Page 1 of 4 [ 49 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Odin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,475
Location: Moorhead, Minnesota, USA

01 Mar 2010, 9:08 am

I got this from here.

Quote:
You've probably heard of Ayn Rand. Most people have these days. She was the author of such inexplicably widely-read "novels" (really, barely-disguised political diatribes) as "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged". Her books are currently enjoying something of a boom among those who misguidedly believe they would be in the self-righteous community of "Atlases" at Galt's Gulch. The novels themselves are of only passing interest, being long, melodramatic and mediocrely written. Rather, it is the "philosophy" at the core of the novels which bears attention.

Hear ye, hear ye, I come to bury Rand, not to praise her. While numerous conservative thinkers (and, oddly, Neil Peart) have lauded Rand as a philosopher, few academic institutions include Rand or Objectivism as a philosophical discipline. Conservatives, such as Chris Sciabarra, tend to believe that the academic left decries Rand due to her anti-communist, pro-capitalist slant. Like much of the witterings of conservatives who presume to know what the left thinks, that presumes firstly, more power than the academic left has had in decades; secondly, assumes that the left was universally pro-communist and anti-capitalist, something which has never been true and thirdly, that Rand was saying anything worth studying. She wasn't. Rand's "philosophy" was the same defence of endless greed which mankind has been engaged in for eternity, the same attempt to place a moral cover on pure selfishness that has long been pursued by any number of exploiters down the centuries. Nietzche was, and is, pilloried for saying "God is dead", Rand is lauded for effectively saying "the self is God". There is nothing new here, save perhaps for the self-delusion that allows so many professed "Christians" to adhere to a philosophy that glorifies greed and athieism. There is also a cult-like deification of Rand by her followers and "swarming" of those who dare criticise her which reminds one very strongly of Scientology (and Glenn Beck followers but that's another matter).

There is another name for those who hold that the only proper moral consideration is the happiness of the self; for those who view empathy and compassion as weakness; who view selfishness as the only virtue: Psychopaths.

Contrary to popular belief, the psychopath is not automatically violent. Rather, the psychopath is defined by a near-complete lack of empathy. Robert Hare (who created the widely used "Hare Psychopathy Checklist") describes psychopaths as "instraspecies predators" who use a combination of charisma, manipulation, intimidation, sexuality and violence to satisfy their own desires. The more human qualities of conscience, empathy, remorse or guilt are either completely absent or extremely limited. It must be repeated that the psychopath is not necessarily violent. Indeed, many are not because their lives have never placed them in a position where violence was the only means to satisfy their desires. Many businessmen (and therefore, many politicians) profile as psychopaths because they exhibit the core characteristics or some section thereof. Ayn Rand should also be considered a psychopath.

