Even the “Better” Objectivists can’t seem to refrain from Randroid boot-licking:

The problem was compounded, I suspect, by Ayn Rand’s unique role. As the creator of Objectivism, she had a legitimate authority to say what was in it and what wasn’t, and so the original structure of the Objectivist movement did—by necessity—revolve around a single philosopher who held a unique authority.

Bullshit — on EVERY count:

As the bitch-goddess herself put the point:

What is a theory? It is a set of abstract principles purporting to be either a correct description of reality or a set of guidelines for man’s actions. Correspondence to reality is the standard of value by which one estimates a theory. If a theory is inapplicable to reality, by what standard can it be estimated as “good”? If one were to accept that notion, it would mean: a. that the activity of man’s mind is unrelated to reality; b. that the purpose of thinking is neither to acquire knowledge nor to guide man’s actions. (The purpose of that catch phrase is to invalidate man’s conceptual faculty.)

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/theory-practice_dichotomy.html

The above point applies to PHILOSOPHIES, as well.

What is a philosophy?  Consider the 5 “primary” branches mentioned by Objectivists:

  1. Metaphysics
  2. Epistemology
  3. Ethnics
  4. Politics
  5. Aesthetics

Fundamentally, ANY philosophical system HAS TO BE “a set of abstract principles purporting to be either a correct description of reality or a set of guidelines for man’s actions.”    Thus, “Correspondence to reality is the standard of value by which one estimates a theory.”

In other words: IF any of  Objectivism is “true” – then it has nothing to do with Ayn Rand except inasmuch as she managed NOT TO BE WRONG about something.

IF, however Objectivsim = “whatever Ayn Rand pulled out of her ass, the ‘facts of reality’ notwithstanding’, then “Objectivism”  is worse than a bad joke.

So yeah:  Ayn Rand was a shitty, schlock novelist with a pseudo-intellectual streak, a penchant for chainsmoking, and a desperate desire to be power-fucked by her notion of an “ideal man”.  Jacqueline Susann was ininitely superior to Ayn Rand, in that SHE didn’t pretend to be leading a “Second renaiisance” of “new intellectuals”.

 

 

 

Advertisements

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s