Here are a couple of Randroid memes seen recently on Facebook. (Here and here.)
Can you spot the obvious absurdity of these statements? Well, as one Facebook commenter explains
Quoting Ayn Rand is pretty absurd for starters, but “reality” and the consequences of ignoring reality are all part of the same set (reality) so it is making a distinction that doesn’t exist… so it really is saying nothing…
In other words, the consequences (of avoiding reality) are themselves part of reality. Therefore, Ayn Rand is saying that you can avoid reality and that you cannot avoid reality. She has arrived at a contradiction!
Ayn Rand’s work is littered with contradictions. They blend in with their context, so that her followers find them hard to spot. Which is why I bother to point them out. It’s a labour of love.
Ayn Rand was not much of a philosopher, but there’s no denying she had a wicked turn of phrase. This one’s my all-time favourite Rand sound-bite.
To arrive at a contradiction is to confess an error in one’s thinking. To maintain a contradiction is to abdicate one’s mind and to evict oneself from the realm of reality.
Rand has arrived at a contradiction. But we all make errors in our thinking from time to time. So how do I back my claim that Objectivism causes brain damage? Well, to maintain a contradiction is to abdicate one’s mind … i.e., brain damage. And that’s what Objectivists do. They maintain Rand’s contradiction! You see, Rand never said
You can ignore reality, but you can’t ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.
And she never said
You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.
These memes are contradiction maintenance by paraphrase! Here’s what Rand actually said.
[Man] is free to evade reality, he is free to unfocus his mind and stumble blindly down any road he pleases, but not free to avoid the abyss [that] he refuses to see.
Mandarin Oriental has put Four Seasons beyond business downtown though the
location about the top floors of Mandalay Bay continues to be operational.
The Las Vegas hotels will often have accommodations
for numerous people. Why pay more for a accommodation if you only
spend a few hours in it anyway.
Nanotechnology may be used in multiple applications the globe and has forced us
to challenge our traditional beliefs in science. It is often possible to book hotels and
flights through these websites, often with significant discounts.
If a guest lost a space key, I’d must schlep down on the maintenance department and create a new
one.
Not sure if Objectivist counter-arguments or spam.
🙂
Some people are beyond logic. Regardless of who said it or what the quote actually says, that’s the point of it. Some people are just so unreasonable that they want their way, regardless of the consequences. Focusing solely on Logic, in such a way, and who know what’ll happen to you — even if one’s logic is technically true (what with missing premises, and all).
You’re being pedantic to the point of stupidity.
There’s a saying for this type of foolishness: “You cannot see the forest for the trees.”
The Ayn Rand quote is a subjective concept. It has to be given a context to apply. Without doing so you are trying to disprove the idea by showing how it is grammatically incorrect, which is completely irrelevant to the point.
It’s not subjective hence objectivism, its obvious.
You obviously don’t get the point with the way you opined. Ayn Rand’s statement is very clear to me. If you avoid fact then you must suffer the consequences of avoiding that fact. Example: If you think you can go without oxygen and stop it, the consequence of your ignorance is death.
Thank you for saving me from having to make that point. In other words, being delusional is not good. This guy simply can’t make that mental leap.
Wow, this guy who wrote this is thick as shit, and one of the many many people who are a threat to all of us, stupidity is not good, please stamp it out where ever you find it.
Rand was referring to a person’s metaphysics. Some people believe that the reality that we perceive via our senses is only an derivative of the true reality. Mostly these folks fall in the Platonic line of philosophy. It’s the people who say they have “their truth” not “the truth”. Nature is not very kind to this type of “thinking” or “non thinking” if you will. Rand is pointing out that this type of non-reasoning leads to disaster in nature and saying it in a pithy way. You and your readers can make fun of it and choose not to understand. It doesn’t change anything in nature or change anything for those of us who do understand what she was saying.
What’s funny is watching the Randroids earnestly proving the writer’s point.
Ed, this is dumb.
Yes, Objectivism causes “…. brain damage”. Of the best kind. One’s mind finally begins to work and achieve its potential.