselves as "Randites" because the whole point is individualism - such a movement is pretty ironic. From what I understand she wanted other people to believe what she believed, and had reason to believe everything she did believe...but just because she didn't accept any other label and didn't want her name applied to people who held differing views to her own doesn't mean she deserves to be labeled as some cultist leader.
She wanted people to have 'Ah ha!' moments as they were reading her work. Personally, she put into words (better than I ever could, not my specialty) feelings that I always felt. I in no way consider myself to be a 'Randite' (yes yes, my screenname but I couldn't think of anything else when making my bf2 account ) but I do agree with many of the things that she wrote in her books. To take everything she wrote as gospel, as if it were a bible, would go against everything she stood for. Whole point is she threw out ideas and you're supposed to weigh them and judge them rationally yourself.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-10-22 21:53:03
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6962|Canberra, AUS

Last edited by Spark (2009-10-22 21:53:55)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman

 

Pages: 1

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard