Atlas Shrugged - Ayn Rand Psychopath?
- Thread starter Kel
- Start date
Depends upon what "standard mean of belonging to society" means. If it means having a kind and non-predatory relationship with fellow human beings, so yes, it definitively qualifies for sociopathology. The second statement is a belief, but it doesn't belong to the thread. This Ayn Rand do interfer with society through her book. Interfering takes a lot of forms. A sociopath can be physically isolated from humans (fear of being discovered?) and interfer through different means, nothing new under the sun.KKP said:
Buddy
The Living Force
FWIW, KKP, I am well versed in Ayn Rand - her life, work and philosophy - including her break with Nathaniel Branden and her increasing frustration with the fact that her philosophy became little more than a rallying cry for cultish sycophants.
I finally got around to reading the book. I enjoyed "Atlas Shrugged" as long as I interpreted it in the context in which it was intended. That is, as a living example of the difference between the proposed ideal of Laissez-faire capitalism vs the parasitism and rapaciousness of government.
And no, I didn't miss the fact that the aesthetics and the emotions, as they are understood, are deliberately integrated in her writings.
Having said that, society, in general, has yet to distinguish corporate psychopathy from the real honest producers in society. Ayn Rand, herself, did brilliant work, but, as I see it, in her personal writings, she stopped short of recognizing the hallucination of law as living authority. Perhaps it was because she was unable to live independently (without some legal or other support), after all.
But, I could be off on some this. :)
----------------
Edit: spelling
I finally got around to reading the book. I enjoyed "Atlas Shrugged" as long as I interpreted it in the context in which it was intended. That is, as a living example of the difference between the proposed ideal of Laissez-faire capitalism vs the parasitism and rapaciousness of government.
And no, I didn't miss the fact that the aesthetics and the emotions, as they are understood, are deliberately integrated in her writings.
Having said that, society, in general, has yet to distinguish corporate psychopathy from the real honest producers in society. Ayn Rand, herself, did brilliant work, but, as I see it, in her personal writings, she stopped short of recognizing the hallucination of law as living authority. Perhaps it was because she was unable to live independently (without some legal or other support), after all.
But, I could be off on some this. :)
----------------
Edit: spelling
combsbt
Jedi Master
KKP said:
Hi KKP, as you familiarize yourself with this forum you will come to find that 'the perfect narcissist' is not admired here. This statement (in bold) is a pretty good summary of why the question of psychopathy came up in regards to Rand's work. Have another look at the threads posted for you in your newbies thread and look in to the suggested reading on narcissism/psychopathy if you are interested in the reasoning behind the forum's interpretation of Rand.
RyanX
The Living Force
KKP said:
KKP,
It sounds like you are arguing on behalf of the very point you are refuting here.
I don't think you're going to get much positive feedback by advocating blatant narcissism. Many of us on this forum are here because we've come to realize what a large problem narcissism (and its more virulent form in psychopathy) is in the world.
Edit: I see Ask_a_debtor already beat me to this! Thanks! :)
Even Gurdieff says a man should be a conscious egoist himself first, before he can help the world.
I think Rand is great in teaching you how to become that person. She believes in personal responsibility which is great. She believes in the fact that the government should not intervene, which is great. She believes in the fact that people should mind their own business, which is great. I don't think she is a sociopath and I respect her a lot.
That said, once you get to that stage, their is a level (and probably more of them) beyond that. However, at that point you come from a much more powerful place than most of the people 'who want to help the world', but have nothing to show for it.
That's the real challenge we 'world savers' are facing: build real power and influence for ourselves, so that we have something to show against people who don't mean well with the world. We world savers should build big, valuable enterprises to take back the power in the world. Along with 'acquiring knowledge', exercising 'free will' I think it is infinitely important that 'world savers' build material power.
I think Rand is great in teaching you how to become that person. She believes in personal responsibility which is great. She believes in the fact that the government should not intervene, which is great. She believes in the fact that people should mind their own business, which is great. I don't think she is a sociopath and I respect her a lot.
That said, once you get to that stage, their is a level (and probably more of them) beyond that. However, at that point you come from a much more powerful place than most of the people 'who want to help the world', but have nothing to show for it.
That's the real challenge we 'world savers' are facing: build real power and influence for ourselves, so that we have something to show against people who don't mean well with the world. We world savers should build big, valuable enterprises to take back the power in the world. Along with 'acquiring knowledge', exercising 'free will' I think it is infinitely important that 'world savers' build material power.
Re: Ayn Rand Psychopath?
I can imagine this to be very painful, but your son has every right to do so. I don't know about your situation, but somehow you suck his energy away, or at least you don't provide him with the energy he is looking for, otherwise he wouldn't keep the distance. That's his choice. Don't blame Ayn Rand or the school teacher for it. That's a victim mentality and won't serve you.
You walk your path. He walks his. If they go further apart. Fine. If they merge again. Fine too. That's the place you need to get to.
Mark said:
I can imagine this to be very painful, but your son has every right to do so. I don't know about your situation, but somehow you suck his energy away, or at least you don't provide him with the energy he is looking for, otherwise he wouldn't keep the distance. That's his choice. Don't blame Ayn Rand or the school teacher for it. That's a victim mentality and won't serve you.
You walk your path. He walks his. If they go further apart. Fine. If they merge again. Fine too. That's the place you need to get to.
HiThere
The Living Force
Re: Ayn Rand Psychopath?
You seem utterly certain that your take on this is the correct one, and other views need your input in order to become correct. I can only presume that you don't have children, as your statements in the above doesn't take into consideration parental love, worrying for ones offspring, or fear for their choices in life.
This is the experience of every parent, and it serves no purpose to talk about detachment from ones children and their choices. You come across as detached and perhaps unfamiliar with parenthood, or perhaps you once were or are the rebelling offspring yourself.
Ayn Rand to me comes across as a theoretical exercise in intellectual abstractions for individualists who are used to taking care of themselves. These people aren't the ones who need our attention, except for the sosiopaths/psycopaths among them. In my opinion it is more important to reach out to all the people who are struggling to find their way and looking for someone outside themselves to follow. The sheeple are always the first ones to pick up on a new prophet, and the most inclined to worship the thoughts and ideas of their hero uncritically. For people of this sort, someone like Ayn Rand is not the right person to emulate, as her thinking focuses on something that is unattainable from the start for most of them - economic and intellectual indepence that doesn't hinder other people's progress.
There is a reason why Ayn Rand has been seen as the strong peoples advocate - it's because her thoughts sound true to people who wish that everybody else could be just as strong and nice as themselves. Rands only solution as I see it is to ask of all people to be better than they are, and history tells us that this doen't work. You have to work with what excists.
Dirk said:
You seem utterly certain that your take on this is the correct one, and other views need your input in order to become correct. I can only presume that you don't have children, as your statements in the above doesn't take into consideration parental love, worrying for ones offspring, or fear for their choices in life.
This is the experience of every parent, and it serves no purpose to talk about detachment from ones children and their choices. You come across as detached and perhaps unfamiliar with parenthood, or perhaps you once were or are the rebelling offspring yourself.
Ayn Rand to me comes across as a theoretical exercise in intellectual abstractions for individualists who are used to taking care of themselves. These people aren't the ones who need our attention, except for the sosiopaths/psycopaths among them. In my opinion it is more important to reach out to all the people who are struggling to find their way and looking for someone outside themselves to follow. The sheeple are always the first ones to pick up on a new prophet, and the most inclined to worship the thoughts and ideas of their hero uncritically. For people of this sort, someone like Ayn Rand is not the right person to emulate, as her thinking focuses on something that is unattainable from the start for most of them - economic and intellectual indepence that doesn't hinder other people's progress.
There is a reason why Ayn Rand has been seen as the strong peoples advocate - it's because her thoughts sound true to people who wish that everybody else could be just as strong and nice as themselves. Rands only solution as I see it is to ask of all people to be better than they are, and history tells us that this doen't work. You have to work with what excists.
FireShadow
Jedi Master
I spent about a year or so checking out objectivism. It drew me in with the concepts of freedom and being responsible for oneself. Those are values I have long held. However, after long pondering, I could not get past the idea that the philosophy had twisting so as to leave the playing field open to predators. (This was before I even found SOTT/Cassiopea). My conclusion was that it may be a fine philosophy if there were no psychopaths in the world.
It seems to me to boil down to what kind of world you want to live in:
"Every man for himself" or "One for all and all for one".
I would change this (for myself) to: " I refuse to be forced into servitude, but will choose to serve as seems appropriate". Of course, this is an ideal to strive for - learning more about myself and others (and the world) so as to better discern when serving is appropriate and in what manner.
It seems to me to boil down to what kind of world you want to live in:
"Every man for himself" or "One for all and all for one".
I would change this (for myself) to: " I refuse to be forced into servitude, but will choose to serve as seems appropriate". Of course, this is an ideal to strive for - learning more about myself and others (and the world) so as to better discern when serving is appropriate and in what manner.
anart
A Disturbance in the Force
Dirk said:
The key word in that sentence is 'conscious' - Gurdjieff has a very specific meaning of the word, one you seem to be missing.
Mistaking Rand's pathology for strength or clarity of vision is a mistake that is often made by those of us born and raised steeped in the pathology of 'modern' society. Taking lies for truth and pathology for wisdom is merely a reflection of the true horror of the situation and the blindness of sleep.
Gandalf said:
Thanks Gandalf. Will do.
[quote author=hithere]
You seem utterly certain that your take on this is the correct one, and other views need your input in order to become correct.
[/quote]
What would you suggest? Should a child have contact with his parents against his will? Should books like Atlas Shrugged be banned? I would say let people decide for themselves and if they live by the philosophy of Ayn Rand for a few years, or even their entire lifes. It's their choice. Hopefully they will read a book or two, or fifty more and see the limitations of the philosophy.
[quote author=hithere]
I can only presume that you don't have children
[/quote]
That's right.
[quote author=hitherto]
, as your statements in the above doesn't take into consideration parental love, worrying for ones offspring, or fear for their choices in life.
[/quote]
I can imagine this to be a great struggle and yes, I realize, every parent will have to deal with this. However realize this: parental love means emotional dependence in many instances, worrying about ones offspring communicates to the child that he/she is weak and this will make him or her insecure and hold the child back. One of the greatest gifts a parent can give their child is to believe in them unconditionally. Lastly fear of their choices in life: again, very understandable, but none of their business.
That said, I believe development of consciousness in the children, can aid parents in this process.
[quote author=hitherto]
This is the experience of every parent, and it serves no purpose to talk about detachment from ones children and their choices.
[/quote]
Yes, but it is the experience of a 3D, STS parent. Which almost every parent is. They see children as part of themselves (and not of the whole). I don’t know if detachment is the answer. It is, partly. Doing the work is the answer. Become so strong and confident, and STO yourself, that you can give (and I don’t mean take) and do what is necessary, so that one does not have to worry in a 3D STS sense. Many parents ‘give’ love where it isn’t ask for, that is however, taking, as the C’s also express very clearly. Otherwise parents will push their children away.
[quote author=hitherto]
The sheeple are always the first ones to pick up on a new prophet, and the most inclined to worship the thoughts and ideas of their hero uncritically. For people of this sort, someone like Ayn Rand is not the right person to emulate, as her thinking focuses on something that is unattainable from the start for most of them - economic and intellectual indepence that doesn't hinder other people's progress.
[/quote]
Ok, so what should be done? Ban the book?
[quote author=hitherto]
There is a reason why Ayn Rand has been seen as the strong peoples advocate - it's because her thoughts sound true to people who wish that everybody else could be just as strong and nice as themselves. Rands only solution as I see it is to ask of all people to be better than they are, and history tells us that this doen't work. You have to work with what excists.
[/quote]
I agree.
[quote author=FireShadow]
It seems to me to boil down to what kind of world you want to live in:
"Every man for himself" or "One for all and all for one".
[/quote]
The second one, of course. However, that is not reality. Think about the prisoners dilemma. If you sacrifice yourself for the
other, where the other doesn’t do it for you, you get screwed. So this doesn’t work at present. Most people who want to ‘do
good’ should forget about that for a while and go for themselves, e.g. build a big business (or whatever is their purpose), become really influential and then go ‘do good’ again. At that point the whole game has changed and the psychopaths and diehard egoists seem to have a lot less control. Only if good men become influential and strong themselves first, we can eventually move to a ‘one for all and all for one’ world, otherwise the bad people will forever be in power.
[quote author=anart]
The key word in that sentence is 'conscious' - Gurdjieff has a very specific meaning of the word, one you seem to be missing.
[/quote]
What am I missing? My interpretation is: work on oneself first, wake up and see what you have to do in your own life. After that another realm may open up. Before that, don’t even think about ‘doing good’, because you will probably bring more damage than do any good.
HiThere
The Living Force
Dirk said:
[/quote]
My sentence above referenced your wording:
A child with nurturing parents will look to them for guidance, even if he/she is older and feels a need to keep some distance. To leave them alone in that situation and let them make their mistakes without interference is a poor strategy when we think of drugs, poor company, egotistical thinking and all kinds of things that is out there.
[quote author=hitherto]
, as your statements in the above doesn't take into consideration parental love, worrying for ones offspring, or fear for their choices in life.
[/quote]
We essentially agree, but you seem to extrapolate the example of the "jewish mother syndrome" to all parents, and that is a broad generalization, in my opinion.
[quote author=hitherto]
This is the experience of every parent, and it serves no purpose to talk about detachment from ones children and their choices.
[/quote]
Alle parents experience these conflicts to some degree, and as the child grows up there is a natural period of conflicting views that needs to be aknowledged and respected. If and when this is accomplished, parent/child can/will develop a relationship of trust and shared values. In a healthy relationship the parents still have the benefit of more experience and are naturally inclined to seek to give advice, more than minding their own business. This shouldn't be viewed as pathological behaviour, in my opinion.
[quote author=hitherto]
The sheeple are always the first ones to pick up on a new prophet, and the most inclined to worship the thoughts and ideas of their hero uncritically. For people of this sort, someone like Ayn Rand is not the right person to emulate, as her thinking focuses on something that is unattainable from the start for most of them - economic and intellectual independence that doesn't hinder other people's progress.
[/quote]
No, but we need to get away from elitist thinking.
Mod's note: Edited to fix the quotation boxes