Ayn Rand Answers

The Best of Her Q & A

De: Ayn Rand

Narrado por: Bernadette Dunne

Duración: 10 h

Resumen del Editor

After the publication of Atlas Shrugged in 1957, Ayn Rand occasionally lectured in order to bring her philosophy of Objectivism to a wider audience and apply it to current cultural and political issues. These taped lectures and the question-and-answer sessions that followed added not only an eloquent new dimension to Ayn Rand's ideas and beliefs, but a fresh and spontaneous insight into Ayn Rand herself.

Here, Rand presents her provocative ideas in a personable question-and-answer session from which one can gain new insights and a fuller appreciation of her thought and a sense of what she was like as a person.

©2008 The Estate of Ayn Rand (P)2008 Blackstone Audio, Inc.

Who's Dommunist, Who's Subummist?

If any philosopher were to speak so honestly and individually today, leftists would scream and whine of their exclusion from being at the center of everything Rand formulated in her worldview. imagine Rand feeling obligated to act apologetic for her own life and humanity, just to please the vulnerable ego of a hypocritical pale-as-snow social justice warrior or some supposedly marginalized person. Rand did not believe in celebrating negativity. and if she were alive today she would tell anyone that they owe it to themselves to be individuals and not just mouthpieces for causes that ultimately dilute what sincere people are wanting. Social justice warriors are not sincere, they are infantile and disconnected from the culture and reality of the past. They're like the new carpenter on the first day of the job, who comes in and plans to build everything the way his or her friends would like it. And suddenly he or she remembers that they have no training in carpentry, they are not even interested in carpentry, there's not a chance in hell they'll be able to perform the duties of carpentry, and the people who told them what kind of architecture they like were morons or maniacs with a twisted view of the mechanics of human history and biology. (That is too much perception to be expected from an SJW. The SJW most likely would just wander off and look for a hotspot so theythem could giggle at a creepy Tiktok video.) It doesn't seem to be hard to talk individuals into becoming nothing but ideological drones. When I was a teenager the young people liked pop music videos much as today's youth like social media. Now there is nothing that makes people cringe more than 1980s pop videos. But the 1980s kids still had a sense of the past. SJWs are like babies born without most of their five senses. There's a short story by a horror writer named Ralston, about an emo white girl who wills herself to "disappear" because of "the racism and homophobia out in the world." And here was a grandchild of 1990s "grunge" social engineering. In reality, anyone willing to throw their life away for problems that they did not create and can only do a small bit to offer help for, is a media-mindwashed fool. HUMANS ARE NATURALLY WARY OF ANYONE DIFFERENT THAN THE NORM IN THEIR ENVIRONMENT. What if the whole "woke" project is a social-engineering "suicide of instincts" teaching people to have no feelings or ideas except those allowed by an omniscient Media that magically knows what's best for everyone? Why are young people who don't believe in M and F genders so trusting of this Media that locked them down in a blatant small-business-crashing transfer of wealth, that even the dumbest members of previous generations would have found fishy and sooken out against in their own teenage years? The SJWs are the wet dream of all teachers and tyrants from the 20th century: MINDLESS UNQUESTIONING ZOMBIES WHO SPREAD THEIR IDEOLOGICAL VIRUS All it cost them was their basic humanity! Everyone should be conscientious. but your conscientiousness cannot be decided for you by strangers. If you're a real human being you're not going to hate people for being different. You also won't help people by encouraging them to think only about the things that supposedly make them different. At my high school some of the boys wanted to be "different" and they got an earring in their left ear. Eventually we had a lot of different people. Ayn Rand wrote about life's rational possibilities, and I believe her work can reach people who have not totally succumbed to so-called political correctness. Just listen, don't trust anyone's strawmanning. Those fifty tattoos and twenty piercings aren't going to make you immortal. One day having your own undeniable binary gender might come in handy. Stop practicing magic if you love and trust science so much. Don't trust corporate MIC science and bought-off doctors, don't parade your individuality by following trends. No science that throws out health and reproductive realities can be trusted, and your intuition knows that. There is no Santa, hippies were a government creation, fads are always stupid and embarrassing in hindsight, and the tobacco industry has murdered millions of people with the curious indifference of high-level scientists like those who hoodwinked society with a game of top-down Emperor's New Clothes in recent times. Apply rationality. Ask questions, and seek answers, expecting only an evolution of understanding, not some sudden "what they said" rage-satisfying opposition-controlling ideology. People are selves, not colors or moods or traits. Truth is beyond control. This audiobook is a nice guide to better hone the art of answer-seeking. Could *you* match Rand's crisp eloquence, knowledge and self-respect? Why not try?

Excellent, but dense

There is a lot of great information that you wouldn't normally find in much of Ayn Rand's books. However, it does get hard to listen to since it's a constant Q&A format

It sounds like Ayn Rand

The book gives insight into a mind dedicated to life on earth. She is the only philosopher that starts with observation and continues in that pattern. Much of the material in this book will be familiar to those who love her, but there are some points that I have not heard elsewhere. For beginners I would suggest her novels rather than this book. This book is good for those interested in her philosophy and her opinions.