Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Atlas Shrugged film to be released in 2011

imdb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 87 posts

Re: Atlas Shrugged film to be released in 2011

#61

Post by msluyter »

grandalf wrote: post #16
jbooth wrote: post #3

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."

Note that most people who aren't fans of Atlas Shrugged resort to making dumb, belittling jokes about it rather than articulating an argument. The internet is full of parodies, etc., but there really aren't many people who dislike the book and are also capable of persuasively arguing against it without resorting to religious authority or mocking sneers (or both). Why? Probably because most people haven't read the boo…

A good place to start would be "Why I Am Not an Objectivist," by Michael Huemer:

http://home.sprynet.com/~owl1/rand.htm

Re: Atlas Shrugged film to be released in 2011

#62

Post by lzw »

SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #51
lzw wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I first read the book, I started looking for criticism to see if I'd been tricked, or if she'd played on my emotions to make me think something was reasonable or logical that wasn't. I have found some obscure philosophical arguments that seemed to be based on a misunderstanding or different interpretation, or making a mountain out of what I think is a molehill. But those are in the minority. Almost all the criti…

I've read it. I was charmed by its philosophy...for a while. Then I had a good friend talk me down from the cloud. The main theme of Atlas Shrugged, as I saw it, is that really smart/creative people are often used and abused by people in power, and that if all the smart/creative people left, that society would collapse. Now, any attractive philosophy needs to have at least a grain of truth to be popular--and I fully…

Your description of the book is what you could find in any summary, and combined with what else you've said doesn't indicate that you have read the book. Maybe you read it as a novel and didn't think about the arguments or glen the philosophy from it, or maybe your lying.

But you haven't correctly stated the premise or conclusions or provided arguments that rebut he argumentsbitbhas made.

You just assert that socialism is necessary because you assert the market fails. You never give any reason. You conflate government actions with capitalism and then rail against corporate influence.

If you read it it was long enough ago or you weren't aging close enough attention. What you've given us is the knee jerk ideological reaction of every liberal who hears that Rand doesn't hate capitalism.

You haven't actually addressed the book, or what Rand said.

For instance, she didn't blame those exploiting the smart people, as you put it, she blamed the smart people for believing they should themselves be exploited.

Re: Atlas Shrugged film to be released in 2011

#63

Post by lzw »

msie wrote: post #25
grandalf wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that most people who aren't fans of Atlas Shrugged resort to making dumb, belittling jokes about it rather than articulating an argument. The internet is full of parodies, etc., but there really aren't many people who dislike the book and are also capable of persuasively arguing against it without resorting to religious authority or mocking sneers (or both). Why? Probably because most people haven't read the boo…

On the other hand, many of her proponents probably haven't read the book either so it sort of evens out.

Never met a proponent of the book who talked about it who hadntbread it. On the other hand this is the default for opponents. Usually their first sentence is false asstion based on their own prejudice and that is the only time they spend on the book, spending he rest of their time making what amounts to an ad hominem. Most of the anti statements in this thread are examples of this.

Re: Atlas Shrugged film to be released in 2011

#64

Post by lzw »

ojbyrne wrote: post #58
grandalf wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Example of a particularly bad sentence? I'm curious b/c although I'm a native English speaker I was not put off by Rand's prose.

Nice placement of a semicolon: "That's not of any importance, even my life and work are not of any importance to me right now, nothing is of any importance; except I must find him." "The window frame trembled with the speed of the motion, the pane hung over empty darkness, and dots of light slashed across the glass as luminous streaks, once in a while." What? "What she felt in that moment contained, as one nameless p…

Like I said, opponents turn out ot universally be people who haven't read the book and who only have insults to bring to better.

Notice you ares attempting to argue against a philosophy by using cribbed quits of prose and making the claim that the prose is bad!

Re: Atlas Shrugged film to be released in 2011

#65

Post by lzw »

cparedes wrote: post #44

Here's some arguments against Ayn Rand's philosophy that aren't exactly shallow: http://noblesoul.com/orc/critics/

Any worthy philosophy will have academics debating the meaning, meerits and logic of it. That bothers me not in the least.

If any of the critics you see from leftists who attack it used these arguments than I'd respect that. However, they just assert some nonsense and then engage in adhominem and it is really pretty tragic.

Re: Atlas Shrugged film to be released in 2011

#66

Post by jbooth »

lzw wrote: post #64
ojbyrne wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice placement of a semicolon: "That's not of any importance, even my life and work are not of any importance to me right now, nothing is of any importance; except I must find him." "The window frame trembled with the speed of the motion, the pane hung over empty darkness, and dots of light slashed across the glass as luminous streaks, once in a while." What? "What she felt in that moment contained, as one nameless p…

Like I said, opponents turn out ot universally be people who haven't read the book and who only have insults to bring to better. Notice you ares attempting to argue against a philosophy by using cribbed quits of prose and making the claim that the prose is bad!

