the sociopathic Ayn Rand revealed

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

Are all of your decisions on the basis of instinct, or do you have an intellect that allows you to rise above the animal instincts?

:confused:

Prime biological directive is survival instinct. The human intellect can and does override that prime directive all the time.

" but it was surely a preprogrammed response "

Not surely at all. It was a split second decision of the intellect. Soldiers are not trained to fall on grenades...
More...

Maybe the soldiers were trained in some way to be altruistic?

I think the need to take action is based on instinct, but the decision as to how to carry out an action is based on our own conscious mind.

I agree that human intellect can and does override the prime directive instinct, but I don't think it is sustainable. Beside, instincts are there to protect us and the gene pool, if we go against it, I got a feeling the outcome would not be favorable.

So, I don't think human intellect could allow us to rise above our instinct. Everything ties in together and must operate as one.
 
First this:

"I agree that human intellect can and does override the prime directive instinct"

Then this:

"So, I don't think human intellect could allow us to rise above our instinct."

Sorry mate, but you are one confused intellectual...

Quote from Pension_Admin:

Maybe the soldiers were trained in some way to be altruistic?

I think the need to take action is based on instinct, but the decision as to how to carry out an action is based on our own conscious mind.

I agree that human intellect can and does override the prime directive instinct, but I don't think it is sustainable. Beside, instincts are there to protect us and the gene pool, if we go against it, I got a feeling the outcome would not be favorable.

So, I don't think human intellect could allow us to rise above our instinct. Everything ties in together and must operate as one.
More...
 
Quote from OPTIONAL777:

First this:

"I agree that human intellect can and does override the prime directive instinct"

Then this:

"So, I don't think human intellect could allow us to rise above our instinct."

Sorry mate, but you are one confused intellectual...
More...

hmm why didn't you quote the complete paragraph which conveyed my point?
The first quote did not show that it was a partial agreement. It was actually just a polite way to convey that I do not completely agree with you.
 
Quote from Rearden Metal:

Seriously, you <i>really</i> should know obvious bullshit like this when you see it.

From your 'credible source':
__________
"She poured these beliefs into a series of deeply odd novels. She takes the flabby staples of romantic fiction and peppers them with political ravings and rapes for the audience to cheer on. All have the same core message: Anything that pleases the Superman's ego is good; anything that blocks it is bad.

"Her heroes are a cocktail of extreme self-love and extreme self-pity: They insist they need no one, yet they spend all their time fuming that the masses don't bow down before their manifest superiority."
___________


Is there even a need to bother pointing out all the lies?
More...
Now that you mention it, YES. Or are we all supposed to just take your word that the articles are bogus?

If you have evidence disproving the articles, spit it out. The articles provide plenty of quotes; all we got from you is a shout of 'LIES!'

Show us your evidence.
 
Quote from Dr. Zhivodka:

Clarence Thomas is a Howard Roark fan? You're shitting me? Roark was an Individualist. Has Thomas ever written a dissenting opinion? Has he ever disagreed with his majority? Has Thomas ever disagreed with Scalia in a professional OR social situation? Has Thomas ever uttered a word of original thought?

Thomas loves the Fountainhead is almost the funniest thing I've heard all day.
More...
Thomas fancies himself an individualist, just like most of those monkey-see-monkey-do teabaggers. Ayn Rand feeds into their Walter Mitty fantasies as "self-made individualists." Thomas has spent his entire life in government, there's not a fucking thing self-made about him.
 
Quote from Rearden Metal:

She called Hickman a 'degenerate', and your blatant smear-jobs are not credible sources. Neither one of these 'articles' can go two paragraphs without telling outright lies.

Seriously, you <i>really</i> should know obvious bullshit like this when you see it.

From your 'credible source':

__________
"She poured these beliefs into a series of deeply odd novels. She takes the flabby staples of romantic fiction and peppers them with political ravings and rapes for the audience to cheer on. All have the same core message: Anything that pleases the Superman's ego is good; anything that blocks it is bad.

Her heroes are a cocktail of extreme self-love and extreme self-pity: They insist they need no one, yet they spend all their time fuming that the masses don't bow down before their manifest superiority."
___________


Is there even a need to bother pointing out all the lies?

