Stephanie responded about Rand's harms:

> > Anyone who is not thriving in this world is struggling because of
> following poor ideas. This is his/her own fault. S/he is either very
> badly mistaken or (much more likely) evil.
> >
> > The problem is that the real world does not work that way, and if
> people believe these premises they tend to end up disillusioned,
> depressed, and isolated.
> >
> > I think that Rand's lack of compassion for people in general is
> harmful to the people who most need her philosophy.

But what I was asking about specifically, was about specific harms. Who do
you know who has been derailed and ruined by reading Rand? No question,
Rand's ideas are powerful, and therefore should have consequences, but what
bad consequences have actually occurred?

Since originally posting this question, I've thought some more about it, and
I think that people who joined the Rand/Peikoff cult may be able to point to
actual harm, but the rest of us can't. And probably most people in the cult
were more helped than harmed, especially if they walked away voluntarily,
which I bet most people do after a while. The rest of her "victims" should
probably be glad they're not Scientologists.

Who has read Atlas Shrugged and can say that doing so in itself screwed them
up or did them more harm than good? Sure, it may have made them a little
pissy for a while, but so what?

Atlas Shrugged caused me to be forever alienated from my church, my in-laws
and most people I knew. Thank, you Aynie! What a bunch of jackasses you
helped me jettison!

Perhaps I would have figured out soon enough that I needed to make some
serious changes without reading Rand, but there's no question that she was a
salubrious shock to my system just when I needed her most. The thing she
gets harshed on the most about is her harsh attitude. But it's also the
thing I needed to make me stand up and speak truth to assholes. Rand is
daunting and insipiring.

Who's been seriously daunted by Rand? Especially compared against all of us
who have been seriously inspired by her?

Mike Lee
Rand is the Donald Trump of Philosophy













People whose
> lives have gone off-track are the ones who are looking for the
> answer as to how to get back to what they wanted and expected their
> lives to be. But if the truth is bundled with the idea that the
> person doing the looking is "evil" for not having lived properly
> prior to learning these ideas, that only adds to his/her burden. And
> yet such people will cling to her philosophy because the good in it
> can help them heal. This can cause a chain reaction in which people
> are healed to an extent, but not fully--because Rand's ideas require
> them to live in isolation, to view people who already have the
> answers as superior to those wo are struggling, to view themselves
> as good only insofar as they follow her ideas perfectly. These
> people experience personal growth without developing compassion;
> instead of sharing their inner light with others, they keep it to
> > themselves. I do not believe this is good for either the person
> doing it or the world in general.
> >
> > Of course, in a perfect world, it wouldn't matter if Rand
> emphasized isolation and non-compassion, because in the long run, it
> is what each person thinks is important that should drive his/her
> actions. But to take the good and dismiss the bad in someone else's
> ideas--especially someone with as powerful a way of expressing their
> ideas as Ayn Rand--requires a strong sense of self to begin with.
> And again, those people who come to Rand because they're looking for
> something just aren't going to have the inner strength to examine
> the implications of her ideas.
> >
> > The deeper truth, really, is that asking if Rand's ideas are
> harmful are like asking if Jesus Christ's are. Christ emphasized
> following the spirit of the law over the letter; a similar caveat
> applies to Rand's ideas. The spirit of Rand's ideas requires
> respect fo the individual, and yet a literal interpretation requires
> one to dismiss others as unimportant or unworthy and evil. It is
> this interpretation that is harmful, more so than the ideas
> themselves.
> >
> > Stephanie
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > There's enough room in this world for everybody to be successful.
> > In memory of David Newton (1962-2006)
> >
> > Stephanie Silberstein: Writer, Author, Thinker - the official
> homepage
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Michael Lee <mikelee.home@...>
> > To: nathaniel_branden@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Friday, May 4, 2007 12:10:46 AM
> > Subject: RE: [nathaniel_branden] on objectivist self-torture
> >
> >
> >
> > Mr Rael asks a great question:
> >
> > > What part of Rand's thinking, specifically, was deleterious, in
> your
> > > opinion?
> >
> > I would love to see some thoughtful, specific answers in this
> forum to this
> > question.
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > In my life, Rand was an intellectual terrorista. She's the
> Tarantino of
> > philosophy: the conversion of the conventionally evil to the
> righteous, the
> > Ezekiel 25:17 sense of vengeance and redemption, the sympathy for
> people who
> > are confused and aren't making it in the world they're supposed to
> thrive
> > in.
> >
> > On balance, way overbalanced, Rand helped me, not harmed me.
> >
> > Mike Lee
> > Recent Activity
> > 1New Members
> > Visit Your Group
> > SPONSORED LINKS
> > Click for free info on online degrees and make $150K/ year
> >
> > Yahoo! TV
> > Stay updated
> > Get video & read blogs
> > on The Apprentice.
> > Sitebuilder
> > Free Download
> > Build your web
> > site in minutes.
> > Yahoo! Groups
> > Start a group
> > in 3 easy steps.
> > Connect with others..
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
> Visit Nathaniel Branden's web site at:
> http://www.nathanielbranden.com/
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>