Dude, the main premise of the book breaks down into a paragraph. "Producers, not paid enough, go galt, government can't replace them, society collapses." That's 12 words. We're all intelligent here and can follow that reasoning to it's implications for our world.

Now you can argue that someone needs to read the full novel and all of the not-real-world alt-historic details in order to understand that, yes, in that world completely imagined by Ayn Rand, her philosophy would make sense.

But that says nothing about the applicability of the main point to the world we actually live in. If this is a discussion about fan-fiction rather than political economy, I'll yield the floor.

Re: Atlas Shrugged film to be released in 2011

#67

Post by grandalf »

ojbyrne wrote: post #58
grandalf wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Example of a particularly bad sentence? I'm curious b/c although I'm a native English speaker I was not put off by Rand's prose.

Nice placement of a semicolon: "That's not of any importance, even my life and work are not of any importance to me right now, nothing is of any importance; except I must find him." "The window frame trembled with the speed of the motion, the pane hung over empty darkness, and dots of light slashed across the glass as luminous streaks, once in a while." What? "What she felt in that moment contained, as one nameless p…

Surely some of Rand's language use is a biproduct of her not being a native English speaker. A rough sentence here or there, or a somewhat wayward clause, is not (in my opinion) reason enough to dismiss an author. My guess is that the editor left those paragraphs alone because he/she understood that they don't detract at all. In fact, if you read them aloud they sound perfect to the ear.

If you're looking for delicious, eloquent prose, try Fitzgerald or Joyce. Rand's feat with Atlas Shrugged was different -- not just literary. She wrote a tremendous novel of ideas. As I mentioned in one of the other threads, imagine if all of the world's philosophers wrote significant works of fiction to help explain their ideas to the general public!

Also, I don't think that the existence of authors whose strength is the beauty of their prose diminishes Rand's accomplishment in the least. Hers is a different accomplishment and there is room on the book shelf for both.

Re: Atlas Shrugged film to be released in 2011

#68

Post by shadowfox »

lzw wrote: post #65
cparedes wrote: post #44

Here's some arguments against Ayn Rand's philosophy that aren't exactly shallow: http://noblesoul.com/orc/critics/

Any worthy philosophy will have academics debating the meaning, meerits and logic of it. That bothers me not in the least. If any of the critics you see from leftists who attack it used these arguments than I'd respect that. However, they just assert some nonsense and then engage in adhominem and it is really pretty tragic.

Are you making this statements with regard to criticisms from the link above or in general?

Re: Atlas Shrugged film to be released in 2011

#69

Post by yummyfajitas »

jbooth wrote: post #66
lzw wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like I said, opponents turn out ot universally be people who haven't read the book and who only have insults to bring to better. Notice you ares attempting to argue against a philosophy by using cribbed quits of prose and making the claim that the prose is bad!

Dude, the main premise of the book breaks down into a paragraph. "Producers, not paid enough, go galt, government can't replace them, society collapses." That's 12 words. We're all intelligent here and can follow that reasoning to it's implications for our world. Now you can argue that someone needs to read the full novel and all of the not-real-world alt-historic details in order to understand that, yes, in that wor…

The government offered Galt any amount of money he wished, and he refused to work for them. Pay was not the issue. Further, society was collapsing even before the strikers left, which was one of the major themes of the book - regardless of the strike, society was doomed.

Step 1: read the book

Step 2: summarize/criticize it

Re: Atlas Shrugged film to be released in 2011

#70

Post by dk »

secretasiandan wrote: post #24
grandalf wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that most people who aren't fans of Atlas Shrugged resort to making dumb, belittling jokes about it rather than articulating an argument. The internet is full of parodies, etc., but there really aren't many people who dislike the book and are also capable of persuasively arguing against it without resorting to religious authority or mocking sneers (or both). Why? Probably because most people haven't read the boo…

This phenomenon isn't isolated to Ayn Rand/Objectivism. And it doesn't occur with Objectivism because Atlas Shrugged/The Fountainhead are hard reads. Its because most people don't spend time objectively studying topics/philosophies they don't have a positive bias towards.

Your last statement is certainly true but it doesn't explain the vitriol. Most people don't have a positive bias towards, say, Plato. But you don't see at every single mention of his name this seeming compulsion to speak up and smear his image and spread misconceptions about his thought. By people who at times even confess that they haven't read his books.
Post reply on HN