I don't know how you could ever discuss Ayn Rand without turning it into a political firestorm. All I can say about Ayn Rand is that I don't think humans need any particular lessons in being selfish, self-centered beings. I think they do that all by themselves quite naturally.
Ironic that it is brought up on a forum that supports a philosophy of giving away one's work to the masses for free and believes that information wants to be free.
So long as this remains a discussion about a significant literary work and does not stray into a flame war about Rand's views with regard to individualism versus collectivism or how any particular political entity behaves in relation to those things, I won't put a stop to it. Individualism and collectivism are appropriate matters of civil dicussion related to open source software.
However is this becomes a flame war, devolves into bashing any particular companies or a discussion about politics, rest assured it will be closed.
de gustibus et coloribus non est disputandum -- Wiktionary
That I can agree with. It amazes me that people get hopping mad about something they have been given for free. Fortunately, they are a small minority of people I just ignore.
Ah, everyone hates the Creator, even while benefiting from the creation. And the Creator is shackled by social constraints imposed by the Parasites.
It's an appealing concept to certain personality types.
It's an adolescent misrepresentation of how society works.
The Fountainhead is a fun fantasy. Like Lord Of The Rings. Or a Marx Brothers movie.
Benjamin Franklin, for example, was a very popular Creator in his time. So were Robert Oppenheimer and Steve Jobs.
None of whom, unsupported by the societies in which they lived, the accomplishments of predecessors or the labor of others could have accomplished anything.
Nobody does anything that they can truly take full credit for.
To be successful, the Roman needs Rome. Otherwise he can be, at best, a miserable soul clad in animal skins and hoping a hare entangles itself in the snare.
Creators should be more humble -- others make the spears with which they make the kill.
This is the critical failing of Ayn Rand's philosophy. She lived in a world where the support structures existed, but being blinded by taking those structures for granted, could not see that the Creators stood on them. She did not see that the individual is supported by the collective.
Edit: To put this in perspective, other writers of her time did not see that the collective benefits from the Creators when all things are in balance. When the hunter shares his bounty with those who made the spear there is balance. Both hunter and spearmaker deserve due credit. And I see no problem with the hunter taking a portion commensurate with the risk he takes so long as it does not create unfair hardship for the spearmaker.
There is room in this world for both hunters and spearmakers. I disagree with those who think not.
Last edited by QIII; July 30th, 2014 at 07:29 PM.
One might be thinking, "But I spent months writing this program, it is mine!" However, who developed the C++ program language you used to build it? Who wrote the compiler? Who came up with the machine language instructions the programming language uses to communicate with the hardware? Who invented Boolean algebra that makes computers possible? And on, and on.
No man, or woman, is an island. You don't create in a vacuum.