Rand's Philosophy and it's Flaws
We have finally finished reading The Fountainhead in Lit and are now on to seminars. I have come to the conclusion that Rand really was, as McCann so aptly called her, a quasi-philosopher. Her ideas were not full expoundd upon and sometimes contradictory. Her writing is weak and her character development lacking. Over the next several entires, I'll expose why one should not follow ratonal objectivism.
First, Rand says that man's existence should be based soley on reason, and that all forms of collecivism and altruism are bad. While it is true that those who sacrifice their identities to a collective can never truly prosper, valuing the well being of others is hardly a vice. Rand uses this position to attack religion, saying that it has promoted the idea tat self-sacrifice is the greatest good. Yet does the Bible not say that we must love our neighbors as our selves? Does this not imply that in order to love others, we must first love ourselves? Religion does not promote the destruction or even the complete sacrifice of the individual, rather it encourages putting individual gifts and abilities together harmoniously.
More to follow, the bell is about to ring...
First, Rand says that man's existence should be based soley on reason, and that all forms of collecivism and altruism are bad. While it is true that those who sacrifice their identities to a collective can never truly prosper, valuing the well being of others is hardly a vice. Rand uses this position to attack religion, saying that it has promoted the idea tat self-sacrifice is the greatest good. Yet does the Bible not say that we must love our neighbors as our selves? Does this not imply that in order to love others, we must first love ourselves? Religion does not promote the destruction or even the complete sacrifice of the individual, rather it encourages putting individual gifts and abilities together harmoniously.
More to follow, the bell is about to ring...