2400Re: Ayn Rand on Original Sin
- Jul 3, 2009
> Reply: Again, everyone here says she is wrong, but no one is willing to point out where she is wrong. I realize that Christians have woven an intricate defense around OS, but once you strip it of all this, what you are left with is Rand's definition.Actually, I did something you are attempting to do: I placed the burden on you to show that Rand's caricature of the Christian take on original sin is accurate. It seems that you should bear this burden since you first stated that she is correct. I'll patiently wait. Appropriate authorities, references, and proper nuances would be helpful.
> > I know you were not advocating for "objectivism." I just felt that given the constellation of ethics and virtue and responsibility and such, one should keep in mind the fundamental and fatal flaws of Randian philosophy, as well as how these flaws color her assessment of others.I agree that, in general, our self-interest benefits not just ourselves. Nevertheless, you state that no one wants to articulate what they see as Rand's flaws. In my original post, I linked to an essay I wrote some years back. In that essay, I point up what I deem to be considerable, even fatal, flaws in Randian philosophy. So, if you'd care to read that piece and interact with it, I'd be happy to discuss it.
> Reply: Everyone wants to state that she has flaws, but again, no one wants to articulate what those flaws are. On the other hand, I am not completely comfortable with objectivism myself, but it is an interesting, and often misunderstood philosophy. I have been watching interviews on youtube with Rand, she has a wonderful and beautiful mind, and she spends a lot of time correcting the misinterpretations of her philosophy by others. It seems cold and cruel on the surface, much like Libertarianism, but once you start digging you come to realize that your own self-interest benefits others.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>