Why do philosophers ignore Ayn Rand?

[starblade_enkai]

It is clearly evident that not only are Ayn Rand's teachings sensible, at least in terms of people, or at least most people, being able to relate them to something completely knowable, but they are quite unique in that no philosopher before has made it a point to stand up for everything she is proposing. So why is it that philosophers pretend she

Comments

[moonrockmambo]

oh my. This will not end well.

[blue_sky_48220]

Best. Comment. Ever.

[schwarzinexile]

I agree.

[anosognosia]

Per my previous distinction, I presume that you wrote this post to offer a rhetorical demonstration of how your point would come across if you were just talking nonsense, and that you are soon to follow up with a serious post expressing disagreement.

[starblade_enkai]

I'm going to presume that you believe that God exists, is an invisible pink unicorn, and shits cotton candy.

Because hey, as long as we're making completely ridiculous attacks...

[moonrockmambo]

what? you are useless.

[starblade_enkai]

anosognosia's attacks are completely stupid. He makes some incomprehensible statement about some project and then makes this assumption. Why should I treat him seriously when he can't even communicate?

[rockstarpoet]

I enjoy Ayn Rand's train of thinking, and often wish people would pay more attention to her than they currently do.

[the_new_lemon]

Haha. "Train." Good one! LOL!!

[starblade_enkai]

If Ayn Rand lacks rigor, then what of all the philosophers before her? What constitutes rigor? If you mean statements like sp(x)l->aq(zo);aq(sp<-rtt) then virtually no philosopher talks this way. If you mean using clear definitions then you are wrong. While I admit she doesn't always use the best possible English this hardly constitutes a lack of rigor.

[starblade_enkai]

Well the first time anyone argues a position it's going to be full of holes, yes, but even if she's wrong about many of the issues there is something to be said about choosing the lesser of two evils. Or in this case the least of many evils. I myself find it difficult to follow her every word, for the reasons you mentioned above

[zentiger]

Philosophers ignore Ayn Rand because the content of her work ranges from the merely terrible to the mind-numbingly awful. At no point does she offer anything resembling a defensible philosophical insight. Her logic is retarded, her epistemology a steaming pile of shit, her metaphysics naively hideous, and her ethics abominable.

Every person who sincerely identifies as an Objectivist is either a 15-year-old or a narcissist with self-image problems.

[zentiger]

Ugly, of course.

[wordweaverlynn]

Require anaesthetics.