...as fresh as the morning headlines. Be sure to click through to Parts 2 and 3.
Sadly, the move towards collectivism has intensified, but at the same time Rand laments the fact that there are no presidential candidates in favor of freedom. Today, we have Ron Paul.
(ViaNakedCapitalism)
Bob,
ReplyDeleteThanks for putting this on EPJ. I have these interviews bookmarked and watch them about once a month to help me maintain my sanity. The whole reason I'm buying a smart/internet TV is so I can show this kind of stuff to my family and friends while sitting in our living room. Cancel out the lame stream media and watch quality...truth that is!
Everyone should watch part 3 where Rand schools the hell out of Wallace on uranium/natural resources and road building!!! Krugman...I'd love to hear your response.
ReplyDeleteI have never understood why this woman attracts so much hatred. I see only luminous intelligence, reflected in those amazing eyes.
ReplyDeleteThe eyes are kind of freaky but her ideas are profound. Great stuff!
ReplyDeleteLila, In my opinion, the hatred toward her comes from the fear of accepting personal responsibility for one's own actions. In other words, to accept her philosophy means we must accept responsibility for our actions. It's easier for most people to shirk responsibility - the thought of accepting it strikes terror in their hearts.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what she'd make of recent brain research which points to none of us actually having "free will".
ReplyDelete@9.16 am
ReplyDeleteI'd like to see the research.
Determinism versus freedom is one of those false oppositions produced by language.
All things are both determined in some sense and free in another sense.
But in human life, in the world of our senses, we do indeed get to choose, however limited the choice.
I think amphetamine use may have had something to do with those eyes. What I admire most is her conviction. She knew truth and spoke it boldly without equivocation. Truly a brilliant mind.
ReplyDelete@Lila,
ReplyDeleteThere's an interesting discussion here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00z5y9z/In_Our_Time_Free_Will/
I'm curious as to what her response would be to Robert Putnam's Social Capital and the snowball of research in contemporary neuroscience supporting the mental and physical health benefits of empathy and compassion, see Richard Davidson of Wisconsin and others. I
ReplyDeletet seems to me that much of today's empirical research suggests that love and compassion are rational.
"the snowball of research in contemporary neuroscience supporting the mental and physical health benefits of empathy and compassion"
ReplyDeletePeople have always had empathy and compassion because it is in their own rational self-interest to do so. I'm sure Ayn would be pleased that contemporary neuroscience supports her theory.
Anonymous @8.43
ReplyDeleteWell said. I never got the feeling she was attacking empathy or love that is genuine (based on values). She was attacking the misuse of the term selfish to degrade a healthy sense of the self. You can't love someone if there is no "you".
It is perfectly in accord with good psychology, good religious teaching, good health, and good social relationships.