Hare's checklist lists certain personality factors as indicative of psychopathy. The average person will perhaps exhibit one or, at most, two. The psychopath will exhibit all but on or two. In no particular order, these items are Glibness/superficial charm. After her writings became popular, Rand collected around herself a group of cultists who virtually worshipped her. However, shallow affect, the psychopath's charm is only ever superficial. As one comes to know and understand the psychopath more fully, the charm which initially attracted one to them is revealed as only skin-deep. In this, Rand was entirely textbook. She was described by most who knew her best as a bitter, friendless child who grew into an equally bitter and acidic woman. Grandiose sense of self-worth would certainly fit Rand. A woman who names her beliefs "Objectivism" out of a belief that any reasoning person who observes the objective truths of the world would necessarily come to full agreement with her would probably qualify. The fact that her little cult were required to memorise her works and discounted as "imbecilic" and "anti-life" if they asked questions simply seals the deal. Her sincere belief was that thinking freely would automatically lead to total agreement with her views. The ruthless policing of her cult would also qualify her under the Cunning/manipulative qualifier. Patholigical lying is one that Rand is probably innocent of. So far as we know, there is no reason to believe she was a pathological liar. Lack of remorse or guilt and Callous/lack of empathy could be described as "Ayn Rand syndrome". These two qualifiers are really the core of her books, philosophhy and worldview. In one of her books (The Fountainhead), her "hero", Howard Roarke, blows up a housing project he designed when a minor alteration is made and then orders the jury to acquit him (the fact that, as an architect, Roarke was presumably contracted for his work and therefore, it wasn't "his" anymore piddles all over the supposed respect for property too). In Atlas Shrugged, her ode to the super-rich which imagines them going on strike against progressive taxation, Rand describes the rest of the world (without whom, let us not forget, the super-rich would be unable to make anything) in such niceties as "savages", "refuse" and "immitations of living beings". When one of the strikers engineers a train crash (because they don't just strike but commit acts of terrorism too), Rand makes it clear that she believes the murdered victims deserved their fate because they supported progressive taxation. A stewing hymn of Nietzchean will-to-power, misanthropy, failure to understand economics, feudalism and sexual politics verging on the obscene, Atlas Shrugged is full of this stuff. Her heroes spend their time both insisting that they are the heroic producers (and without labour, what are they producing exactly?) and bemoaning that others do not worship them as such. In her spare time, Rand was an admirer of serail killer William Hickman (I'll spare you the details of his crimes save to say that they were brutal even by serial killer standards), describing him as "a brilliant, unusual, exceptional boy"; "other people do not exist for him and he does not see why they should" was her evaluation of his crimes and Rand considered this worthy of praise. Finally, on the personality factor, there is Failure to accept responsibility for one's actions. Since our record of Rand's life isn't fully detailed, it's difficult to say how much she satisfied this one. Certainly, when her lover Nathaniel Branden found another partner, she blamed him rather than herself or her increasingly poisonous views. We shouldn't sympathise with Rand as injured party too much here, she was herslelf married to someone entirely different and cruel enough to carry on the affair without regard to discretion. Indeed, if the only duty of the superman is to please himself, Brendan was acting according to Rand's ideals and she should have applauded him. She once said the the USA should be a "democracy of superiors only" with "superior" being defined as "rich". One scarcely needs to point out that such a system wouldn't be democracy at all but oligarchy and interestingly elitist for all her followers claim to despise elitism.

One doesn't need to work very hard to diagnose Rand. Her life and writings paint a vivid picture of psychopathy so clear and obvious that it is only surprising so many miss it. She was a phonomenally damaged woman for whom one can feel an element of pity (an emotion that disgusted her) even while aware of how terrifically dangerous she and her philosophy was and are. Rand herself died alone except for a hired nurse. Her deranged views had driven away anyone who might have been close to her. Like L. Ron Hubbard, however, her lunatic ideas have spawned a cult that would turn all of us into happy little psychopaths; a cult that includes many of the world's foremost economists, politicians and rabble-rousers (Beck again, although "intellectual terrorist" might be more appropriate). Like George Orwell, Rand imagined a dystopian world characterised by the powerful's exploitation of the powerless. Unlike Orwell, Rand wanted to live there.


_________________
My Blog: My Autistic Life


phil777
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 May 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,825
Location: Montreal, Québec

01 Mar 2010, 10:47 am

How did such a deranged woman get so much attention at all is beyond me -.- The USA ought to foolproof whatever litterature is produced using that Hare's checklist (or if anything better exists o.O ), i mean geesh, free speech shouldn't allow people disconnected from reality to speak (at least, to that extreme). =.=



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

01 Mar 2010, 10:48 am

All I really have to say is that I really bet she is more complex than psychopathy. This isn't even to say that she was sane, but rather there are so many things that can be wrong that an after death label of "psychopath" is really quite questionable, especially if it comes from a group that tends to dislike the woman. It is clear that Ayn Rand would probably be considered to have a psychological condition. The issue is that I would really bet that the matter is more complex than psychopathy.



sartresue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 70
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,313
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism

01 Mar 2010, 11:09 am

Pathological randyism topic

Why am I not surprised? The image of Atlas shrugging off his innocence (what me worry?) is both sinsiter and ominous.