If anyone can be convinced of <B>anything</b> by articles like these, I pity them for their simple-mindedness. All of you 'Ayn Rand worshiped a serial killer and here's the proof' fools are the left-wing equivalent of those 'a professional con man says he had gay sex with Obama, so it must be true' types. Really, I see no difference between you.
More...
http://www.michaelprescott.net/hickman.htm

http://www.noblesoul.com/orc/critics/personal.html

http://www.alternet.org/books/14581..._leaders,_was_a_big_admirer_of_serial_killer/

http://lilacs.posterous.com/truly-this-explains-everything

http://www.executedtoday.com/2009/10/19/1928-william-edward-hickman-ayn-rand/

http://www.examiner.com/x-3629-Phil...-real-Conservative-man-William-Edward-Hickman

Yes, please point out the lies.
 
Quote from Gabfly1:

http://www.michaelprescott.net/hickman.htm

http://www.noblesoul.com/orc/critics/personal.html

http://www.alternet.org/books/14581..._leaders,_was_a_big_admirer_of_serial_killer/

http://lilacs.posterous.com/truly-this-explains-everything

http://www.executedtoday.com/2009/10/19/1928-william-edward-hickman-ayn-rand/

http://www.examiner.com/x-3629-Phil...-real-Conservative-man-William-Edward-Hickman

Yes, please point out the lies.
More...


TANSTAAFL. You want me to do the tedious job of pointing out to you why obvious lies are in fact lies, you're first going to have to take the humiliating step of <b>picking option B</b> below.

You're asking me to to explain why your articles are full of shit, because:

Option A: Yes, I'm fully aware these 'articles' are obvious propaganda pieces that are full of blatant logical fallacies (hey, I'm not stupid), but I'd still like you to point out any lies I may have missed. (And my answer to that would be <b>no</b>, since it would be like trying to 'debunk' the flat earth theory. Why bother to debunk that which is already clearly bunk?)

OR

Option B: These articles look totally above board to me, and I see no clear reason not to believe every word written therein. To my innocent eyes they look nothing like propaganda hatchet jobs. I have no clue why you'd even say such a thing- I really don't get it, so please explain it to me.

If you're willing to look like a gullible bluepill by picking option B, I'll be willing to explain what should already be plain to see.
 
Quote from Rearden Metal:

TANSTAAFL. You want me to do the tedious job of pointing out to you why obvious lies are in fact lies, you're first going to have to take the humiliating step of <b>picking option B</b> below.

You're asking me to to explain why your articles are full of shit, because:

Option A: Yes, I'm fully aware these 'articles' are obvious propaganda pieces that are full of blatant logical fallacies (hey, I'm not stupid), but I'd still like you to point out any lies I may have missed. (And my answer to that would be <b>no</b>, since it would be like trying to 'debunk' the flat earth theory. Why bother to debunk that which is already clearly bunk?)

OR

Option B: These articles look totally above board to me, and I see no clear reason not to believe every word written therein. To my innocent eyes they look nothing like propaganda hatchet jobs. I have no clue why you'd even say such a thing- I really don't get it, so please explain it to me.

If you're willing to look like a gullible bluepill by picking option B, I'll be willing to explain what should already be plain to see.
More...
False dichotomy.

Option C: Here's what your serial-killer groupie thought about the people who dared to judge her lust object:

"The first thing that impresses me about the case is the ferocious rage of a whole society against one man. No matter what the man did, there is always something loathsome in the 'virtuous' indignation and mass-hatred of the 'majority.'... It is repulsive to see all these beings with worse sins and crimes in their own lives, virtuously condemning a criminal..."

How dare society pass judgment on Rand's handsome lust object just because he kidnapped, tormented, raped, murdered and dismembered a 12-year-old girl (whom Rand doesn't expend so much as a comma on, by the way)? Who are they, "these beings" who surely must have "worse sins and crimes in their own lives" than kidnapping, raping and dismembering little girls?

Your serial-killer groupie was a complete nutjob, and you're just embarrassed at having been caught taking advice from a halfwitted sociopath.

I "love" the way people who didn't have a fucking thing to do with building a society, a society without which they'd just be meat for wolves, think they can look down on it with disdain and they owe it nothing, not even simple respect as having provided them an opportunity to be their best.

The Bolsheviks drove little Alisa out of her fricking mind and she never recovered. May as well take philosophy lessons from Charles Manson as from Ayn Rand.
 
Rand was, apparently, guilty of something I saw in a lot of women, back in the days I was as prison guard. On visiting days some of the most gorgeous ladies would come in to visit our biggest assholes (no pun), that is, the inmates who had brains enough to do productive work but chose instead to assault and rob their way through life. These are a minority of inmates, mind you, but they were the ones with prettiest girlfriends by far.

There is a whole class of women out there who idolize the deviant. I'm told deathrow inmates get love letters and marriage proposals by the score, from complete strangers.

The difference with Rand though was that she also had an authoritarian background, and was a novelist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top