Rating: 
Summary: Objective Review on Objectivism
Review: A brieft note: Reading over the reviews given by numerous readers, I observed one fact that disturb me a great deal. Why is there so many personal attact towards Ayn Rand? One reader even wrote "the fact she was short, dumpy and unattractive". I understand that fact that none of us are professional critics, but shouldn't we, the readers, concentrate on reading and anaylyzing the book, instead of focusing on Ayn Rand's personal life and physical outlook. ALSO, if one just briefly take note of the extreme different of rating the readers gives to this book, one would notice that nearly all readers gives either a 1 star grading, or a full 5 stars grading. Doesn't this brief analysis suggest that we, the readers, fail to provide a review that provide a COMPLETE analysis over her book. It seems to me that each reader finds one point which jumps onto their mind and irresponsibly assume Ayn Rand's book only contains that one single point. A review, as I understand it, should be an analysis on the author's ideas, her writing styles and skills. Lastly, the fact that so many readers actually spent their time to write such lengthy reviews shows that her book draws lots of attentions. Thus, anyone who haven't read it should take a look of it.
Rating: 
Summary: Philosophy of Objectivism
Review: Ayn Rand was both a brilliant fiction writer, and abstract thinker. Her personal philosophy was so moral, in an age of what she described as "moral grayness" that it led to the beginnings of a large cultural revolution in America. Some key philosophical tenets that are displayed in Atlas Srugged include the defense of athiesm, the argument for reason and the senses, a solution to the is-ought problem in ethics, and an individual human rights advocacy. Read this book, or you are in the dark.
Rating: 
Summary: Seeing 'narcissism' requires a second look
Review: Some readers of ATLAS SHRUGGED fail to note its narcissism simply because Rand used some of the language of classical liberalism and free-market economics. This language is misleading. What confuses some of Rand's supporters is that most of her 'philosophy' admits of two interpretations: a superficial, 'benevolent' one, and a deeper, 'narcissistic' one. For example, Rand believed, and said, that all human beings had rights. However, when one looks more closely, one learns that she did not believe that all human beings were human beings, nor that rights were always rights. And whose privilege was it to decide which were which, based on standards that were 'contextual' (i.e. that varied according to her mood)? Hint: her initials were A.R., and her imaginary world consisted of thirty-six 'righteous' people, a couple of well-meaning hangers-on, and a few billion evil 'looters'. During her lifetime, when the details of her personal life were largely unknown and her journals and letters had not yet been published, there may have been some justification for the failure to see the malevolence lurking behind her 'philosophy'. But knowing what we now know, we can say with some assurance that when 'benevolent' and 'narcissistic' interpretations are both available for one of Rand's stated views, the 'narcissistic' reading is to be preferred. Rand's longtime friend and associate, psychologist Allan Blumenthal, is reported in THE AYN RAND CULT as saying that the *entire* philosophy of Objectivism was created as a system of personal therapy for Rand herself. Readers of ATLAS SHRUGGED may want to give that some thought. Seeing the malevolence behind 'Objectivism' doesn't require one to give up belief in rights, liberty, and the free market; on the contrary, for many 'Objectivists', waking up to Rand's flaws will be the first step toward genuine understanding of liberty.
Rating:
Summary: The only book better than The Fountainhead
Review: For those of you who gave this book only one star belong in a communistic country. To refer to Ayn Rand as narcissistic means that you didnt comprehend the content of the book. Objectivism is the complete opposite. As the United States becomes more and more socialized, sure some people will feel secure by being "taken care of" but at a cost of all the hardworking peoples FREEDOM. I say if you disagree with Rands philosophy and want to pay over 50% in taxes, fine go live somewhere else and let the rest of us persue our happiness.
Rating:
Summary: An astounding book. However, does require a clear mind.
Review: An astounding portrayal of what would (and might yet) happen when the producers of this world finally throw up their arms and say..."Enough. We will not be your targets any longer. Our efforts, our monies, our very time of life is no longer for you to claim under whatever "rights" you deem." This book asks the question, when the people who produce stop producing, who then, will make this world work? Who will the masses tax when there are no longer any producers producing a tax base. And who will feed the leviathan government when there is no more money to confiscate from the producers. By the way, reading some of these reviews, I really don't think some of these people have read the book. If they have, they are displaying a clear lack of understanding of Objectivism and the book. Indeed, some of them are showing their true colors, ugly as they are. Truth is startling to some. Reading
Rating:
Summary: To Each His/Her Own (book)
Review: I've found the reader reviews an intensive eye-opening extension of Ayn Rand's psyche, almost as flavorfully expressed as AS, though not as exorbitant. For those who couldn't finish - perhaps absorbing it with a neutral perspective may help you overcome the polarized scenarios the author chose to adhere to her fiction, an irritating agent to most. The structure of her philosophy wasn't a discrepancy of social delusion (brainwashing has proven to be an incomplete task on the realistic masses) but an innate sense of pure being and keen observation for personal regulation. All of Rand's heroic characters blatantly chose who, what , when, and how to conduct a formula for speaking, working, loving, etc. An overkill of precise narcissism, perhaps; even though black and white thinking is seen in most part for extremists, an individual does eventually come to a decisive yes or no conclusion. The contradiction does appear in AS as the gray area of indecisiveness, the varying degrees of need for others to gain strengths, which is seen in Rand's other precarious characters. To attack such individuals as weak or evil is unnecessary, their actions tend to a prove a different self worth to a wider consensus. The judgment ultimately lies in productivity (I won't go there). If money makes the world go round, Rand definitely heightened the debate of self worth vs. survival tactics. How far do we go for our wants and how do we view outside help? Currently born rich or poor, do partnerships, credit cards, loans, and charities become progressive, envious tools for either party? The AS thinkers made a "joint" effort to prove a point of integrity by disappearing from a parasitic society; they did need to band together at the same time to make their justification, so are they weak and needy? For Rand's non-fiction insight, it does depend on which group you've identified yourself with to push the envelope, to uphold one's reverent will to the end, not exactly lone selfish Nazism. AS is still a fascinating classic novel; I've found no match to her literary web of insight. Yet!