I always had a suspicion about Ayn. Very nasty person. :evil:


_________________
Radiant Aspergian
Awe-Tistic Whirlwind

Phuture Phounder of the Philosophy Phactory

NOT a believer of Mystic Woo-Woo


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

01 Mar 2010, 11:19 am

phil777 wrote:
How did such a deranged woman get so much attention at all is beyond me -.- The USA ought to foolproof whatever litterature is produced using that Hare's checklist (or if anything better exists o.O ), i mean geesh, free speech shouldn't allow people disconnected from reality to speak (at least, to that extreme). =.=

Then who decides who is disconnected with reality? It seems to me that such a rule would quickly silence anybody of extreme opinions regardless of how intelligent they are or what they can add to our thinking. It would also likely have issues existing with the US given laws about the free exercise of religion, as no matter how nutty Rand is, she has nothing on a number of fringe religious people.



pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

01 Mar 2010, 1:54 pm

I tried reading some of her books, and I found them to be dreadfully dull. I couldn't make it all the way through. For some reason, right-wing nut jobs find her books to be sherely fascinating.

Left wing authors, like Upton Sinclair (The Jungle) or John Steinbeck, are much more readable.

Are there any psychopathic right-wing authors that aren't soporific?



NeantHumain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,837
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

01 Mar 2010, 7:08 pm

I am doubtful of Prophet 451's amateur diagnosis of Ayn Rand as he seems to have only a glib understanding of psychopathy, which is not psychopathology (psychopathology is the broader study of mental illness). Still, the author makes some valid points: Callousness and a lack of empathy are a cardinal trait of psychopathy, and Rand's objectivist philosophy advocates just such an outlook on life. She lacks the impulsive antisociality/criminality needed for a diagnosis of psychopathy; I'd say she's more a malignant narcissist, which is a sort of halfway house between the more ordinary "phallic" narcissistic personality disorder (e.g., the celebrity who needs the fame) and the more overt, ruthless exploitation and callousness of the full-on psychopath.

Rand's philosophy is usually considered a variant of ethical egoism, the position that the basis of human morality should be "enlightened self-interest" (greed). Mostly Ayn Rand seems to have reacted to communism by advocating the exact opposite of communism's purported ideals.



xenon13
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,638

01 Mar 2010, 8:29 pm

Think about it. Foreigner arrives from "enemy" country and creates a cult the influence of which seeps its way into the establishment, the values of which help destroy society and in time destroy the country itself.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

01 Mar 2010, 9:05 pm

xenon13 wrote:
Think about it. Foreigner arrives from "enemy" country and creates a cult the influence of which seeps its way into the establishment, the values of which help destroy society and in time destroy the country itself.

Honestly, I think Ayn Rand's philosophy is actually reflective of some elements of this country before her arrival, and that her values are not complete historical aberrations for the US.

I mean, as it stands, I think that NeantHumain is closer to the truth in that Ayn Rand was likely just outright rejecting communism's purported ideals. Particularly given that from what I've heard, she had good reason to hate the communist regime for non-intellectual reasons.

As for malignant narcissism? I wouldn't be surprised. I think it is more plausible than psychopathy.

In any case, I've heard that Ayn Rand had a very good new biography come out, one that is reasonably even-handed and well-researched. http://www.amazon.com/Ayn-Rand-World-Sh ... t_ep_dpt_1



Kilroy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,549
Location: Beyond the Void

01 Mar 2010, 9:09 pm

Neil Peart from Rush read a lot of her stuff lol
love Rush



xenon13
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,638

01 Mar 2010, 10:48 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
xenon13 wrote:
Think about it. Foreigner arrives from "enemy" country and creates a cult the influence of which seeps its way into the establishment, the values of which help destroy society and in time destroy the country itself.

Honestly, I think Ayn Rand's philosophy is actually reflective of some elements of this country before her arrival, and that her values are not complete historical aberrations for the US.

I mean, as it stands, I think that NeantHumain is closer to the truth in that Ayn Rand was likely just outright rejecting communism's purported ideals. Particularly given that from what I've heard, she had good reason to hate the communist regime for non-intellectual reasons.

As for malignant narcissism? I wouldn't be surprised. I think it is more plausible than psychopathy.

In any case, I've heard that Ayn Rand had a very good new biography come out, one that is reasonably even-handed and well-researched. http://www.amazon.com/Ayn-Rand-World-Sh ... t_ep_dpt_1


"More American than Americans" and so forth, yes, I have seen this, it seems to fit in with a lot of the sick undercurrents of American society, some of the more disgusting interpretations of Calvinism, for instance.



