I read Ayn Rand. I’ve never cared more about steel and trains in my life.

I'm always astonished that she did not learn English until she left Russia, so not until she was an adult; yet STILL wrote clearly enough to form a philosophy.

“The best of trolling is taking down the eye rollers”. I like that :-)

Ayn Rand cleared away tons of mental clutter for me. She was obsessed with forming true, clear concepts. She believed that she established an epistemological method that is THE WAY to get to the truth. Of course, you’ll have to read a lot of her work and decide for yourself if she is right. I see Ayn Rand's philosophy as an extension of Aristotle's thought. Man has one chance at life here on earth and the purpose is for him to reach his potential. Life might be and ought to be great. A man must have political freedom to reach his goals. Without freedom, he gets all jammed up and frustrated. Ayn Rand was a champion of great artists. Notably, Victor Hugo who wrote “Les Misérables,” “The Hunchback of Notre-Dame,” “The Man Who Laughs,” “Ninety-Three,” and “Toilers of the Sea.” She also praised Dostoevsky, Rostand, Rachmaninov and others. I discovered all these thanks to Ayn Rand. Unfortunately, the world is going very much AWAY from the ideas of Aristotle and Ayn Rand and toward some kind of mindless nihilism. I consider myself a student of Aristotle and Objectivism but I have found value in many other thinkers as well including Robert Pirsig (“Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance” and “Lila”) and Iain McGilchrist (“The Master and His Emissary”). I think there is always a danger in over-emphasizing the left hemisphere of the brain which leads to obsessively over-analyzing things. I have certainly done that and I find it common with Objectivists. Objectivism can be a very SQUARE philosophy. It’s easy to get consumed in concept-formation and lose touch with the real world. I carry what I’ve learned from Aristotle and Ayn Rand everywhere I go. There’s is definitely more to life and more to philosophy and art and imagination and creativity than just those two. But if you are interested in reason, individualism, truth, freedom, virtue, and goodwill you will find tons of value in Aristotle and Ayn Rand.

I swear by my life and my love of it that I shall not live for the sake of another man nor ask another man to live for mine

I read Ayn Rand in my late teens; she definately influenced my young adult thinking. I should read her now, so many years later, to see why many criticize her.

Rush's best album was their Ayn Rapus opus, 2112.

“The best of trolling is taking down the eye-rollers.” That’s a fairly classic line. The other side of this, of course, is the ridiculous over-use of “underrated” or “greatest of his/her generation” as undeserved compliments. It’s just part of social media hypeville. Glad Malice can read around great minds (all of whom are human and fallible, etc.) to find the good. And he can explain it because he actually reads…

Man, Michael Malice is a freaken genius. His description and comments on Rand are perfectly honest and to the point!

To me, Malice looks so much like Ayn Rand it’s logical he’s a charge in her defense. And Fountainhead is a great read, and no, I have no phrenological resemblance to AR. Time for breakfast.

Taking her books seriously would mean taking radical responsibility for your life and for your dreams. Panning her takes no effort at all.

I take his point at minute 7:00 but IMHO I actually think David Letterman created that sarcastic vibe in America more than Jon Stewart and before him.

I say "last I checked" not as a sneer but as a qualifier. But now I learn that people use it as a sneering mechanism I'm going to have to think of a different phrase. All I'm trying to say is "this information could be wrong, or not up to day"

“Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology” EPIC book!

I see flaws in objectivism in that it requires an individual to have a moral base and be able to *THINK* rationally.

I'd like to see more people spend the time and effort to read Rand. I just can't see how anyone can read her and not walk away with a net benefit. I like that Lex offered the idea that you don't have to completely agree with someone to glean some value from their thinking. Too many people nitpick in an effort to invalidate. Rand's critics are often guilty of this. She's not perfect, but she profoundly changed my thinking. I'm grateful to her.

Why would she believe it if it doesn’t corresponds to reality? Once you find a point where the ideas do not correspond to reality, you reject that aspect of it. Malice need to distinguish between the fundamental philosophy vs the application of it.

I just love that they mentioned Yaron Brook😂

agreed with the title alone. I'm a weirdo because I'm on the left but like much of what Ayn Rand had to say, loved the Fountainhead- Atlas Shrugged not as much but I think that even for the sake of discussion and debate, her work is important enough to at least go into the discourse

Ayn Rand is awesome, I definitely dont think she was infallible and i view objectivism as a philosophical framework on which to build upon. New knowledge means updating views but the foundation is there/valid and the technique for finding the truth is valid.

