Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5872

Freudian projection is the process of attributing one's own ideas, feelings, or attitudes to other people or objects--the guilt-laden adulterer accuses his spouse of adultery, the homophobe actually harbors latent homosexual tendencies. A subtle form of projection can be seen in the accusation by Christians that secular humanism and evolution are "religions"; or by cultists and paranormalists that skeptics are themselves a cult and that reason and science have cultic properties. For skeptics, the idea that reason can lead to a cult is absurd. The characteristics of a cult are 180 degrees out of phase with reason. But as I will demonstrate, not only can it happen, it has happened, and to a group that would have to be considered the unlikeliest cult in history. It is a lesson in what happens when the truth becomes more important than the search for truth, when final results of inquiry become more important than the process of inquiry, and especially when reason leads to an absolute certainty about one's beliefs such that those who are not for the group are against it.

One of the closest to Rand was Nathaniel Branden, a young philosophy student who joined the Collective in the early days before Atlas Shrugged was published. In his autobiographical memoirs entitled Judgment Day (1989), Branden recalled: "There were implicit premises in our world to which everyone in our circle subscribed, and which we transmitted to our students at NBI." Incredibly, and here is where the philosophical movement became a cult, they came to believe that (pp. 255-256):

Ayn Rand is the greatest human being who has ever lived.
Atlas Shrugged is the greatest human achievement in the history of the world.
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.
Once one is acquainted with Ayn Rand and/or her work, the measure of one's virtue is intrinsically tied to the position one takes regarding her and/or it.
No one can be a good Objectivist who does not admire what Ayn Rand admires and condemn what Ayn Rand condemns.
No one can be a fully consistent individualist who disagrees with Ayn Rand on any fundamental issue.
Since Ayn Rand has designated Nathaniel Branden as her "intellectual heir," and has repeatedly proclaimed him to be an ideal exponent of her philosophy, he is to be accorded only marginally less reverence than Ayn Rand herself.
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/i … on-229029/

Very long read. But interesting. It does make a good point, on why people who claim to be individuals fawn over every word of that PTSD sufferer.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

Macbeth wrote:

Freudian projection is the process of attributing one's own ideas, feelings, or attitudes to other people or objects--the guilt-laden adulterer accuses his spouse of adultery, the homophobe actually harbors latent homosexual tendencies. A subtle form of projection can be seen in the accusation by Christians that secular humanism and evolution are "religions"; or by cultists and paranormalists that skeptics are themselves a cult and that reason and science have cultic properties. For skeptics, the idea that reason can lead to a cult is absurd. The characteristics of a cult are 180 degrees out of phase with reason. But as I will demonstrate, not only can it happen, it has happened, and to a group that would have to be considered the unlikeliest cult in history. It is a lesson in what happens when the truth becomes more important than the search for truth, when final results of inquiry become more important than the process of inquiry, and especially when reason leads to an absolute certainty about one's beliefs such that those who are not for the group are against it.

One of the closest to Rand was Nathaniel Branden, a young philosophy student who joined the Collective in the early days before Atlas Shrugged was published. In his autobiographical memoirs entitled Judgment Day (1989), Branden recalled: "There were implicit premises in our world to which everyone in our circle subscribed, and which we transmitted to our students at NBI." Incredibly, and here is where the philosophical movement became a cult, they came to believe that (pp. 255-256):

Ayn Rand is the greatest human being who has ever lived.
Atlas Shrugged is the greatest human achievement in the history of the world.
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.
Once one is acquainted with Ayn Rand and/or her work, the measure of one's virtue is intrinsically tied to the position one takes regarding her and/or it.
No one can be a good Objectivist who does not admire what Ayn Rand admires and condemn what Ayn Rand condemns.
No one can be a fully consistent individualist who disagrees with Ayn Rand on any fundamental issue.
Since Ayn Rand has designated Nathaniel Branden as her "intellectual heir," and has repeatedly proclaimed him to be an ideal exponent of her philosophy, he is to be accorded only marginally less reverence than Ayn Rand herself.
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/i … on-229029/

Very long read. But interesting. It does make a good point, on why people who claim to be individuals fawn over every word of that PTSD sufferer.
All people tend to gravitate towards people that they share similar interests and beliefs with and just as many adjust their own beliefs in order to 'fit in'. Cultish behavior can form around any idea or trend and normally does. Original thought is very rare and those with an original idea tend to have others that mimic them and co-opt it as their own. If you look at the punk movement from the 70s and 80s they all considered themselves individuals but if you looked at them as an outsider, most of them wore the 'punk uniform' which made them non-individualistic.

Individualism is a difficult concept but in this case, the people that took her words as gospel definitely fit the definition of cult-like behavior. They worshiped at the altar of individualism while shunning it at the same time. Hypocrites? Yes, but so are 99% of the people that have lived on this earth.
"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
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England
Long story short, very few people are born leaders. Most are followers that will form a cult around any strong personality.
"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
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6993|67.222.138.85

article wrote:

that would have to be considered the unlikeliest cult in history.
uhhh, why? Rand and her writings are ready-made for a ridiculous group of followers. They go against thousands of years of morality and common social pretexts, making it a prime target for the greatest hypocrites of them all - the rebels.

You can't "learn" objectivism. It demands that you do what you do for yourself, not because someone told you to do it. If you read Atlas and your life changed, it certainly didn't make you an objectivist, at least not a good one. As such the quotes in the article made me nauseous.

also

article wrote:

The components of a philosophy must stand or fall on their own internal consistency or empirical support, regardless of the founder's personality quirks or moral inconsistencies.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6993|67.222.138.85
What did I say?
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England
Ok, I finally read the article. He's trying to use the fact that a 'cult' formed around her to justify his deviation from some of her philosophical points. Did he really need to create such a large wall of text to justify himself? Grab your balls and stand up for yourself, JHC. I can't believe I wasted my time on that garbage.

By writing such a long blog entry and then asking others for their opinion on his own, he's displaying the same behavior that the 'cultists' he decries exhibited. It was almost like he was asking permission from his audience to deviate from her beliefs. Pathetic.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2009-11-28 17:16:55)

"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

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard