Been away too long. Got to get back. And as usual, it is a book that
prompts me into writing. However, no new book this. For the umpteenth
time, turned the pages of Atlas Shrugged. Whew!! haven't I mentioned
enough of that book already! I can hear cries of plea, of restrain.
This time, Henry Rearden meets with Francisco D' Anconia, in a party
(
Read more... )
too many contradictions to maintain an academic discussion here. To start with- what 'deception' is francisco imposing on himself? He is fully aware of what Dagny is going through, he admires her for her courage, and he continues to perpetuate the deception because he believes his duty to Galt to be greater than his duty to Dagny. So does Kira. She is fully aware of what she's doing to Andrei, but she believes her duty to Leo is greater than her duty to Andrei. Both are individualists (objectivist individualists), who act on their convictions, for their own motives. What is the difference? Where is it?
Let's leave Leo out of it for the time being, though, if I chose to answer that particular judgment, I would say- at least he chose to live. Also, he doesn't really *know* of Kira's sacrifice. If he did, he would despise it. He is not a man who accepts charity or sacrifice. Anyway, let's leave Leo out of it, and move to your next 'personal' evaluation.
'Galt is a person without fear nor guilt, and knows how to handle pain. That is what makes him a hero.' I have a question for you right about here. I know you said you didn't care about Christ. But do you really *know* what happened to him.
Number one: He was nailed to a cross. In my opinion, that should teach someone to handle pain.
Number two: When faced with numerous accusations (mostly untrue), he is not said to have displayed the least fear of his impending death.
Number three: As a matter of fact, he embraced death for all of God's children. He was pretty proud of it, so I guess that absolves him of the crime of guilt.
Quite apart from his status as the son of God, I guess that makes him a hero by 'your' definition.
I could write about Spiderman as well. But I guess the point is taken. If it isn't, there's not much I can do. *grin*
In short- 'A is A.' One should not contradict oneself.
Venky's non existent reading habits don't leave much room for comment. I sympathise whole heartedly, believe me. Venky is a burden no one should have to carry :D
Reply
Christ, well, I don't care, there are too many versions pertaining to his story, and I, being a non Christian, have the option of not studying them. And why should I even think of Spiderman, for "Christ's" sake.
And also why drag Venkatesh into this topic? He did not even express an opinion.
Reply
Yes, you already said whatever about Christ. The point was not whether you cared or did not care or your religious origin, just to indicate the flawed nature of your reasoning w.r.t. heroes.
No, Venky wasn't *dragged* into the conversation. He introduced himself into the conversation. The comment was not directed at his opinions, but at his reading (or lack thereof), a topic that he himself introduced into the thread. Also, this will be my last post on your worthy journal. I am accustomed, in general, to more amiable responses.
Reply
I am not going to defend that once again.
"this will be my last post on your worthy journal"
So be it.
"I am accustomed, in general, to more amiable responses."
So am I.
Reply
Leave a comment