Why does she cause so much seething?
https://nintil.com/why-ayn-rand-is-not-and-ought-not-be-taken-seriously>I have never read a piece of work from Ayn Rand, beyond some paragraphs and extracts here and there on the internet. I never gave Objectivism, her system of thought, much importance.>But there are people -Objectivists- who think she is one of the greatest, or the greatest, philosopher ever (along with Aristotle, they'll add). Sometimes, Objectivists tell people who have not read Rand to read her, so that they can become rational, and abandon their "non-Objectivist, mystical beliefs".>I haven't read anything from Rand because I consider that the effort won't be worth it, as every time I've read something from Objectivists, I have not been persuaded that there is much to be learned from Rand. And also, there exists a critique available on the net that demolishes Objectivism. I will give reasons later why I believe the critique succeeds.>This conclusion, however, has to be qualified. Should we reject views just because others with good qualifications say they ought to be rejected, and there are no critiques of their arguments for the rejections? Usually, yes. Such combination of factors is a very good reason to reject something without reading about it. This is how we generally go about in our life: rarely we go to the depths of Physics' journals to believe or disbelieve claims that physicists make. If a lot of people who have studied a subject for a long time agree on something, that is evidence for that something. It is not ultimate evidence, but the burden of proof is on you is you want to go against the consensus.>So defenders of ideas that are out of the consensus of relevant experts should take the best critiques that have been made against them, and refute them. It would also be nice for them to provide a brief introduction to their ideas, to reduce the cost for others of acquiring information about those ideas.
>>24812425this is not the answer, but a hint to the answer is buried in this post.>I haven't read anything from Rand because I consider that the effort won't be worth itpeople who *have* read it found that their effort wasn't worth it. this is why rand causes so much seething.
>>24812398I always associate her with 2016-era trumptards, as the first time I was introduced to her books was when I had found them on some right-wing book infographic from /pol/. Julius Evola too.
>>24812430From the article:>EDIT: Read beyond the first paragraph! Also, read this to understand how to reject something without reading it.https://artir.wordpress.com/2016/04/10/on-the-express-acceptance-and-rejection-of-beliefs/
>>24812398Sexism and antisemitism
>>24812425I'm not defending her but the fact academics don't like her makes her feel like a kindred spirit.
>>24812398Philosophy is an idiotic waste of time. Useless wordcels create problems which don't exist, and then fail to provide any solution to them.Reading Ayn Rand is a waste of time, just like how reading Hegel, Marx, or Nietzsche is a waste of time.Philosophers never (zero exceptions) actually live up to their own lofty ideals. They talk talk talk and write write write and do nothing.The real question is why Ayn Rand is treated properly while academics still pretend there's value in other philosophers. My take: if they acknowledged all philosophers as equally valid, it would betray the scam, so they arbitrarily picked one to hate.There's a hypothetical other world where Rand is taken seriously in academia and Fichte generates nothing but seethe, and other than that, the world is completely identical to our own.
>>24812704People will think you're a brainlet, but of course you're correctPhilosophy is cargo cult inspired by mathematics
>>24812704>>24812721>philosophy bad>anyway, here's my shitty philosophyKek, every single time.
>>24812398It's mostly from University professors who are left leaning that despise her because of her whole "CAPITALISM LE GOOD" stance and entry level philosophy but here's where that they don't understand and why she's misunderstood. She's a novelist, not a philosopher.
>>24812704>Reading Ayn Rand is a waste of timeSo is reading your post you faggot but at least she was more relatable and compelling with what she wrote especially when it dealt with issues that still today such as mediocrity and invidualism
>>24812398isn't because she inspired a bunch of 90s economists (and more recently, techbros) into some libertarian+ ideology with a savior complex who ended up causing the 1997 crisis? i remember BBC did a pretty good documentary on it, All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace.
>>24812704>Philosophers never (zero exceptions) actually live up to their own lofty idealsMainlander did
OP is a frog poster. He does not care about your answer. He asks this three times a week sometimes and we all know why she's crap.Back in the good old days, /lit/ banned these threads so we could talk about books. I propose we just link to this and ignore the bitch.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKqUUYl5SCY
I'm never going to read her books, but I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt since her detractors are insufferable.
>>24812398Because she called bullshit on the libtard/left alliance. Too bad she tried to start a cult and was saved by welfare in later life.
>>24813853She's called bullshit by sensible people with good taste.
>>24813894No, that's the one place Randtards have you guys in a corner. Her opinion essays and those of her movement were on point (e.g. The Anti-Industrial Revolution and The Virtue of Selfishness) and her fiction isn't any worse than a lot of mainstream stuff that's is currently lauded by critics. The problem is she tried to start a self-help cult and the ideological rigidity such necessitates turned her into a hypocrite.
>>24812425>I haven't read anything from RandOpinion discardedOP rand haters are numales or women
>>24813916Cribbed and distorted Stirnerism. She's a moron on top of being a no-talent. You sir are as moronic.
>>24813925God I hate these "people"
>>24813930Not an argument, twerp. I'm glad to see she's still inspiring irrationality in her enemies from beyond the grave.
