Philosophy who needs it

[Sweater Cows!]

Both [conservatives and liberals] hold the same premise—the mind-body dichotomy—but choose opposite sides of this lethal fallacy.

The conservatives want freedom to act in the material realm; they tend to oppose government control of production, of industry, of trade, of business, of physical goods, of material wealth. But they advocate government control of man’s spirit, i.e., man’s consciousness; they advocate the State’s right to impose censorship, to determine moral values, to create and enforce a governmental establishment of morality, to rule the intellect. The liberals want freedom to act in the spiritual realm; they oppose censorship, they oppose government control of ideas, of the arts, of the press, of education (note their concern with “academic freedom”). But they advocate government control of material production, of business, of employment, of wages, of profits, of all physical property—they advocate it all the way down to total expropriation.

The conservatives see man as a body freely roaming the earth, building sand piles or factories—with an electronic computer inside his skull, controlled from Washington. The liberals see man as a soul freewheeling to the farthest reaches of the universe—but wearing chains from nose to toes when he crosses the street to buy a loaf of bread.

- Philosophy Who Needs It, 186

[XLFD]

It sounds like Ayn is therefore saying that a philosophy that would take the best of both viewpoints would be a superior stance, one where the state is minimally involved.  A Libertarian philosophy.  And yet throughout her life, she critiqued Libertarians, likely based on her belief that the only thing worse than not defending the good is to defend it poorly, and witnessing their response to things that make libertarians look 'eccentric', like their opposition to seat belt laws, mandatory motorcycle helmet laws, anti-terrorism laws, and drug criminalization. 

To come out against issues like these that are made for 'the common good', just because your principles say it is wrong to do so and you lose rights, allows the dichotomous groups to label them as wacky fringers who have no interest in safety and security.  And it generally works, since on many other issues the wacky fringers side with either liberals or conservatives on social and fiscal issues respectively, and blend in with those views.

[Willy]

When

Are these your own thoughts or are they out of a book because if they are your own thoughts I would have to respectfully disagree but if they come from a text I must vehemently disagree. I would show respect for this type of thinking if someone, such as yourself,  came to these conclusions based on life experiences but if someone wrote an article or book trying to educate or influence others I would have to say they are full of it.

[AQUAMAN]

Ummm, with all due respect for all, before you go throwing Ayn Rand's philosophies in the dumpster, at least read some of her books, and try to digest them. A short novel she wrote was "The Virtue of Selfishness". Atlas and Fountainhead are rather lengthy, and should be read later, after you digest her shorter easier to read novels. If you read her biography, of where she came from, and left, and with good reasons, you will get a better understanding of the woman, and how her philosophy is timeless, esp. in these current times. Fictional names and cities, do not so much make for fiction, as it does reality in that author's case, imho. Thanks S.

[Sweater Cows!]

It's a bit of a long read, but so worth the time, It in quick explanation(in my words, &/or to me) is a lot  about the battle going on today, taking from the producers(those who create monetary value in their work by the value of their hands or time or brains) by force to give to the non-producers based on 'need'(those who have no respect to the value of what a man can produce or denigrateing what he can produce(through thinking, production, working) and think that if  joe blow can create and profit from his hands or mind(a new product that he spent time to create & make then he(joe schmoe) should have it given to him even though he chooses not to use his hands or brain to produce anything.

What it does not say is that any mans value (the 'creator'(say Steve Jobs ipod) is less/more than the value of the baker's waffles.But that each man who can do *something* has value. (aside from those who truly can't produce physical/mental handicap etc..)

Atlas Shrugs point(to me) is saying all men have value based on their abilities and that the value(ie money) that they get in return for the value(their hands and/or mind or whatever) they give is the value of man and his mind and hands. To give someone else who sits home and 'mooches' the value you create with your hands or mind etc... is to devalue each person and his ability to produce. Atlas Shrugged IMO says it is okay to have value and get money for the value (again value being your work/creation/invention etc) and not owe it to the moocher who won't go out and create his own value. Money is the value we place on a man and his hands/brain/time, and it is okay for that value to exist.

Ya really must read the book to get it though as my opinion does not do the book justice.

[Willy]

When.

Thanks for your explanation.

[Sweater Cows!]

What it does not say is that any mans value (the 'creator'(say Steve Jobs ipod) is less/more than the value of the baker's waffles.But that each man who can do *something* has value. (aside from those who truly can't produce physical/mental handicap etc..those of course  that are ill are not considered moochers as they aren't mooching but lack in the the ability to produce and  should be taken care of by those who can produce)

NOTE: THIS DID NOT SOUND RIGHT AFTER i PROOF READ AND WAS TO LATE TO EDIT IN POST. Look above in bold and I will finish the sentence I did not in the original post

[Marty Redman]

If you own one of them Kindles you can download Ayn Rands Anthem from Amazon for free.  Good if you want to get a taste of Rands views but can't find her books available at a good price for you. 

Some of our best political novels are fictional, like Gullivers Travels and Das Kapital.

[Sweater Cows!]

Also there is a free download on Amazon that is a Kindle 'reader' so you can read the kindle books on your computer. It is usually right below the book on the left side of the screen.

Also the Libraries have what is called "inter-library loan" so if your library does not have  the book they can borrow it from one that does, it does take a few weeks sometimes to get the books transferred but better than buying sometimes.

[Sweater Cows!]

No its not my own thoughts. It's from Philosophy Who Needs It, pg186

[Sweater Cows!]

It took me at MANY weeks longer to read Atlas Shrugged than it would for me to read a regular book of that size. Tom Clancy, Patricia Cornwell and such types I can finish in about 12-16 hours but Rand is a bit wordy.

I actually posted in a Rand forum about how she could have cut down the wordyness of the book and someone replied that they thought she had compared to how she could have wrote it(or something like that).

[AQUAMAN]

Bottom line is that Ayn Rand's books are timeless, and that no one now can or has represented the American Spirit in such an artistic and creative way since, just my opinion. Try reading the short stories first, that way you can prepare/enlarge your brain for the large stories later, imho.

[AQUAMAN]

Read ON PAL! Get the whole story from the start, imho. There is no Dead-End to success, at least for most of us, maybe not you though. Being a Big Liberal, you can find almost ALL of LIFE to be Muddled, thus your incomplete life and lack of success, failure, but I guess that's in vogue now, ain't it?