Re: An Open Letter To Open-Minded Progressives

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 01:01:00 -0500, "skysi" <feur@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>
>"raven1" <quoththeraven@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>news:fl1o045f6j2qri8laeamurgfnd679eoc2j@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 14:09:30 -0500, "skysi" <feur@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"raven1" <quoththeraven@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>news:bv1m04pbm2jn2e77sfm0rl7l7ro5rhm7g4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 21:20:00 -0500, "skysi" <feur@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"raven1" <quoththeraven@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>news:olpk04tue3kq03av4g3etauv9mfglauuod@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 15:08:32 -0500, "?????? ????????"
<feurio@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Folks, read works of Ayn Rand and a lot of your confusion in life,
>>>>>>>politics
>>>>>>>and economics will go away.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That would be a feat, given Rand's total muddle-headedness on each
of
>>>>>> the topics. Like Marxism, Libertarianism is an excellent example of
>>>>>> "nice idea, wrong species".
>>>>>
>>>>>Hmm... and what exactly did you read to come up with the conclusion. 
>>>>>Care
>>>>>to
>>>>>comment on examples of muddle-headedness?
>>>>
>>>> The entirety of the philosophy contained in "Atlas Shrugged" and "The
>>>> Fountainhead" would be a good start.
>>>
>>>Yes, It's a good start,
>>
>> Missed the point much?
>>
>>> but only in a poetic sense. What you see in Atlas
>>>Shrugged and Fountainhead is a condensed idea.
>>>It is impossible to lay out your entire philosophy in detail in a
novel.
>>>Here's what she wrote in  "For the New Intelectual" which was an
organised
>>>collection of exerpts from her previous works :
>>>
>>>The full system is implicit in these excerpts (particularly in Galt's
>>>speech)
>>
>> Galt's speech is a prime example of what I mean; as the Caterpillar
>> put it to Alice in another literary work, "it is wrong from beginning
>> to end".
>
>That's all you have to say? Not much, considering you really said nothing


As did Rand in Galt's speech. Somewhere around 100 pages worth of
nothing, IIRC.

>:o)
>Do I still have to repeat the word non-fictional works? 

If her own fictional character can't adequately present her philosophy
in an endless speech that she wrote for him, her non-fictional works
are unlikely to be any more rewarding, but I'm willing to give it a
shot. What single non-fictional work of Rand would you recommend to
someone looking for a basic overview?