With ‘Objectivists’ Like These, Who Needs Raving Atheists? December 5, 2005
Posted by Resident Egoist in : Philosophy , trackbackThe Raving Atheist had his latest smear of Ayn Rand yesterday — which consisted of depicting her, without any pretense at explanation, as a plague that must avoided by anyone who cares for self-preservation.
Here, is his advice to Julia Sweeny, a comedian-atheist who — due to recommendations from her audience — wishes to know more about Ayn Rand and has Objectivism: The Philosophy Of Ayn Rand as second on her reading list:
DON’T DO IT — they’re the BAD ATHEISTS!!! Of course lots of Randites flock to your show and babble about her — only cult-minded atheists are motivated enough to go to live atheistic performances (the rest of us just watch them on cable or DVD). But Rand thought selfishness was a virtue, glamorized rape, thought a rational woman would never want to be president, hated gays and loved abortion. Bad crowd, Julia, bad crowd …
“Cult-minded atheists,” eh? This, coming from a militant atheist who has an entire website devoted to the subject [of atheism], and who admittedly makes it an explicit choice to watch atheist shows on cable or DVD. But this standard anti-Ayn Rand hysteria isn’t what I find especially outrageous, including the snipes about her supposed love of abortion and glamorization of rape [among other things].
What is outrageous, and disgraceful, is the alleged defense this most innocent of persons is offered by people who — for unclear reasons — like themeselves identified as “Objectivists”. Here’s a comment by one Francois Tremblay:
[N]o, Objectivism is not “Randianism”. The best works I’ve read on Objectivist thought were not written by Rand. I consider “Logical Structure of Objectivism” the seminal work on morality and it was not written by Rand. So get off the cult trip, most Objectivists are NOT members the Ayn Rand Institute.
Yes, do read that again: “The best works on Objectivist thought [he's] read were not written by [Ayn] Rand.” Let me put that another way: the best works on the philosophy of Ayn Rand that he has read were not written by Ayn Rand, but by somebody else!
And if you’re wondering why this character thinks of “The Logical Structure of Objectivism” as a seminal work on morality, it’s because David Kelley & Co. have chosen to sneak within it a chapter on so-called “social virtues” — and chief among them is tolerance.
God forbid that Ayn Rand only listed “rationality, independence, integrity, honesty, justice, productiveness [and] pride” as essential virtues. After all, what could she have had to say about the philosophy which she created? David Kelley and Franc Trembley know best, and anyone who dares think otherwise is a dogmatic cultist!
Indeed I have not been the first to say this, nor do I suppose will I be the last, but the fact cannot be understated: these sort of “Objectivists” have the potential of doing far more damage to Objectivism than any raving anti-Objetivist ever could. Their solution to those evasive and dishonest smears against Ayn Rand consists, not of a rational refutation of those myths, but of even more cowardly dishonesty.
Their habitual response is essentially this: “yes, we agree with you that Ayn Rand was a lunatic and an amateur philosopher at best — but you must not let that stop you from learning true Objectivism, which — and I insist — she didn’t come up with anyway. Here, go read this timeless book by my tolerationist comrade who will do all that is godly possible to spare from being offended by the truth, and pay no attention to those white-washing cultists who dare tell you that objective moral judgment is possible.”
That Ayn Rand deserves far better cannot be understated.
Technorati Tags: Ayn Rand, Raving Atheist, Julia Sweeny, False Objectivism
Comments
I think RA is just teasing. He is libertarian, I believe, and an ueber-capitalist, so I’m pretty sure his remarks about Ayn Rand were all in jest.
I enjoyed this post thoroughly. I happen to work with Francois Tremblay on a number of projects, including blogging, and I have been a regular fan of TRA… until now.
I was suprised when I read his objectivist slurs, as I didnt know he was so against it. I wonder how familiar he really even is with the philosophy of objectivism?
Well, I wanted to give you a quick thanx for addressing it in your blog and qouting Francois as well.
Wait a second, now Im confused. I re-read your post, and when you quoted Franc and his comments about objectivism, was it a criticism you were making that he was referring to writings of people other than Ayn Rand?
FYI Francois Tremblay does not consider himself an objectivist.
My reply: You have been served, Randist lunatic.
(Edited by Admin to fix CSS break)
@ Mookie:
Yes, I’m sure that all the lies he’s spreading about her are acts of kindness. Sarcasm aside however, you might be interested in knowing that Libertarians are among the most outsopoken demonizers of Ayn Rand.
P.S: I am not a Libertarian.
@ Aaron Kinney:
Well, forgive me for thinking otherwise after seeing THIS.
I think you should re-read my post again. To spare you some time however, I’ll explain myself again: I was not criticizing Franc Tremblay merely beacuse he pointed to someone else’s work (frankly I could care less). I criticized him because he lied; namely: he refered to other people’s work and called it Objectivism while it is not.
“Objectivism” is the proper name of the philosophy of Ayn Rand, i.e., Objectivism is that which is contained within the works of Ayn Rand herself and anythig else that she explicitly sanctioned. That “The Logical Structure of Objectivism” doesn’t fall into that category is obvious — especially considering the fact that Ayn Rand never taught any such thing as the “virtue of tolerance.”
@ dada saves:
Isn’t it to the “Raving One” that you should be asking that? If I recall well, I didn’t accuse anyone of cultism. I merely thought the following: how far removed a step is watching atheist TV and DVDs and having an entire site devoted to atheism from going to see atheist comedy shows? If this latter is cultist, then clearly, so is the former.
So in response to the first part of your question: YES, I am “suggesting that the Raving One is being hypocritical”. And if you opt to ask the “Raving One” the same question that you asked me, don’t forget to inquire about his thoughts on that remaining part of Julia Sweeny’s audience which did not recommend Ayn Rand to her. Are they cultists, too — because they go to atheist shows — or does that charge only apply to admirers of Ayn Rand?
@ Franc Tremblay:
Maybe I should start by reminding everyone that Franc is a tolerationist. Well, too bad he doesn’t follow the teachings of what he admittedly thinks is “the best book on morality ever written,” for he is without a doubt, one of the most non-tolerant individuals I’ve ever seen. You should read some of his writings — they exist plenty on the web.
I never said you were. I merely thought that you thought you were. Apparently, you are a little bit saner than I imagined.
Anyway, you ought to stop flattering yourself. You are not “being criticised for daring not to follow Objectivist dogma”, whatever the hell that contradiction in terms is supposed to mean. You are being criticized — I repeaat once again — for your lies; namely: for refering to a perverted version of Objectivism as “Objectivism”.
Of course this leaves me a bit puzzled, for if you think that anything anyone dreams up can be called “Objectivism”, why are you not then an “Objectivist”? Or is this just something whimsical you do? No need to answer that, as I really don’t care — not to mention that you might just break my CSS formatting again just as you did last time.
dada wrote:
“Did you stop to think that atheism is a lack of beliefs, thereby immune to charges of cultism?”
Atheism is NOT a lack of beliefs!! It is simply a lack of belief in the existence of a god. Nothing more, nothing less. Even though I am an atheist, I do have beliefs. Also, atheists are not necessarily immune to non-religious cults.