Birth of Objectivism - John Hospers on Ayn Rand (excerpt)

[allencrider]

Ayn Rand was an Antichrist.

[Cramnella]

To respond to the video instead of masturbating about current events, I weep along with Dr. Hospers in remembrance of this great woman who has been so maligned by so many.

[darkshadyfigure]

Contradictions do exist and different philosophers can arrive at different conclusions, both being logically sound. Evil and good are a matter of perspective, and altruism is not inherently evil.

Peikoff's principle concerning the morality of people with "inherently evasive" ideas is laughable, at best, for even he contradicts himself by declaring a principle and then providing an exception.

[darkshadyfigure]

Eastern Philosophy is evil, Religion is evil, the Palestinians are evil, goodwill is evil. If you do not agree with Rand, you are wrong.

We must remember the great evils of history, and the men that spawned them. Damn you Christ, Ghandi, MLKing and Mother Teresa!

[DreadLaw2]

@darkshadyfigure This sarcasm would be more meaningful if you didn't include genuine evil in every other example. Religion is, for the most part, evil. Ghandi helped form one of the most envasive and destructive States of All Time (India) in which people now starve, and Mother Teresa enjoyed the suffering of others. Martin Luther King was a massive Libertarian, and while I'm sure he was no Fan of Rand, he is far closer to her Philosophy than the other evils you mention.

[Manx123]

Of course not, but Dr. Peikoff recognized that while Kerry was disgustingly bad, Bush was apocalypticly so, and that Bush's foreign policy was decidedly more harmful than Kerry's domestic.

[TomPaine2009]

The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged remain influential, and may become more significant with the passage of time.

[Manx123]

Sorry, but he supported George W. Bush in the 2004 election.

[asalmog]

I don't get your point. Maybe Ayn Rand would too. (and maybe not, who knows?)

[Manx123]

As in he is irrational for doing so.

[asalmog]

Ok. I guess I can't really respond until I know your reasoning. I am reminding you that there were two possible outcomes of the 2004 elections: a Bush victory or a Kerry victory. No libertarian victory was an option.

[Libertyrider]

@asalmog "No libertarian victory was an option" since the Oligarchy that is America's totalitarian government is in charge of the media, true. That's why Ron Paul received 1/10th the campaign coverage in '08 that (Big govt socialists) Clinton & McCain did. Michael Badnarik was on the ballot in 48 states and WAS THE ONLY OTHER candidate on the Ballot who WAS an eligible victor in the 2004 election. Nader with 35 states got 50 times Badnariks TV coverage. Its ALL rigged by BIG GOVERNMENT GREED.

[legendre007]

Good Premises to you, too. :-)