Did Rand believe in Romantic Loyalty?
Posted by FlashGordon 10 years, 9 months ago to Culture
If you read Rand's novels her female heroine's always seem to just move on to a better man if one appears. In fact I thought of renaming Atlas Shrugged to "Who's Hank Rearden" because she just seems to forget about Hank when she meets John Galt. So did Rand believe if you meet someone "better" and they're interested in you, you just move on? I know she got upset with N. Branden when he picked someone else (we're all human). So those that study Rand more seriously than me, did she believe in marriage (ignore the question of children for the moment) or other forms of romantic committment?
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
On facts. hmmm. you and I are going to disagree. I feel it coming...;)
Edit: To be honest I agree on almost all accounts of what you have said, I remember being told by a prof. years ago was what the difference between a 'fact' and the truth was , "It was a fact that the sun revolved around the earth, the truth is the earth revolves around the sun."
The Parable of Parables
One mother told her daughter this:
-------
"If you do not send a "Thank You" note to every person who gives you a gift, no one will like you, God will frown upon you, and you may be stung by 1,000 bees."
-------
Another mother told her daughter this:
-------
A mother once told her two daughters that If they did not send a Thank You note to every person who gave them gifts, no one would like them, God would frown upon them, and they may be stung by 1,000 bees.
Yet another told her two daughter that if they sent a Thank You note to some people that gave them gifts, that they might enjoy the experience of gratitude and the feeling of being special for several more moments, and that as they grew older, they would be happier at remembering how wonderful the world was and how generous it's inhabitants were.
The first daughter of the first mother ignored her and refused to send Thank You notes to anyone who had given her gifts because she felt that it would satisfy her lying mother. She lived a life in which she always felt betrayed and always suspected people of trying to manipulate her.
The second daughter of the first mother believed her mother because she felt that was what a good daughter ought to do. She lived her life resenting the thousands of Thank You notes she was obliged to write, never felt gratitude upon receiving gifts, and feared the wrath of God when she failed to send a note or sent one late.
The first daughter of the second mother ignored her and did not send any Thank You notes. She did not feel particularly happy or special, but nor did she fear deception.
The second daughter of the second mother believed her and sent out some Thank You notes to specific people for special gifts she had received or for special things they had done. She did, in fact, feel enriched for the experience, and led a generally happy life.
-----
The first daughter laughed at her mother and said "that's the God of the old testament. Jesus taught that it is good to give thanks, and so I will do so in the way that I choose". She learned nothing from her mother that day, and went on to live an interesting life that was not particularly fulfilling.
The second daughter learned to speak in parables like her mother before her, and spent her life spreading health, wealth, happiness and good will.
As far as Priestly goes, I don't know enough. Many inventors did come to the US because it was easier to get patent protection and therefore funding.
What I love most about my wife is that we can share all of our translations and doubly support our values knowing there are 2 different paths to them.
http://animals.about.com/cs/evolution/a/...
thanks Rozar.
Srinivas Ramanujan shows that genius appears anywhere. To be RECOGNIZED and REWARDED requires a special society. He came to the attention of mathematician G. H. Hardy at Cambridge, who nearly set the letters aside as being just from another crank because Ramanujan did not use standard notation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_R...
Also, read about the life of Newton. The Principia came from the Royal Society with its "imprimatur" but with no royal copyright. Also, Newton was not interested in publishing at all only Sir Edmund Halley's efforts upon him made that possible at all. Newton was certainly the most brilliant man of his time, and perhaps the greatest scientist of all time. However, he could have been born anywhere. By comparision, about 100 years later, Joseph Priestley FLED England for America because copyrights and patents strong as they were held no barrier to a mob of ignorant royalists.
Moreover, Newton HID many of his RELIGIOUS works for the same fear of persecution. He was a Unitarian, perhaps even an Arian. No copyright laws help with that.
Relativity does not explain what happens in an atom, and quantum mechanics does not explain gravitational fields. They are incomplete. We do not have a theory that explains, and we do not need such. Most scientists would find it depressing if had theories that explained everything. Let's use the language correctly. First of all a "fact" is a specific instance, a theory explains many facts and has predictive as well as explanatory powers. If you are asking for a list of every "fact" that Evolution explains or predicted, we'd fill up the Encyclopedia Brittani ca and more.
There's proof ;)
Load more comments...