Ayn Rand
I just finished reading Ayn Rand's the Fountainheads, and once again I am on the quest of self-justification like in my little Gatsby essay. There is an eerie relevance, however, to the Fountainhead, because Ayn Rand certainly would have told me that I do not need to justify myself for anyone but myself, and so do not need to use a web blog. Shove it Rand. Rand has no right to decide what kind of justification I need, and if I were to conform to her standards, I would only be doing so to justify myself to her. I happen to enjoy the support of other people. I'm writing this and I'm having trouble remember what it is I disagree on. I think Ayn Rand makes some of these points:
most people cannot think for themselves
a perfect man is totally self sufficient
when one is selfless, then one is selfish about one's soul
As for the first one, it's true, but only when it comes to art. This has to do with our emotions and our feelings about certain things. If all of your friends are but characters in a novel, then it is only fitting that you should treat them as pieces of art and decide which ones you like based on which ones are beautiful and which ones make you feel good about yourself, often those two characteristics are inevitably tied. Ayn Rand suggests that there is some sort of "good" art that if everyone were to think for themselves they would understand that this is "good" art. She somehow suggests there is some pinnacle to a art which uses human emotion as its pedestal. Art and our love for it is controlled by our love for ourselves and our mood, our disposition, and so the best changes from time to time. There is no "pinnacle", no obviously good art, there is simply art that we use for self justification, or an escape, a beauty, a something which produces a good feeling inside that we cannot deny... but this is obviously controlled by our friends, our influences, our something. It's not entirely controlled by us, because we can't entirely control our subconscious. This has been my worst explanation yet, but I'll sumarise. Our taste in art comes from deep emotion. We don't control our deep emotion. We don't control our taste in art. It therefore doesn't come from ourselves. I mean, there is bad art, and bad skill, and there is the consideration of that kind of stuff... On the other hand, there are people who like art consciously based on whatever people like. There are people who like art based on the "mob" affect. But in the end... what we have has all come from other people. It's good to be as individualistic as possible when it comes to taste, if thats what you want. But I'm not sure the extreme she presents in her book actually exists... these mob people who persecute for the sake of persecuting, because they think it will justify themslves. Oh I guess they do exist, so I agree with Ayn Rand on that point, but I don't think I'm one of those people. I'm not being rebellious just because I'm different... but....
i'm not sure there is anything we can do with people looking for false acceptance. I mean, if you say "I like that art" and people accept you because of that, then you know that you aren't really accepted. If you say "I like that art" and think that it makes you a good person, because it helps people or it promotes some virtue or something, then thats what you gotta do. even if you're wrong, you make mistakes... oh fuck it. Ayn Rand rips apart charity saying it doesn't work because it is charity.She doesn't think people have the ability to be truly charity minded... they are always thinking about themslevs, it refers to that third point i made, so i'll talk about that in a minute.
a perfect man is totally self sufficient
hence the word perfect
When one is selfess......... then one is selfish about one's soul
When we do good things for people, it makes us feel good. So we are obviously searching for that good feeling, we want to feel like we did something good. Thats the entire point, we wouldn't do anything if it weren't for ourselves and our emotion. when someone dies, it feels bad, so we think that dying is bad. so when we save someone, when we prevent something we identify with, then we are doing something good. Ayn Rand says it is selfish to give away material things, when the hardest thing to give away is the soul (she thinks its good to seel your soul to the devil) But I say, that not giving away the soul is the entire point. It's okay to be selfish and hoard your soul and make yourself feel good, because thats the point of our "soul". we feel good when we do things for people. Of course, we have to think if what we're doing is really good for people. A lot of what we do we do for justification but we aren't really being good to people. Ayn Rand ties these two points together:
1) most charity does not actually help people
2) people do charity just to feel good about themselves
well obviously when you tie those two points together it's a bad thing. But that doesn't always happen. If someone isn't really helping anyone, they are generally aware of it and so they aren't doing it to feel good about themselves.
Some people actually feel bad when other poeple are hurt, and so they try to help them. obviously there are over zealous "self esteem" people that need to be kept in check, but once again they generally get it pretty right and we don't need to worry about them.
Ayn Rand pretends that everyone who does charity is completely wrong about it, they aren't really doing it, and they are just doing it to make other people think they are charitous. When a philanthropist gives money to a charity, its probably because HE feels guilty, which is upbringing, nothing else. Most people are pretty obvious about why they do things. And she also talks about people being controlled by propoganda to make the wrong decisions.... Yeah its something to worry about, but she can't just blame one side of being the propoganda side, after all, all she was writing was propoganda.
FOCUS
OkaY, i've discovered one of my problems. I can't focus. I can sit down at the guitar and play the guitar and slowly get better at it and I can maintin that for about half an hour, and this is true with everything. But I can't sit down and REALLY concentrate on my fingerpicking. Or I wasn't doing that, but now that I really it, I think it will be a lot easier to do, just as I must do it in my writing and I am tryinig to do it now. Of course, being able to not focus is a sikill too, it allows one to multitask. Maybe, just maybe, I'm NOT ADD. haha laterz
most people cannot think for themselves
a perfect man is totally self sufficient
when one is selfless, then one is selfish about one's soul
As for the first one, it's true, but only when it comes to art. This has to do with our emotions and our feelings about certain things. If all of your friends are but characters in a novel, then it is only fitting that you should treat them as pieces of art and decide which ones you like based on which ones are beautiful and which ones make you feel good about yourself, often those two characteristics are inevitably tied. Ayn Rand suggests that there is some sort of "good" art that if everyone were to think for themselves they would understand that this is "good" art. She somehow suggests there is some pinnacle to a art which uses human emotion as its pedestal. Art and our love for it is controlled by our love for ourselves and our mood, our disposition, and so the best changes from time to time. There is no "pinnacle", no obviously good art, there is simply art that we use for self justification, or an escape, a beauty, a something which produces a good feeling inside that we cannot deny... but this is obviously controlled by our friends, our influences, our something. It's not entirely controlled by us, because we can't entirely control our subconscious. This has been my worst explanation yet, but I'll sumarise. Our taste in art comes from deep emotion. We don't control our deep emotion. We don't control our taste in art. It therefore doesn't come from ourselves. I mean, there is bad art, and bad skill, and there is the consideration of that kind of stuff... On the other hand, there are people who like art consciously based on whatever people like. There are people who like art based on the "mob" affect. But in the end... what we have has all come from other people. It's good to be as individualistic as possible when it comes to taste, if thats what you want. But I'm not sure the extreme she presents in her book actually exists... these mob people who persecute for the sake of persecuting, because they think it will justify themslves. Oh I guess they do exist, so I agree with Ayn Rand on that point, but I don't think I'm one of those people. I'm not being rebellious just because I'm different... but....
i'm not sure there is anything we can do with people looking for false acceptance. I mean, if you say "I like that art" and people accept you because of that, then you know that you aren't really accepted. If you say "I like that art" and think that it makes you a good person, because it helps people or it promotes some virtue or something, then thats what you gotta do. even if you're wrong, you make mistakes... oh fuck it. Ayn Rand rips apart charity saying it doesn't work because it is charity.She doesn't think people have the ability to be truly charity minded... they are always thinking about themslevs, it refers to that third point i made, so i'll talk about that in a minute.
a perfect man is totally self sufficient
hence the word perfect
When one is selfess......... then one is selfish about one's soul
When we do good things for people, it makes us feel good. So we are obviously searching for that good feeling, we want to feel like we did something good. Thats the entire point, we wouldn't do anything if it weren't for ourselves and our emotion. when someone dies, it feels bad, so we think that dying is bad. so when we save someone, when we prevent something we identify with, then we are doing something good. Ayn Rand says it is selfish to give away material things, when the hardest thing to give away is the soul (she thinks its good to seel your soul to the devil) But I say, that not giving away the soul is the entire point. It's okay to be selfish and hoard your soul and make yourself feel good, because thats the point of our "soul". we feel good when we do things for people. Of course, we have to think if what we're doing is really good for people. A lot of what we do we do for justification but we aren't really being good to people. Ayn Rand ties these two points together:
1) most charity does not actually help people
2) people do charity just to feel good about themselves
well obviously when you tie those two points together it's a bad thing. But that doesn't always happen. If someone isn't really helping anyone, they are generally aware of it and so they aren't doing it to feel good about themselves.
Some people actually feel bad when other poeple are hurt, and so they try to help them. obviously there are over zealous "self esteem" people that need to be kept in check, but once again they generally get it pretty right and we don't need to worry about them.
Ayn Rand pretends that everyone who does charity is completely wrong about it, they aren't really doing it, and they are just doing it to make other people think they are charitous. When a philanthropist gives money to a charity, its probably because HE feels guilty, which is upbringing, nothing else. Most people are pretty obvious about why they do things. And she also talks about people being controlled by propoganda to make the wrong decisions.... Yeah its something to worry about, but she can't just blame one side of being the propoganda side, after all, all she was writing was propoganda.
FOCUS
OkaY, i've discovered one of my problems. I can't focus. I can sit down at the guitar and play the guitar and slowly get better at it and I can maintin that for about half an hour, and this is true with everything. But I can't sit down and REALLY concentrate on my fingerpicking. Or I wasn't doing that, but now that I really it, I think it will be a lot easier to do, just as I must do it in my writing and I am tryinig to do it now. Of course, being able to not focus is a sikill too, it allows one to multitask. Maybe, just maybe, I'm NOT ADD. haha laterz