Rand and Gladwell represent opposites of the scale.
Exactly. Chances are the answers lies somewhere in the middle...
Malcolm Gladwell versus Ayn Rand: Who is right?
11–20 of 137 posts
Re: Malcolm Gladwell versus Ayn Rand: Who is right?
#12"Right" is such a silly word for discussing philosophies, it implies an absolute and dealing in absolutes is one of the easiest ways to get yourself in trouble from a decision making based on philosophical opinions standpoint
True, but Rand's philosophy deals entirely in absolutes, and is resistant to reconciliation with any other philosophy. Any golden mean approach need not apply.
So, yes, it's a silly word, but by that same measure Objectivism is a silly philosophy.
Re: Malcolm Gladwell versus Ayn Rand: Who is right?
#13Ayn Rand is the philospher for the shallow and immature.
I think many people read Rand all wrong. I found large elements of satire in Atlas and Fountainhead. Like Orwell in Animal Farm, she created a silly cartoon version of the world with its dynamics hugely out or proportion in order to bring out the subtle absurdities of modern life and government. You're not supposed to read it and decided to move to the mountains of Colorado. You're supposed to read it and then have a…
That's a valid argument. Unfortunately, looking at some of the essay work that I remember being included in the paperbacks (sorry I'm not specific, I read it almost a decade ago), it seems that Rand was more serious than humorous, and her readers seem the same way as you've pointed out. Someone with a fresher memory / more time to Google can feel free to prove me wrong.
Re: Malcolm Gladwell versus Ayn Rand: Who is right?
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article doesn't bring up Ayn Rand who is the dead opposite of Gladwell.
There was no reason to bring her up as the blog author's commentary wasn't very insightful.
OMG! Which part of "putting two ideas together in order to stimulate thinking" is so difficult for you to grasp? It's done all the time.
Re: Malcolm Gladwell versus Ayn Rand: Who is right?
#15What's the deal with linking to this crappy "So You Want to be a Billionaire" site?
It's obviously blog spam of the worst kind. Using Rand for bait is a nice touch.
Re: Malcolm Gladwell versus Ayn Rand: Who is right?
#16Re: Malcolm Gladwell versus Ayn Rand: Who is right?
#17False choice. Rand usually makes valid points in her novels but tends to wildly overstate them (perhaps in order to underscore her points). Gladwell may be somewhat reductive in his reasoning, but certainly social and environmental factors play a large role in success.
Simply put, it's both nature and nurture. It's what you do (by nature) and your circumstances (nurture) that determine success.
Re: Malcolm Gladwell versus Ayn Rand: Who is right?
#18"Right" is such a silly word for discussing philosophies, it implies an absolute and dealing in absolutes is one of the easiest ways to get yourself in trouble from a decision making based on philosophical opinions standpoint
True, but Rand's philosophy deals entirely in absolutes, and is resistant to reconciliation with any other philosophy. Any golden mean approach need not apply. So, yes, it's a silly word, but by that same measure Objectivism is a silly philosophy.
It's a silly philosophy with some grains of truth behind it. I think it's absolutely worth studying.
Similarly, I doubt anybody would call Gladwell's writings a "philosophy." He doesn't write all his books with a single, unified theory around them. Each one pursues a separate venue.
Re: Malcolm Gladwell versus Ayn Rand: Who is right?
#19Re: Malcolm Gladwell versus Ayn Rand: Who is right?
#20Garbage article.
The article misses that Rand's books are romantic, whereas Gladwell is a journalist. Rand writes fiction; Gladwell writes theories based on anecdotes and statistics. For an analogy, that'd be a lot like saying "Pablo Piccasso, or xyz modern photographer: Who is right?"
The guy's synopsis of Rand is pretty telling --> "Atlas Shrugged is a similar story. In it a group of scientists and tycoons decide in equally petulant fashion decide that they will "simply take their ball and go home" when society refuses to capitulate to their capricious demands."
Rand misses some points, the world isn't so black and white. But her general message is pro-individualism, hard work, anti-politicking, pro-competition, etc. It's anti-interventionism, anti-socialism, anti-labor, etc. It also mocks the hell out of people who come from opposite backgrounds, and interprets their motivations as scared and selfish. It makes for a good read, but makes her books hard to discuss with people from those viewpoints.
In reality, most people who are pro-collective, pro-socialism, etc. are decent folk with great intentions. Free marketists and socialists just happen to violently disagree on how to build the best world. Unfortunately, Rand's ruthless treatment of people who disagree with her all being nincompoops makes the books hard to discuss with someone who doesn't already have some of the underpinnings of her philosophy.