Response to Ayn Rand's Significance

I respond to Scientificdiscussion's Ayn Rand is insignificant debate point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqtuReaDqYs

I talk about why Ayn Rand is significant, how modern philosophers are not significant, and why I think Ayn Rand comes up in conversations. This also is a topic of credentials and why they seems so important but can mean so little.... which is a huge topic that I hope to discuss sometime in the future.

But if YOU(people of the world) have any doubt...... Then this message goes out to you:

YOUR ideas about life are worthless, YOU don't have anything of value to say, and whatever YOU do say can be disregarded since YOU(all of you) are not referenced in my philosophy 101 book.... I looked in the index and none of you were there..... just so you know. ;)

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• value
• significance
• credentials
• Ayn
• Rand
• philosophy
• insignificant
• sparkygravity
• ScientificDiscussion
• what
• load
• of
• poop

[touchingstoves]

Wow! Is this possible? Have you turned Ayn Rand into a Subjectivist? Or worse, a Kantian!

Amazing! :D

[Sparkygravity]

:) I'm not trying to turn anyone into anything. This is my interpretation of why ayn rand is significant. I may be wrong, I may be right. You just have to use your own opinion, and decide for yourself.

[0neironaut]

im sorry, what? were not a result of collective thought? have you heard of history?!

[Sparkygravity]

Ha! nope I'm afraid not. We are not the Borg, and you have a choice whether or not to accept your culture or not. We are a result of history (the past), but not the definition of history. Humans are too insignificant to lay such a claim.

[orangeman4242]

I liked this video, but I disagree about your "philosophy making sense in 20 books" comment. Rand was not advocating anything like Occam's Razor. She made a great emphasis to encourage integration and a rigorous pursuit of understanding of material.

[Sparkygravity]

ok, I can agree to that. But I feel there is a division and disparity between views a person has adopted without real critical analysis and views a person has reviewed critically and claimed ownership over.

I still believe that if you have to rely on the work of other thinkers to make a point, or validate your ideas, then your just using them as a crutch. I think a person has a responsibility to be philosophically self-reliant.

[horvay]

"[Ayn] Rand was [just a] crazy bitch that just couldn't stand reading real philosophical inquiry"

Actually, she had read the things that the philosophers before her had said. She actually knew that philosophy has a purpose, whereas people like Kant and Hume just tried proving that it has no purpose because truth isn't possible and reason is limited.

In fact, for you to say things like that with words like 'crazy bitch' shows much about your intentions and character.

[Sepero1]

SD's arrogance has obviously obliterated his ability for clear thought processes. The world is better off now that his videos have been deleted. Thank you

[hopkins4545]

Ayn Rand was a sociopathic pig. Capitalism all the way, grafted from other brtual pigs.

[Explitiv3]

What, oh I thought I heard a pig die outside... wait that's just your mouth moving.

[horvay]

Funny guy. Now get back in your hole!

[Explitiv3]

truth isn't possible...

We have no organ at all for knowledge, for truth: we know (or believe or imagine) precisely as much as may be useful in the interest of the human herd, the species: and even what is here called usefulness is in the end only a belief, something imagined and perhaps precisely that most fatal piece of stupidity by which we shall one day perish.

[touchingstoves]

I apologize for my crass sarcasm.

[horvay]

My own experiences are my constant reminder that her philosophy is true. My knowledge, my conceptualization of reality, is the same as hers (as far as I know).

My standard of truth is REASON.

Most philosophers have spent their lives denouncing truth. They have been working to undo the very purpose of philosophy: the standard by which a person makes choices, based on what they think is true.

Most philosophers basically say, you can't know, stop trying.

How much do you know about her?

[Explitiv3]

Saying that your the "result" of history confines you, and thus refutes your claim that you are an individual. The computers, the ikea desk assortment, your cloths, all were the influence of the culture around you. Sorry Spark, the city is prior. You cannot escape your social/ political associations. You are defined by them, even your reference to the Borg (star trek) proves my point.