How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 Philosophy 101
 Atlas Shrugged--the movie?   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  ]
 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Atlas Shrugged--the movie?

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


75 posted 06-05-2007 03:51 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

I didn't say it was smart.

I was just pointing out its existance.
rwood
Member Elite
since 02-29-2000
Posts 3797
Tennessee


76 posted 06-05-2007 04:24 PM       View Profile for rwood   Email rwood   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for rwood

quote:
Don't sweeten your words with ice cream. in a famine, my "rational self-interest" was to eat you first or local rebel first.


Forgive me, but this made me laugh out loud. I'm loving your words. For whatever reason, my mind even attached Antonio Banderas' voice-over as Puss N Boots from Shrek.

and "Clifford the Big Red Dog."

You're quite a character. Keep it coming, Drauntz.
Drauntz
Member Elite
since 03-16-2007
Posts 2907
Los Angeles California


77 posted 06-05-2007 04:58 PM       View Profile for Drauntz   Email Drauntz   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Drauntz

rwood,
you are very smart that you get entertained here. I enjoyed the conversation too.

something reminded me of Simpson the TV show. I only watched twice...quite a entertaining  and philosophical.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


78 posted 06-05-2007 06:07 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

people in forest ate other humans not because they did not have other food. it is  because human meat was tastier.



Historically speaking, beginning with the more contemporarily known occurrences of the Donner Party and the Andes Plane Crash -- cannibalism was the survival means of last resort.

This is also commonly true throughout history -- if, however, you would choose to be eaten rather than eat -- then Rand would say that you do so for your own reasons.

Of course there were cultures -- not even ones far removed from 'human' sacrifice -- that used canibalism as a means to shock enemies (not because the meat was tasty -- but because victory was sweet) -- and it was used primarily as a means to illustrate that thier enemy was less than human.

I'm sorry I can't spend more time with this -- I have to get ready for the local Clifford Day parade, when we re-enact his heroic deeds that saved our nation!  


On that note Hush --

I know you posed the question to Stephen, for reasons I admit I don't fully comprehend, but since I sort-of initiated the tributary;

It's an amazing coincicdence that the military doesn't want a draft either -- why?  Because they've found soldiers who want to be there, for their own reasons, are far better soldiers than ones who don't want to be there.

And I'm going to bet that Mike (and we know Drauntz) think we owe soldiers  -- and may even owe our community the response of joining the military.  I'll bet we might even hear the phrase uttered at some point that 'Freedom isn't free'.

While I think also that we owe our uniformed and un-uniformed who choose service our gratitude and continued financial support -- I have often found it odd though that many equate that act of nationalism with freedom.  The ability to win wars was the reason for the emergence and dominance of the nation-state in history -- regardless of form of government -- and has nothing to do with a liberal democracy.  However necessary it may be it has nothing to do with 'freedom'.

When I was undergoing neuropsych tests last week I took an MPII and one of the questions was -- "do you get angry at the law when a criminal is set free?"  My response was no. Because persons who are set free are persons who can't be proved to be criminals...

I think that's one of the first things that we 'owe' our community -- that is the sacrifice of absolute security -- because in order to have 'freedom' (and it isn't that far from Rand's Objectivism) we have to employ a system that is more likely to err on the side of (dammit, my brain is fried now -- I'll have to finish later)
Drauntz
Member Elite
since 03-16-2007
Posts 2907
Los Angeles California


79 posted 06-05-2007 06:33 PM       View Profile for Drauntz   Email Drauntz   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Drauntz

Local Rebel

"if, however, you would choose to be eaten rather than eat -- then Rand would say that you do so for your own reasons."

No, she would say, "on the mark, everybody eats, go."

I wonder if she would applaud for Hitler. She will, according to you.

I  can not help relating her and Ann Coulter together. same thinking. both needed be given quite amount of housework  to be real women with soft hearts.

someone is going to jump at me. Ahhhhhh.
hush
Senior Member
since 05-27-2001
Posts 1693
Ohio, USA


80 posted 06-05-2007 07:46 PM       View Profile for hush   Email hush   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for hush

'I  can not help relating her and Ann Coulter together. same thinking. both needed be given quite amount of housework  to be real women with soft hearts.'

Ummm... *raises eyebrows* Since when does housework make women "soft?" Have you ever done any amount of housework?

If you deride Rand and refuse to read her, and praise the Simpsons for philosophy, I have to assume you probably wouldn't get her anyway.
Drauntz
Member Elite
since 03-16-2007
Posts 2907
Los Angeles California


81 posted 06-05-2007 07:56 PM       View Profile for Drauntz   Email Drauntz   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Drauntz

Hush

"If you deride Rand and refuse to read her, and praise the Simpsons for philosophy, I have to assume you probably wouldn't get her anyway."

I do not refuse to read her novel but I have better books to read. like "Uppity Women of Medieval Times".

Her way?  I am simply too stupid to understand her.

I love every human beings and I make friend with ones with kind hearts.  

and I do not deride Rand as a human being. but her "philosophy" disgusts me.

Housework  does make woman more female
but to be a mother is a chance to experience that one may die for the baby, children....etc.

I read some of her quotes....most of them are simply nonsense. Most of  her words have no clear definition at all.  

[This message has been edited by Drauntz (06-05-2007 11:23 PM).]

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


82 posted 06-05-2007 08:04 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


A young man
jumps on a grenade
to save those around him from harm.

What is the rational self-interest in that,
or was he just stupid?

.
Drauntz
Member Elite
since 03-16-2007
Posts 2907
Los Angeles California


83 posted 06-05-2007 08:16 PM       View Profile for Drauntz   Email Drauntz   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Drauntz

Sir Yi Huan,
Of course he is stupid. look at the smart presidents.....Clinton and Bush.

Personal value...

Rand's value is trash....proper term.....out of date for thousand years.

"A lion fighting to death is better than the chicken waiting to be on the plate"
Drauntz
Member Elite
since 03-16-2007
Posts 2907
Los Angeles California


84 posted 06-05-2007 08:34 PM       View Profile for Drauntz   Email Drauntz   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Drauntz

who wants to be around with selfish people?

I don't

do you?
Drauntz
Member Elite
since 03-16-2007
Posts 2907
Los Angeles California


85 posted 06-05-2007 08:48 PM       View Profile for Drauntz   Email Drauntz   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Drauntz

"An embryo has no rights. Rights do not pertain to a potential, but only to an actual being. A child cannot acquire any rights until it is born. The living take precedence over the not yet living (or the unborn)." by Ayn Rand...

some Governments will love her dearly.
Drauntz
Member Elite
since 03-16-2007
Posts 2907
Los Angeles California


86 posted 06-06-2007 01:47 AM       View Profile for Drauntz   Email Drauntz   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Drauntz

Thinking those policemen and firefighters died in 911 can still make me cry. Ayn Rand, based on her stupid "philosophy" might think those heroes were too stupid to mention....as Local Rebel said "if, however, you would choose to be eaten rather than eat -- then Rand would say that you do so for your own reasons."

She is an evil hearted and cold blooded, by-product of communism.


"In another incident, related by the columnist Samuel Francis, when Rand learned that the economist Murray Rothbard's wife, Joey, was a devout Christian, she all but ordered that if Joey did not see the light and become an atheist in six months, Rothbard, who was an agnostic, must divorce her. Rothbard never had any intention of doing anything of the sort, and this estranged him from Rand, who found such "irrational" behavior intolerable."
http://www.friesian.com/rand.htm

what a crazy person she was!!!!!
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


87 posted 06-06-2007 02:06 AM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Dang Drauntz...

this is getting kind of harsh, ain't it?

I am a bit taken aback, I do confess, and a bit perplexed by the vitriol there. But I don't know enough about you, OR the book to pass a judgement.

But you are right about one thing.

I didn't get enough sleep last night. (Teenagers--y'been there? sigh...I am reminded nightly how many apologies I owe my parents--my son didn't get in until well after sun up--so no, I could not sleep.)



So sweet dreams? And kisses, 'cause I like kisses too!

Ta..and thanks all. This thread is amazing, and it serves as just example of the underlying, overlapping thematic structure of this wondrous book.

I think that nearly each post here could be a topic worthy of its own thread.