Rating:
Summary: Ayn Rand is a genius
Review: This is the easily best book I have ever read
Rating:
Summary: A Must Read!!! Wonderful story and philosophy
Review: "Atlas Shrugged" is an exciting novel which illustrates a philosophy of life. I highly recommend it.
Rating:
Summary: Sometimes the questions are more important than the answers
Review: Think this is the kind of book Hitler would have liked? What about Mousselini? Or any other dicators/Meglomaniacs/Machivellian types, etc.? These ideas are perhaps worthwhile in the hands of a "good" person, humanitarian, etc. (I know...what then is the definition of 'good'? But indulge me for a moment, ok? This IS leading somewhere.) Did anyone ever ponder what could happen if John Gaunt were a devil in disguise? (I know to some of you readers he is) Selfishness is excusable--but not on a global scale! To think about only yourself and no other...well I am sorry, but that is wrong. Think about the kind of horrible place this would be if we were all looking out for ourselves and only ourselves. When the day final came that I or you or anyone else needed help, there would be no one available to give it. No sharing. No caring. And, no love. At least nothing genuine and lasting. Love is not selfish but selfless, is not about receiving but giving. And a selfish loveless society is really just a metaphor for hell on earth. (For those of you who believe in hell, that is. And for those of you who don't, well then whatever you can equate with the word 'hell' will do in this case.) To justify this 'philosophy'as the way things should be, could be, blah blah blah without considering the reprecussions if it were, is just wrong wrong wrong! Thank God/Godess/Whatever/Whoever you believe in that this is only fiction! Rand did make one valuable contribution with this novel--she has encouraged thinking, discussion, and debate about the world, about ourselves and our role in it, about right and wrong, good and bad, moral and immoral and eveything in between. Although a true Objectivist is also a Narcissist and therefore sees things only in 'black or white' terms, the by-product of this pig-headedness is that all the non-Objectivists in this world (who no doubtedly outnumber you) are then encouraged to talk, think, debate on these ideas offering more perspectives, more options, more choices. How can anyone consider themself a free thinker, an INDIVIDUAL if they do not at the very least allow themselves the luxury of having a variety of views to pick and choose from, to accept or reject in their quest to come up with their own opinions and views? Sometimes the questions mean more than the answers, and the journey means more than it's destination.
Rating:
Summary: great book....
Review: Instead of "Atlas Shrugged", why didn't Rand title it "1000+ Pages of How to Justify Being a Selfish Bastard by Hiding Behind the Mantle of Philosophy and Spouting Way Too Many Psuedo-Intellectual Ideas"? Whatever happened to free will? My free will tells me I can choose whether or not I want to read this book, like this book, and encourage others to read it too. I am entitled to my opinion just as everyone else who has written in is entitled to theirs--so please, no whining, crying, or griping please! I am just exercising my right of free speech--something her highness Rand must have no doubt considered herself blessed to have when she wrote this tome in the first place. I believe organized religion may no be for everyone. I believe in myself. Am I anobjectivist? No. I believe in what I want to believe in--I am not an Atheist and don't put down others who are. However, I do believe they are wrong on one account--Rand, objectivists, atheists--the whole free-thinking bunch of you! Religion--"morals"--any organized social group or thought process, for good or ill is what helped humans evolve from the lone cavedweller/hunter/barbarian to the 'civilized' man (or woman) he is today. Not to wax prolifically on anthropology, sociology, (or any other "-ology") this book is not the way. At least not in it's entirety. And the ideas expressed in it are certainly not for everyone. Need I remind you, ladies and gentlemen out there reading this, that no one belief or view will every suit everyone--we are humans, infallible. We are not robots or gods or perfect. Our world is not, was not, will never be the way it is in Rand's novel. That is why this is a work of FICTION. Now lighten up, folks and move on to another book. Why not try reading "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" and get some much needed levity into your lives!
|