Fountainhead is a pretty good book if you can get over the silliness of the philosophy. Atlas Shrugged is kind of insufferable because it's basically all the silliness of Fountainhead with none of the charm. She causes seethe because she's an easy target and a low-hanging fruit for the slop-eating sections of the Left, and an inspiration and prophetess for the slop-eating sections of the Right. In reality, she's just a wackobird who can write decent fiction when she restrains herself.
>>24812398Its less her and more the retards that take her seriously
>>24813944Not an argument. >Struts offs with satisfied grin
>>24814020>struts offYou posted a comment, retard.
>>24813925Fuck it I'm reading Fountainhead and there's nothing you numale faggots on /here/ can do about it
>>24812398She claimed to be a philosopher but had a mind-bending level stupid opinion of Plato
>>24813930Stirner's philosophy allows for pedophilia and is entirely idealistic tranny shit
>>24812398I was just watching the Mike Wallace interview and she says something I'm sure is one of the reasons, especially here.>If a man wants love he should correct his weaknesses, or his flaws, and he may deserve it. But he cannot expect the unearned, neither in love, nor in money, neither in matter, nor spirit.
>>24812398(sigh)Ayn Rand developed her philosophy specifically because she was so ugly that even in the shitstorm of the Russian Revolution neither her kike daddy nor the inbred alcoholic Bolsheviks were interested in raping her. She coped by convincing herself that this is due to socialism repressing the healthy and natural instincts (to rape Ayn Rand) in men, and men should act as selfish as possible (i.e. finally rape her). In her books, tall selfish men with big arms are constantly raping her self-insert character. She completely misunderstood men, as it always happens with women.A real man is a living antithesis to Objectivism. As a human male, I cannot act in my own personal interests since I naturally have none, so instead I rape women out of selfless kindness, as all men do.If Ayn Rand ever met me, I would rape the Objectivism out of her to absolutely no benefit of my own (there can be no personal gain or profit from raping Ayn Rand desu), and that would collapse her world-view on a metaphysical level. It would become indisputably self-evident to her that she kept writing books because despite all of her efforts she never got a good rape. She never got a good rape because the only men she interacted with were Objectivists who fell for her books - books written by a women dreaming of being raped, about a woman dreaming of being raped. The only men who can enjoy her books are women in male bodies, inherently incapable of raping her, and instead hoping that she would rape them, that she would incarnate as a the man she dreams of, the Messiah hiding under the skin of the Prophet. She would see why all of her relationships with men were such disasters, both of them eagerly waiting for the other to rape, waiting to no outcome. She would love me and my kind dick selflessly in return despite all her will, leaving her with absolutely nothing to ground her ideas anymore, finally feeling true freedom - freedom as an absence, as a flight with no land holding your feet, as hers would be dangling high above. The dreams of an Atlantean man of self-interests would evaporate from her head with the moisture of my cum drying in her scruffy hair. She would sing praises to Lenin whenever her mouth is not taken by selfless work on my cock and balls.
>>24812906Ikr? You can't exist outside its frame of reference without referencing the object itself
>>24812398That's a dude
>>24812398> Rages against the government going out of it's way to help the average citizen, advocates for a "minimalist" government > Dies on social securityThat tells you everything you need to know about her.I'd hatefuck Ayn so hard desu
>>24812398It’s best if U read Aristotle, Rand and KELLEY together!Peikoff and the Ayn Rand Institute are cultists compared to Kelley and Altas Society.
>>24815103So did Popper yet U niggers don’t say anything about him.>>24816220True.Should have supported UBI or NIT
"objectivism" is just LaVeyan SatanismBoring shit that's not wortwhile
>>24814000It's not pretty good, the writing is atrocious and deadly serious. The only way it could possibly be good is if it was written by someone else as a parody of Rand
>>24812398Because she directly opposes the moral bases of both socialism/leftism and religious conservatism resulting on the NPCs that form those ideologies to seethe and attack her without even touch her ideas in fear people might slightly agree with her
>>24816891She was educated in the Soviet Union and lived off government benefits.If anything, she's just a worthless hypocrite like all libertarians. No one cares about your "ideas" when you don't even live them.
>>24815391>(sigh)Stopped reading there. You're not on Reddit.
Misogyny
OP is a faggot
>>24815391>to absolutely no benefit of my ownwow, way to completely miss the point of Objectivism
>>24812704Of all those people, Marx actually did live up this ideas. He helped organize the working class movement in Germany and Great Britian. Hegel and Nietzsche were largely just academics.
>>24816795>the writing is atrociouslol shut the fuck up
>OHOHOHOH WOMYN WRITER>NOOOOOOOOO NOT WITH THOSE POLITICS
>>24818880>Marx actually did live up this ideasHe was a retarded mooch with shitty hygiene who lived in filth, lol.
>>24812398Because rich failsons take her seriously
>>24818917You're projecting because you're a loser.Marx's ideas have shaped the world. The most powerful country in the world, China, uses his philosophy to shape their beliefs.
>>24819755fuck off dengist retard. china abandoned the revolution long ago.
>>24819786>China abandoned revolution because they wouldn't let Maoists do cannibalism in the country side anymoreShut up you westoid fake leftist baizuo.
