Ayn Rand's Literature of Capitalism • Hacker News Board

Re: Ayn Rand's Literature of Capitalism

#41

Post by zach » Sat, Sep 15, 2007, 4:33 PM UTC

pg wrote: post #32

rrival wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are magnificent. To suggest that anyone -not- read them (for the sake of brevity, no less) is to suggest a reader not experience great, life-changing literature. Her objectivist philosophy may be a bit overt in the latter, but never for a second could I sleep well knowing I'd proposed that others -skip- these books.

I advised myself to skip them, and I'm happy so far with that advice.

Me too. Having detested Catcher in the Rye and Slaughterhouse Five as a teen, I stopped reading books that seemed to only be popular within the context of being a teenager. It was definitely a good move.

Re: Ayn Rand's Literature of Capitalism

#42

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Sep 15, 2007, 4:38 PM UTC

mikesabat wrote: post #31

I think that every aspiring entrepreneur should buy and try to read the Fountainhead. Howard Roark (main character) is the prototypical entrepreneur fighting to get his ideas to a world that needs them. It works intellectually, but it is best used for inspiration. How often do you find a piece of literature for $12 that MAY change your life.

[deleted]

Re: Ayn Rand's Literature of Capitalism

#43

Post by wyday » Sat, Sep 15, 2007, 4:42 PM UTC

pg wrote: post #40

randallsquared wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Popularity isn't proof that someone is a good writer, but it certainly is evidence of same.

I don't know how far you'd want to rely on that evidence. Only a small percentage of people buy books regularly. So to make a big bestseller you have to write a book that gets bought by that huge majority of people who don't read much. And usually their decisions are dominated by random extraneous factors: i.e. it's a biography of someone they admire, or is related to some doctrine they subscribe to, or contains fact…

If it's not general popularity, and it's only critical popularity after a few hundred years, then can a writer's talent even be judged in the short term?

(This question sounds smarmy, but I ask it earnestly.)

Re: Ayn Rand's Literature of Capitalism

#44

Post by gwenhwyfaer » Sat, Sep 15, 2007, 5:16 PM UTC

wyday wrote: post #43

pg wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how far you'd want to rely on that evidence. Only a small percentage of people buy books regularly. So to make a big bestseller you have to write a book that gets bought by that huge majority of people who don't read much. And usually their decisions are dominated by random extraneous factors: i.e. it's a biography of someone they admire, or is related to some doctrine they subscribe to, or contains fact…

If it's not general popularity, and it's only critical popularity after a few hundred years, then can a writer's talent even be judged in the short term? (This question sounds smarmy, but I ask it earnestly.)

Probably not, no, since one of the tests of quality is timelessness.

Re: Ayn Rand's Literature of Capitalism

#45

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Sep 15, 2007, 5:20 PM UTC

mikesabat wrote: post #31

I think that every aspiring entrepreneur should buy and try to read the Fountainhead. Howard Roark (main character) is the prototypical entrepreneur fighting to get his ideas to a world that needs them. It works intellectually, but it is best used for inspiration. How often do you find a piece of literature for $12 that MAY change your life.

[deleted]

Re: Ayn Rand's Literature of Capitalism

#46

Post by gwenhwyfaer » Sat, Sep 15, 2007, 5:36 PM UTC

gwenhwyfaer wrote: post #26

rms wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, there isn't one. I lost here, I forgot that Objectivism ends up encompassing any rational belief so it's hard to argue against it.

Well, it doesn't. The exact rational beliefs that Objectivism encompasses were very carefully laid out by Rand before her death, and all other opinions, beliefs or perspectives were explicitly denounced as irrational. It's hard to take anything seriously that on the one hand says "reject irrationality, think for yourself, reach your own conclusion!" and on the other hand says "but the only way you'll know, and we'll…

Actually, I was thinking about this on the way into Sheffield, and I was wrong to use the term "the pain we cause"; I think what I actually mean is "the pain we have the means to prevent", which does encompass cause, but also covers things like survivor guilt as well. Rand's work allows people to admit that they do have the means to prevent the suffering of others (rather than pretending that they don't, which is dishonest), and yet to maintain that preventing that suffering would in fact be immoral, rather than merely impractical, unhelpful or counterproductive.

Re: Ayn Rand's Literature of Capitalism

#47

Post by gwenhwyfaer » Sat, Sep 15, 2007, 5:42 PM UTC

gwenhwyfaer wrote: post #24

uuilly wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does Brittany Spears fit in the Kardashev Scale? There a millions of people that think she is more important than energy consumption. Should we put them all in the gas chamber? Even if we let them live, Kardashev, brilliant though he may be, has hardly come up w/ a universal set of values that everyone is, should, or will eventually strive for. The best you can do is to absorb his ideals, spread his word and cr…

> Where does Brittany Spears fit in the Kardashev Scale? There a millions of people that think she is more important than energy consumption. Should we put them all in the gas chamber? Only if we can use them as fuel.

(You guys do get that I'm joking, right...?)

Re: Ayn Rand's Literature of Capitalism

#48

Post by pg » Sat, Sep 15, 2007, 5:44 PM UTC

wyday wrote: post #43

pg wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how far you'd want to rely on that evidence. Only a small percentage of people buy books regularly. So to make a big bestseller you have to write a book that gets bought by that huge majority of people who don't read much. And usually their decisions are dominated by random extraneous factors: i.e. it's a biography of someone they admire, or is related to some doctrine they subscribe to, or contains fact…

If it's not general popularity, and it's only critical popularity after a few hundred years, then can a writer's talent even be judged in the short term? (This question sounds smarmy, but I ask it earnestly.)

No, there's currently no neutral way.

Good judges can tell who the good writers are, but there's no currently no independent way of telling who the good judges are.

Empirically the oscillations of opinion seem to settle down after a few hundred years. Even then there are probably errors. E.g. tragedies will tend to be more highly regarded than comedies, because they seem more serious.

Re: Ayn Rand's Literature of Capitalism

#49

Post by gwenhwyfaer » Sat, Sep 15, 2007, 5:44 PM UTC

curi wrote: post #4

brianmckenzie wrote: post #2

Someone whose philosophy can be summed up in a Depeche Mode song is probably not the brightest light in the history of western civilization.

but it can't be, that's why she wrote a number of lengthy books instead of just one song.

That's one explanation, and possibly not the best...

Re: Ayn Rand's Literature of Capitalism

#50

Post by patrickg-zill » Sat, Sep 15, 2007, 5:44 PM UTC

One need only look at the current mess of Zimbabwe, where all the productive people both black and white, were driven out or killed, to see "John Galt" in action.