Unorthodox
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 95
Location: Northwest USA

02 Mar 2010, 12:15 am

Armchair psychoanalysis on a dead woman is a bit low, IMHO. I also tend to fall into the camp that Rand's experiences with Soviet Communism probably pushed her to the opposite extreme, and I've always admired how she did more damage to that ideology with a typewriter than any number of people did with guns and bombs, quite an achievement really. I would think that the more intelligent members of the political left would at least recognize that her work is an absolute masterpiece of nonviolent activism, but it would seem that their distaste has clouded their, how shall we say; objectivity?

Atlas Shrugged is consistently ranked just behind the Bible as the most influential book ever written, and though one can disagree with her perspective, I don't think anyone, especially anyone here, is in any position to question her technique or effectiveness in spreading her message. Noam Chomsky once called her the most evil woman of the 20th century, but I think that's just professional jealousy talking, she did far more with 2 works of fiction that he ever has with his double digit output of political screeds.

I think the real stroke of genius was writing her philosophy as a work of fiction rather than a political or philosophical book, I don't think anyone since has really been able to leverage such a work into so much influence on political thought. I of course immediately draw parallels with the Bible and other religious texts, which rather than telling you what to think and how to behave use allegory and narrative to show you, which every aspiring author knows is a much more powerful technique. What can't be denied is that Rand's ideas have a lot of resonance with a lot of people, because no one is claiming that she was a great writer, and yet people not only continue to slog through these massive overwritten tomes, but to adopt elements of them as their personal philosophies, so there has to be something there that many intelligent people respond to. Yelling and screaming about how terrible an author she was, how callous her ideas were, etc etc ad naseum does absolutely nothing to refute them, and character attacks on her personally just appear weak, calling for her work and the views it supports to be suppressed seems desperate. Better to take a page out of her own book, if you feel that strongly about her ideas, write a massive narrative work of fiction about a progressive community overcoming greedy industrialists, Ayn Rand herself is the greatest proof that such an approach can bear tremendous fruits.



xenon13
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,638

02 Mar 2010, 1:09 am

They say that there is nothing so lucrative as the racket of making up excuses for the rich to be selfish and evil and making this into a virtue. Unfortunately, this is squeezing moderation and balance from society which will collapse. There's a reason the likes of Confucius preached moderation - running an Ayn Rand paradise means losing the Mandate of Heaven in due course.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

02 Mar 2010, 1:44 am

xenon13 wrote:
They say that there is nothing so lucrative as the racket of making up excuses for the rich to be selfish and evil and making this into a virtue. Unfortunately, this is squeezing moderation and balance from society which will collapse. There's a reason the likes of Confucius preached moderation - running an Ayn Rand paradise means losing the Mandate of Heaven in due course.

The issue is what "moderation and balance" mean. I don't really see a meaningful way to objectively define those terms, and the closest I see is an extreme form of conservatism that always upholds the status quo.

Is this to say that Ayn Rand's position is correct? No, but I just don't see why Confucian philosophy has a good epistemic position on the matter.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

02 Mar 2010, 3:16 am

xenon13 wrote:
They say that there is nothing so lucrative as the racket of making up excuses for the rich to be selfish and evil and making this into a virtue. Unfortunately, this is squeezing moderation and balance from society which will collapse. There's a reason the likes of Confucius preached moderation - running an Ayn Rand paradise means losing the Mandate of Heaven in due course.


I believe in democracy. We should all be selfish and evil.

ruveyn



Unorthodox
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 95
Location: Northwest USA

02 Mar 2010, 4:25 am

pandabear wrote:
Are there any psychopathic right-wing authors that aren't soporific?


Try Anne Coulter, if you take her seriously the blood pressure increase alone will keep you up for hours, if not land you in the ER. Otherwise, it's some of the funniest reading around, even her Wikipedia entry had me in stitches, especially her early stuff like getting fired for insulting a dead man at his own funeral, or her interview with the crippled anti-landmine spokesman...