Objectivisms greatest contribution is the importance of the individual's obligation to pursue truth and strive to create.

Great conversation.

Objectivist ethics tells you what you should be, not what physical actions you should do.

Was reading her books in the midst of family troubles. Bad depression. I enjoyed the reading but the depression later was awful. Not her fault but will think about books on tape this time

Confident creative egos furrow the soil of human creativity. It’s not for them to be accurate all the time, leave corrections to others. Forging ahead can sometimes be their only concern. Like Terence McKenna. He’d have made much less of a positive impact if he worried overmuch about the accuracy of his claims after every talk

I might be an eye roller, but with a piercing gaze.

0:23 I am able to speak to many of her weaknesses. I consider myself an adopter of the philosophy of objectivism, to the fullest extent of my ability to reason and live a life of rational self-esteem*. I say self esteem, because Ayn Rand herself laments in several interviews and later works that she was mislead my an english dictionary when she used the terms "selfish" and "egotist" instead of the words Self-interest, and Egoist which appeared in her earlier works. The dictionary did not explain the negetive connotations to those words. Those errors in her second language lead to almost the entirety of the hatred for her. As a person, she comes across a bit cold and ruthless. But she's a Russian-American with a thick accent, who came out of the Bolshevik revolution and moved to America, working odd jobs while unable to speak the language, never saw or heard from her parents again, and she did not have a good relationship with her mother in the first place. A mother who apparently was a certain type of person she didn't like. Though she refrained from saying anything negetive in her interviews which I've listened to, she always states that despite their differences her mother was the one who got her to America and for that she is/was grateful. It was a hard life, and she came to America and met many of the same attitudes and ideas that lead to communism in widespread adoption in the United States. A philosophy which she went to war against. Where I see she deviated from the logical conclusion of her philosophy is in having no children. Not that anyone should, or that she should have, but her outlook on the subject of children was rather dismal. She agreed with a questioner in a Q&A that I listened to recently, that some self-sacrifice is required to have and raise children. This slip would effectively nulify her entire ideology, if the human race followed it to the fullest extent and did not self-sacrifice (a form of alturism) humans would go extinct. This is on the level of non-reason of Jesus and the church, where sex is sin and children are evidence of it, god sacrificed his one and only son, and Jesus demands that everyone pick up their cross and follow him, and he went and died on a cross, and to do this after giving their last penny as the old widow did. My point is, Christianity laments sex and human pleasures as they are called in scripture, the process of procreating, having children, it praises child sacrifices and self-sacrifice a and the logical conclusion is extinction of happiness followed by elimination of the human race. But Ayn was wrong about her own philosophy. The logical conclusion to Objectivism self-interest, and rational self-esteem, is achieving what you want in life, creating abundance for yourself, finding a partner who embodies your values, then recreating the both of you in children who share your DNA. Followed by raising them to subscribe to reason, to reject mysticism and alturism. In my opinion, Rand and Peikoff both missed that logical extension of the philosophy, that having children with the person who embodies your values, after you both acheived the highest level attainable for yourselves through reason and hard work. The highest act of self-esteem and self-assurance and beliefe in ones own abilities to solve future problems, and to attain happiness in life would be demonstrated in having a child. I read Atlas after reading "Objectivism: The philosophy of Ayn Rand" written by her friend and associate Dr. Leonard Peikoff. I found Atlas to be a reasonably good book, with many unique perspectives. A few technical discrepencies, but it's a sort of Distopian Sci-Fi and that's to be expected. It was long and there are several hours of dry parts. I found "Objectivism" the book by Peikoff to be an excellent read, informative and highly stimulating. I'll subscribe to objectivism, because it's what I was looking for in a world of anti-reason, anti-rich, anti-vaxxers, and anti-freedom. 5:20 Rand herself had been vying for an equivalent logical argument against her philosophy for her entire life, in order to strengthen it's arguments. Peikoff claimed she was disappointed that nobody came forward who actually posed a real challenge to her philosophy in her lifetime. I think if we had seen that, objectivism would have evolved to a more comprehensive philosophy than where she left off in her essays. But her fans are all dead wrong about keeping it exactly as she wrote it. She wanted it to evolve and for new areas to be discovered and added to it. To my knowledge, nobody has mounted a thorough or logical attack on Rand. It's pathetic, those rebuttals that surface are really just character assassinations and not logical arguments against objectivism, as laid out in Leonard Peikoffs book on that subject. I'm convinced that nobody is capable of overturning it from a logical argument perspective. And the conclusion I have draw is that my distain for people thinking that they own me, my life, and the products of my labor is that they are horribly wrong and unjust. Anyone who think the Draft is okay, to force me to die for their cause and community. And anyone who thinks taxation of 1/3 to 1/2 of everything I've ever produced, confiscation of my dreams is somehow morally justified. It's not. And I am justified in denouncing anyone who thinks they have a claim to me, or that I should sacrifice myself for them. To them I say: Go get your own cross, and nail your ass to it for the betterment of whatever it is that YOU stand for, homie.

As a Brit, I'm reminded of Christopher Hitchens' comment on Ayn Rand: "I have always found it quaint, and rather touching, that there is a movement in the US that thinks Americans are not yet selfish enough."

Philosophy is for man. It is the objective necessity of man. Not for animals. That’s not putting the philosophy to work on the animals.

Is no one going to mention how much the thumbnail looks exactly like Malice

I don't really like Rand's philosophy but i appreciate how well Malice speaks of her

🙄 it’s cute that malice takes himself so seriously.

Happiness is NOT an ultimate human purpose. Human-apes may be "happy" doing all kinds of senseless, meaningless and even atrocious things (and, yes, we can debate each of these terms... and then matters certainly get more interesting.. a debate for another day). And, no, I am not eye-rolling. The content here does not deserve even an eye-roll.

Great video! Hilarious! Good talk, guys! I'll be using this in my 12th Grade English class! I do agree with you about Jon Stewart's tone. I want to like him, but he's always preaching to his base and I end up rolling my eyes all the time, "seeing past his idiosyncracies".

Atlus is about to Shrug

how can a person so intelligent drink Redbull?

The host in these videos gives the impression he is about to nod off.

“It’s just fax”

Reality is not two there can be no primacy. Awareness is known by awareness alone and is the sole irreducible axiom of reality.

I fing love mike

Be careful, the word preference is bad now, or something.

TROLL NOT LEST YE BE TROLLED!❤ Lub these TWO!

Hey, cats don't spray your house if you let them go out for fight club sessions. She failed her cats! :)

Keep doing your thing man!

Read Atlas Shrugged while taking Via Rail-Canada’s inter city railroad

thank you, solid

Russian language translates to English well. Dostoyevsky. Tolstoy. Giants. Bigger better more incite than Twain, Dickens

I absolutely love u 2! Cant wait for the next conversation with one another. And Lex, still want to treat u to dinner sometime. U like The Sizzler?

Any Rand...my hero!

Buddhists have said a lot of these things like you should be happy and start with yourself. I haven't really read much of her stuff but it is interesting most of her thoughts have been cherry picked by people that I really don't care for. Her comments on indigenous people that have been out there I don't personally agree with either. Just my thoughts and I don't expect some zero sum argument against it.

Do you seriously expect a serious thinker to say that he's wrong? Do you expect Newton to think that calculus is flawed? Do you expect Mendeleev to doubt the correctness of the periodic table? Should Mozart be faulted for publishing Eine Kleine Nachtmusik -- on the basis that it's arrogant to consider one's own work as good? Why is this criticism of "she thought her philosophy was flawless" only ever flung at Ayn Rand?

It’s impossible to call any moral philosophy objective as there are more than one way in which a society can be good or virtuous. The idea that theres exactly one utopian hypothetical ‘just’ society is weird to me. Therefore your ideas about the direction of society can never be objective. There can be qualitive differences between people’s ideas of ‘justness’ but not an objective truth. And that’s what really really speaks against Ayn Rand to me. I can’t see how someone who spends years studying philosophy can come to the conclusion that what’s right for society is an objective measure.

The person who wrote 2+2 = 4 also probably wrote and spoke on personal things that they even took actions on that would be out of place with that logic. Again, weird stage 1 thinking in this argument.

I really enjoy Ayn Rand because of her simple, beautiful ideas. But I think she really avoids all the messiness by never including children, affection, or parenthood in her writings. I find it kinda stupid to write about what is most important in man's spirit but ignore parenthood. When you ask even the most remarkable people what is most important to them in life they answer, "my children". Rand's writing seems so immature by avoiding this foundation of human motivation.

objectivism > social subjectivism.

It's funny to me that several of the villains in Rand's novel _Atlas Shrugged_ are more successful with women than the allegedly "superior" heroes Rand wants the reader to identify with, despite these heroes' tedious philosophical speeches that they are better at sex than ordinary men. It's like Rand is unintentionally showing what often happens in the real world: The bad boys get the girls, while the responsible, productive chumps and nerds have to go without female companionship for much or even all of their lives. These sexual losers can fill up their lonely hours with extra work, of course, which makes them more money. But they still go home to empty beds.

I don’t agree with anarchy but I also don’t believe in a powerful government. I agree with Ayn that a governments sole purpose for existing is to ensure that our rights are protected. A government should have no other job. Anarchy would never work in the modern world on so many levels.

The best he has is that Rand didn't neuter her cats? Sigh. Also, the psychology of a woman as president is not objectivism. That's psychology, and she has said this before many times. Objectivism as a broad philosophical set of ideas. Psychology is not.

Two people,both have high IQs One speaks better than other

Can you please talk about how til tok videos are bad and ruining attention span in people.

In university, all the professors would always make snide remarks about Rand. It always struck me as odd, that there were was a unanimous dislike for her in academia. Now, after experiencing the real world, I understand. They dislike Rand because she made to much sense. Her ideas ran counter to their naval gazing, BS post modern philosophy.

So just WTF is my EQ? Obviously EQ is different from the skill, technique, and practice of psychotherapy. But EQ is still something you can identify and guess on an individual. My perception is that it is significantly higher now than the average of the general population. How can it not? I underwent 4 years of the most intensive, daily psychotherapy in existence. It's a very difficult experience to describe because I feel like there are so many dumbasses. Yet, I don't think I am SMART. I just think I am LESS stupid.

Lex drinks energy drinks ? Lol is this caffeinated lex ? :)

This guy has to be out here paying for guests and views bc there’s no way this dude has that many fans. He looks like and sounds like a rock

Michy don't like sarcasm 🤔

I’m a cynic, but I feel it’s being allergic to lies that makes me this way. I’m not only negative, but if I have criticism I share it. Also if I agree with something I express it.

I wander sometimes the vast majority of both Ancaps and Anarchists are 15yo

Ayn Rand basically tried to create an alternative form of humanism in response to the death of god in our era. She didn't quite pull it off, but I agree that she was asking the right questions.

Oh, this guy speaking is like watching pudding set up.

I love Ayn Rand I also love the 90's Boy Band _The Light Funky Ones_

Think a little before succumbing to Objectivism. There are dozens of philosophers and the history is DEEP! A lot deeper than Ayn Rand. Sorry! I've been discoursing about Plato in classes for decades and every year there is something MORE I see, think about. Unfortunately, in my reading of Ayn Rand's major work that is not true. She's never met a good critic because she's never spent time in ANY major Dept of Philosophy, right? Or go to a conference of philosophers and get your assed kicked a few times. I've been there and have also dished it out, lol. Great Literature? Dostoyevsky. AMAZING. Atlas Shrugged--formulaic fantasy for Rand believers. You want to KNOW what life means or what the QUESTIONS are? Dostoyevsky, friends!

Don't yuck up someone else's yum.

180 IQ galaxy brain [deaf voice]: "Ayn Rand is just facts, impossible to argue against."

2+2 equals 4. Yeah, but can you criticize the creators or founder of this truth solely on this truth? Lol. I mean yeah I guess if you get into quantum physics or don't understand how word problems and math work. Ah, so you can't criticize it. Its a cult. Very odd thought experiment to negate something.

Her ideas are as much records of trauma, as Max Stirner's was a record of his. Try to look at their lives and see if these people aren't just acting out.

Jon Stewart is a master of bating nothing else , just tribe on tribe back padding here.

Why do people hate Ayn Rand? lol Oliver from that late night show made a video about it years ago.

I love super-ideological Jews. Milton Friedman. Ayn Rand. Even Marx. It's the race at its best. Like Jordan dunking on Shaq or something.

I agree, Ayn Rand did not have all the answers, and she would agree too.. she only discovered the philosophy. It needs to be developed more. One example of her ideas thay i think is wrong,, is her idea if people being 'born tabula rasa'. I think modern psychology and biology has proven that humans are born with certain features. Give an example of how Objectivisism "waves away" questions about metaphysics. Also, metaphysics is part of the foundation of the philosophy. So, the philosophy does say things have metaphysical necessity.

I'll provide one example where Ayn Rand is completely around the bend. She insists that if there were no "taxes" imposed by the government, "private enterprise" would build all of the roads and other critical infrastructure required. I find that to be a preposterously ridiculous, absurd belief. For that to be even approach the "remotest" of possibilities, you'd require an environment where a critical mass of people were skilled and motivated enough to enthusiastically participate in such an endeavor. The way the world is, there are simply too many incompetents, malcontents and "free riders" to overcome this "utopian" vision, and I use the word "utopian" ironically, so calm down.

Comment on Rand on Donahue saying how rules apply to the world but not Israel.

@6:50 Jon Stewart didn't teach that at all. Lol. The Generation imitates him through their own choosing. Jon Stewart never set out to teach and almost every episode beginning he says, "Folks! This is a Fake News show..." You're just butthurt.

Ann Rand's motto: GREED IS GOOD!

Anyone read Notes from the underground? trolls

Why do Objectivist act like no other philosophies emphasize the individual as good as them?? Have they not bothered to study the works from the likes of Simone De Beauvoir? She had arguments which promote the individual while emphasizing empathy. Rand seems to act like radical selfishness is all you need, but this just isn't true for most of us. Simone was a marxist and could still acknowledged you can have your cake and eat it too. I don't think Rand was unintelligent, or a horrible person, but she sure as hell isn't among the greatest thinkers on my list.

As an objectivist I also don't think that she has all the answers, instead I think that she has the best philosophical Foundation. Meaning that I think good philosophers like Leonard peikoff will come along and build on top of her philosophy.

I think this kzfaq.info/get/bejne/lZ6da8aCrpqol4E.html sums up Ayn Rand work and some of its consequences.

She was also pretty ignorant as hell. She had a strong ideas that appeal but somewhat child like world view. At least from her expressions. Pretty imperialist but she was from a different time.

Cool guys...nothing to say!👍 maybe just twitter? A virtual safe space for rapers and pillagers to raid.

Ayn Rand really just took advantage of her communist roots and gave grown men (at the time, and surprisingly a niche group still...) what they wanted to hear, hard work, self-determination, black and white morality, nothing else matters. Yet she obviously over simplified the complexity of life and in the end lived a lot more egalitarian lifestyle thanks to social welfare programs. And to the point of her coming off poorly, it is because she thought she was right about everything even when she was living against her own values... and kind of was a bitch about it. I was really attracted to her ideas when I was 18 after realizing religion was bullshit... which let's just say is reflective of those who follow her to this day. LOL no offense ;)

It's easy to come up with an ideology (it's not philosophy) that is based on selfishness when others are obligated to be selfless. In other words, men do the jobs that are dangerous, women, like Rand, do not.

Ayn Rand is to philosophy what Qanon is to Catholicism.

is this dude drunk

I love Ayn Rand, but my biggest flaw in her work is what she left out ... the collective produces the individual.

She didn't have all the answers...? How so, I thought. Then I listed and ... THAT'S IT??? There are no jokes about her? Newton was right about many things, never heard any jokes about him. She was a big advocate of pleasure and enjoyment. That's wrong how? And it invalidates her ideas how? She referred to he philosophy as Objectivism. That's a problem how? And it isn't named that because she's saying it all facts. She named it Objectivism because it values that things are what they are, reality matters. And she said "women should not be President"... yes... and we know that she is wrong how? And even if she is wrong, I see nothing in her philosophy that depends on this claim or that defends this claim... this was her personal opinion... I heard nothing to support the claim that she did not have all the answers. Gove me an example of something that she was wrong about and then provide the evidence and/or reasoning to support the claim. Fail.

Ayn Rand brilliant mind? Lol

On that Donahue interview, she looked absolutely miserable. Beware of following people who promote personal philosophies but who are personally troubled and/or terrible.

Only in the USA would an intellectual dwarf like Ayn Rand ever receive praise.

People's main criticisms of Rand aren't because she thinks she's flawless. They reject her inconsistencies. They see through the thin veneer of weak philosophical structure attempting to cover up unabashed selfishness. They understand that such actions, when taken by all, are incompatible with a healthy society.

If you think Ayn Rand has all the questions, you have a very narrow world view.