Talk:Ayn Rand: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Joe Quick
m (New page: {{subpages}})
 
imported>Larry Sanger
(→‎Awfully critical: new section)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{subpages}}
{{subpages}}
== Awfully critical ==
This article is remarkably hostile to Ayn Rand.  It should be neutral, of course, and in that spirit should balance the current criticism with actual details about Rand's views and other works.  One claim is, "She is described by her admirers as ‘a philosopher’ but this is not a term accepted by many in the philosophical community."  This seems a little slanted.  It is certainly true that most philosophers who are familiar with her writings don't think much of her as a philosopher, but I don't recall it often being ''denied'' that she is a philosopher.  I doubt most philosophers care about that particular question--I don't.  I'd say she wasn't a professional philosopher, and that she was an amateur philosopher, and that she was much overrated by herself and her followers.  Does this mean she wasn't a philosopher?  It makes about as much sense to deny that as to deny that black velvet Elvis paintings are art.  Jimmy Wales and I used to debate about the merits of her work.  :-)  --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 02:25, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:25, 27 November 2008

This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Works [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition (1905-82) Russian-born author of The Fountainhead (1943) and Atlas Shrugged (1957); , considered the founder of a philosophical movement called Objectivism [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup categories Philosophy, Politics and Literature [Categories OK]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant American English

Awfully critical

This article is remarkably hostile to Ayn Rand. It should be neutral, of course, and in that spirit should balance the current criticism with actual details about Rand's views and other works. One claim is, "She is described by her admirers as ‘a philosopher’ but this is not a term accepted by many in the philosophical community." This seems a little slanted. It is certainly true that most philosophers who are familiar with her writings don't think much of her as a philosopher, but I don't recall it often being denied that she is a philosopher. I doubt most philosophers care about that particular question--I don't. I'd say she wasn't a professional philosopher, and that she was an amateur philosopher, and that she was much overrated by herself and her followers. Does this mean she wasn't a philosopher? It makes about as much sense to deny that as to deny that black velvet Elvis paintings are art. Jimmy Wales and I used to debate about the merits of her work.  :-) --Larry Sanger 02:25, 28 November 2008 (UTC)