Ayn Rand predicted it 50 years ago

Ayn Rand, as usual, putting light into darkness.  She predicted 50 years ago the brutal crisis we are suffering now, because we have dropped the values of individual liberties to embrace collectivism. The price for not thinking is too high.

This entry was posted in Sin categoría and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Ayn Rand predicted it 50 years ago

  1. Accdir says:

    Ms. Rand: always brilliant

  2. misterioso says:

    Ayn Rand (AR) is not merely the best thinker of the 20th century, or the
    best of the modern world, say, since Descartes–or even the best since
    Aristotle or even the one who carried Aristotle to greater heights.

    She is totally new, original, fresh–she went back before Aristotle, to the
    real beginning–she went back to reality, first handedly! Like Dagny
    looking down the track–she got us all on-track, for the 1st time w/o
    Aristotle’s errors.

    It might’ve been harder to in the 20th century, in the context of so
    much junk to wade thru–but when she saw it was junk, she didn’t wade
    thru it–she discarded it. Did she use Einstein’s well developed
    “instinct” to tell which avenues were fertile (as he said) – No! She used
    reality! A first handed look!!

    She went back & considered Thales & others but formed her own first-
    hand ideas based on her method of integrating the observations of her
    own senses.

    When she rejected God, it was primarily because it was a slap in our
    face–more so than it was contradictory. This is very significant.

    Independence & Rationality developed in her separately–but both as
    necessary components. 1st was Independence & 2nd was Rationality.

    This is why The Fountainhead came before Atlas & the defiant attitude
    of the Mysterious Valley & Bjorn Faulkner came even earlier–

    It’s rooted in her emphasis of Nietzche’s thought: “The noble soul has
    reverence for itself.” This is also Kira’s Viking. Altho I love Andrew B’s
    appreciation of her works & achievements, I think he missed her Viking
    point. He was O.K.! She did approve of her Viking, just to the tip of his
    sword. But then, not now! Prior to rationality, et al, he was the best, in
    context, available to evolution.

    Evolution develops Man up to a point (like Bohm-Bawerk’s economics of
    the ’round about method of production) & then leaves him on his own.
    Evolution makes no investments, but the ’round about method, &
    purpose chosen by Man’s knowledge & values does!

    Man becomes a being of self-made soul. On the primitive level, Kira’s
    Viking is it!

    So, Ayn Rand developed along two lines, both necessary for her
    achievements: Independence and Rationality, with Independence
    developing first.

    This is the Independence rooted in reverence for one’s self–that
    reverence is nourished & grows as it grasps Rationality.

    Now Branden mis-understood all this despite his close association with
    her. Recall that he complained that her philosophy was hard to get to
    because it was intertwined within her stories.

    But that is the secret of her achievement!

    How was she able to see beyond the other all-time great thinkers? How
    was it that Einstein, Descartes, Aquinas, et al–geniuses all–could not
    see it?

    Because they didn’t have reverence for themselves. As a novelist, Ayn
    Rand was selfishly pursuing the ideal Man.

    That Man must be efficacious in reality. She created her hero. The
    completely efficacious Man, who must, because he has to deal effectively
    w/reality, prize & be expert in Rationality & Independence. The heir to
    Kira’s Viking.

    Now this is the “refractor ray” setting up the optical illusion that has
    prevented those geniuses from getting to the core of the issue, the key
    barricade being the diaphanous approach: the fundamental belief that
    reality is beyond our knowing.

    From the beginning of Man’s thought there existed a fear that we
    cannot actually know reality as it really is–as God sees it.

    Thus her fundamental rejection of God because He’s a slap in our face.

    There also existed a fear that Man should not tamper with nature
    [altho it was in his nature to do just that] and that tampering with
    nature changes it from what God intended–[from the Garden of Eden &
    disobedience to Heisenberg.]

    This is why the geniuses could not penetrate–why they philosophized in
    the 3rd person. Why they adopted the diaphanous approach.

    But Ayn Rand, in pursuit of an ideal Man, who must move beyond
    nature, yet deal with it–whose actions must be based upon it to move
    beyond it–rejected this barrier as nonsense.
    It was not even a temptation.

    She philosophized in the first person
    Not: What should one do?
    But: What do I do? What,
    heretofore, does my hero do?
    What does reality require?

    So the search for the ideal Man in romantic fiction leads to a Primacy of
    Existence philosophy, with reason & logic as the means to dealing with
    it. A philosophy based on what Man needs to deal with reality–not on
    what we would imagine what an all-knowing God would set up.

    2500 years of junk was based on this error. Miss Rand rejected it. They
    never even noticed it. They almost took it for granted. Their genius
    was to no avail.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s