What amazing responses from all of you.

My humble gratitude.
Drauntz
Member Elite
since 03-16-2007
Posts 2907
Los Angeles California


88 posted 06-06-2007 02:16 AM       View Profile for Drauntz   Email Drauntz   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Drauntz

my dear SB, since you mentioned this person, I have to find out who she is to get all the attention. Then I found out that she is not my type...trust me, I have known many her like..just did not write a novel or self define a "philosophy". I do not like her.

you, I love you and respect you because you are very kind and intelligent and humble. I respect you even if you like Ayn Rand. You have your reasons like Balladeer. I respect him and his admiration for her.

I give out my opinion openly. I talk frankly and say what I mean. if someone get hurt, I will say sorry.

Dear lady you need to have a good sleep. Don't let my words bother you. many hugs and kisses, love ya!!
Drauntz
Member Elite
since 03-16-2007
Posts 2907
Los Angeles California


89 posted 06-06-2007 09:20 AM       View Profile for Drauntz   Email Drauntz   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Drauntz

Forced good....
when she was in Russia, there was an activity called Saturday volunteer Action...every Saturday, people had to work for free to clean the street, dirty block, to do something for widowers, orphans, or what they did as day job. This was forced. Obviously she hated it.

Individual right and self interests...her family property was confiscated by Government due to revolution and she obviously belong to the "problemed" group...many people disrespect her if I guess but she was very smart one...to survive through this, one had to have a strong self-protection....the base of her "philosophy".

about the social structure.....since she was from communist-Russia, she must have learned  Marxism...he's theory about a development of a society was  original society--slave stage-feudalisms--capitalism--empiricism--socialism
---communism.  
Russia was in Socialism stage when she was there...property belonged to all people=belonged to society=belonged to the
government=only Government or a few officials had the right to make decisions. She hated that.Everybody owned a piece of land or properties before revolution hated that. SO she stressed the  on the Government should not put fingers on individual...based on her experience.

She was for a short visit but she stayed in US...I wonder if she was granted political Asylum....if she had ever talked about the suffering of Russia and other countries and Jews in WW2....if not...obvious a traitor of humanity kind....She had let Communism ate her soul alive.
"“World War I led, not to [Wilson’s] ‘democracy,’ but to the creation of three dictatorships: Soviet Russia, Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany. World War II led, not to [Roosevelt’s] ‘Four Freedoms,’ but to the surrender of one-third of the world’s population into communist slavery.”Ayn Rand.  I can understand what she said but she had no knowledge of the real life of others...she was from the sort of privileged family. And if she hated communism..it did not mean that she could not have a heart for people there.
The way she brainlessly flirt the city of New York really made me laugh...why? Russia is such country with long history and many beautiful architectures...her different taste?... could be why the simple lined and the beauty of light and brightness and scenic and smoothly melted with nature...the Frank Lloyd Wright style interested her.

Because she has never been through a physically tough life she might ideally emphasis the "self-interest". if she was sent to Siberia, she would had learned that "self-interest" led to a pathetic death.  

my thought
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


90 posted 06-06-2007 04:13 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Okay.

I'd like to try to clarify the intent of my original post, as we seem to be veering off into personal tastes of the one work, and justifications regarding the philosophy and life of Ayn Rand.

I should explain that I have a fascination with screenplay writing (mostly because it suits my general predisposition to both dialogue and my distaste for the sometimes annoyingly tedious chore of correct punctuation necessary to write a novel)

But anyhow, I did, and yes I repeat myself, ask if any works were considered too sacred for film adaptation, because I also had in mind a film that almost completely re-wrote a novel--and much improved the body of work.

I'm speaking of the movie Forrest Gump. If you've never read the book--I think that you, like me, will walk away from it with greater admiration for the art of film adaptation. (Just an example of when adaptation can be a good thing.)

Here's an interesting article on that very subject:
http://www.the-write-stuff.com.au/archives/vol-1/reviews/gump.html

I apologize if I appeared to intentionally begin a conversation to which I had little to contribute. (I knew Mike would have much to say about the example I used, and I genuinely wanted others input about this book which baffles me with its intricacy, but I did not consider that no more "a trap" than asking, simply, "What's up with this book everyone talks about?"

So I appreciated very much when Reggie came in to address my question--just as much as I appreciate the time and energy others put in to discuss a topic that I honestly had no clue would incite a near-riot. (And I will let you all know if I understand why that is, when I finish reading it, k?)

Now I hope the conversation can continue, as I do find it interesting.

You all have my gratitude for your participation, and your patience.

*peace*

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


91 posted 06-06-2007 04:48 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

Honestly, Karen, I considered your original question entirely rhetorical, which is why I didn't even try to answer it. Which, I suppose, is my answer?
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


92 posted 06-06-2007 04:52 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Karen:
quote:
But anyhow, I did, and yes I repeat myself, ask if any works were considered too sacred for film adaptation


Considering that "The Passion of the Christ", and "Crime and Punishment" were film adaptations of either sacred writings, or classic literary works ... I would say "no" to your question.


Stephen

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


93 posted 06-06-2007 04:59 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

grin...Ron, I have learned over time that sometimes, no answer IS the answer. (Especially when the non answer does not come from you!) <--still not making sense, but I think you know what I am talking about anyway!

And thank you, Stephan, my ever patient friend!

I'm gonna go soak some charcoal now.

Grilling burgers for supper, here.

Thanks again.
Drauntz
Member Elite
since 03-16-2007
Posts 2907
Los Angeles California


94 posted 06-06-2007 05:35 PM       View Profile for Drauntz   Email Drauntz   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Drauntz

Dear Sb, You asked about the novel but this novel is related to a "philosophy". So I just picked up the philosophy branch and talked about it. I do not think that I did anything wrong. I did not attack your poster and I did not attack any individual on PIP. I love you all. Why I was labeled acting poorly? by your thread? give me your answer!!!!
Ha ha ha. have a laugh, my dear lady.

have a wonderful day, my dear SB.
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


95 posted 06-06-2007 06:23 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Drauntz--please consider carefully that I am not a moderator--so I do not know what happened here. (When I said I was going to sleep--for once, I was actually able to do that.)

I am as confused as you are, if not more.

I am not taking any joy in your pain, but I am confused as to how you came to your conclusions regarding the work and philosophy of my example--because that is what it was, an example of my point regarding film adaptation.

If you re-read this thread, you will read me repeatedly stating that I couldn't judge "Atlas Shrugged" without reading it.

And no, I didn't know you were joking about the "trapped" comment, and so yes, I was baffled that you would jump to the conclusion that all of this conversation was a crafty manipulation to hurt you.

The exchanges between Ron and I, as well as Stephanos and I are the result of what I hope is some understanding that we have achieved over time--and yes, through many previous misunderstandings, quite like this one.

If you feel hurt as well, I would not presume to tell you that your feeling is wrong--because feelings just are, but if you know my heart, then you know that if I thought I hurt you, I would apologize until you begged me to stop.

So please don't take this to heart sweetie.

You have been very kind to me in the other forums, and I would truly be bothered if you thought that I would repay that kindness by "setting you up".

This thread was not directed at you.

It was open for general discussion to all.

I am sincerely sorry that it caused you any pain, even if I was merely inadvertantly a catalyst.

And I hope you take this, what I say now, in the spirit that I intend.

As I said to you earlier in the thread--no offense meant and none taken.

Okay?
Drauntz
Member Elite
since 03-16-2007
Posts 2907
Los Angeles California


96 posted 06-06-2007 06:40 PM       View Profile for Drauntz   Email Drauntz   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Drauntz

my dear Sb,I always respect you!!!
You are soo very kind.

I am very humors person.
It is not the topic. It is what I said hurt someone who admires her very much. I allow myself to tell my true opinions.

you, A kind heart never hurt me, even you lose your temper on me.

It is Ron who did something so I can not open the page and  all email to moderator is blocked. He knew what he did.... to punish me for nothing....or for giving my opinion in a humors way. I am not mad. I am just disappointed.

thank you and big hug to you. don't worry.
I love you, truly. I cherish all kind hearts with my own heart.

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


97 posted 06-06-2007 07:02 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

Drauntz, if you can't open the page how are you reading what Karen said to you? How are you answering her? You have NOT been banned, at least not to my knowledge. If you were banned, the screen would directly say so when you tried to post. If you have a problem, it's not with me.

My email address is ron@piptalk.com and it has never been blocked.
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


98 posted 06-06-2007 07:06 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Ron:
quote:
I think you're underestimating the potential power of rationality, Stephen. Newton believed that if you knew the position and acceleration of every particle in existence, you could mathematically calculate the future. Rand lived in a similarly deterministic world, possessed of an intellect far sharper than most. Her conclusions weren't always right, but she apparently (who can know for sure?) never doubted them at all.


Admittedly, I don't hold much trust in the idea of autonomous reason, or reason-in-itself.  The existentialist philosophers cured me of that.  Just consider the things that Kirkegaard, Schopenhaur, Nietzsche have said about that very thing.  

But Ron, knowing my view of reason and intelligence (as an important thing, but contingent), you should realize that I'm not doubting Ayn Rand's intelligence, or her confidence.  Though I'm not claiming that she was all wrong (nor are egoists), I'll simply remind you that plenty of smart and confident people have been mistaken.  So an appeal to intelligence, isn't the only thing that matters in such a discussion as this.

quote:
I don't see a great deal of difference, Stephen, between interpreting what someone told you to do (and not always getting that right, either) and reasoning out for yourself what is the best course of action to follow. Both, I think, rest on a foundation of faith.


Faith is still no in-itself-virtue.  The object of faith is still the issue.  Faith (in something) is simply a given.  But also, I wonder how faith in God is justified in your own mind if you see "no great deal of difference", between going it on your own, and trusting God.  Unless I've misunderstood you.    

quote:
I certainly don't have a problem with arguing the existence of God. Shoot, I do it all the time. What I don't do, what I believe is ultimately futile, is argue that God is the ONLY thing that exists and that God's existence can be proven by disproving all other alternatives.



Then you have misunderstood me as well.  I don't say that God is the "only thing that exists".  Within his truth is great liberty.  So much that even lies are rife with with it.  Nor do I interpret everything as negatively against Christianity (I just got through arguing that Evolution would not imply atheism- as many assert).  But, where systems of thought (whatever it may be) take away the foundation for what is good and evil, and replace that foundation with something like autonomous reason, then I will point out the predicament.


quote:
Naturalism, egoism, Objectivism, these are all moral alternatives that must exist, and indeed, must be viable, if Man is to have a Choice. Christianity doesn't have the market on morality. It can't if God's promise of free will is to be believed.



I don't doubt that there is truth in all of these philsophies and world-views.  But, your premise about viability doesn't make sense, if it is based merely on free-will.  Sometimes you can look at an extreme, to see the fallacy of an argument.  And if you could consider that Hell itself (in Christian Theology) would represent at least some kind of respect (on God's part) to man's free will, then you might be able to admit that the ability to choose a path, and live there, doesn't necessarily make something "viable".


I don't mind you arguing for objectivism, naturalism, or any other "...ism", as long as you don't resort to free will as some kind of carte blance justification.  If that were true then all things are justified.  And I know you too well to think you believe that.


Stephen.    
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


99 posted 06-06-2007 07:25 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

My answer to that question is of course no.

Or rather I don't really understand the question because I can't think of anything that  would fit the criteria.

--------------

When you read Rand, Everybody I've talked to identifies with the Prime Movers (Galt, Dagny, Rearden -- thanks Hush) and nobody with the parasites or looters(Dagny's brother James).

This is both the strength and weakness of Atlas Shrugged.

When you read Lewis, regardless of your belief system, everyone I know starts questioning their actions, double checking to make sure that they are not like the people who are in hell or on the road to hell. It is not his protrayal of hell that scares people. They simply do not want to be like that.

This, like Rand, is both the strength and weakness of his work.

Both are splendidly didactic.

--------------------------

As far as Rand's selfishness, if you accept my thesis that the two writers are essentially talking about the same thing -- you can describe it anyway you like -- then, how would you feel if people were constantly trying to take that away from you?
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> Philosophy 101 >> Atlas Shrugged--the movie?   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors