Mike Rowe and Ayn Rand
Author Carrie-Ann Biondi:
"Their names are not often heard in the same sentence, but they should be. Many might not realize how consonant Rowe’s and Rand’s views are, nor the ways in which their approaches to addressing the ills of our time can instruct one another. Most fundamentally, Rand and Rowe understand that reality requires each of us to work for a living, uphold the virtue of productiveness, and appreciate that there is no such thing as “good” or “bad” work, but only honest work done well or poorly."
"Their names are not often heard in the same sentence, but they should be. Many might not realize how consonant Rowe’s and Rand’s views are, nor the ways in which their approaches to addressing the ills of our time can instruct one another. Most fundamentally, Rand and Rowe understand that reality requires each of us to work for a living, uphold the virtue of productiveness, and appreciate that there is no such thing as “good” or “bad” work, but only honest work done well or poorly."
Hi, JimJJ. Eddie's reason for staying behind was stated pretty obviously at the end of Atlas Shrugged: "We can't let it go!" he repeatedly says. So he stays. And in Atlas Snubbed, Eddie says, "You‘re right; it was my choice [to stay behind]... I couldn‘t let it go!" And when Eddie wonders aloud why he was never told about the Gulch, he asks, "How was I to know that another choice existed? You never told me about your valley, never asked me to go with you." But the truth of the matter comes out when Eddie realizes he WAS told: "What do you mean, 'not in so many words?'" That's because no one is directly told about the valley before they're ready to hear it, and Eddie clearly was not ready--he couldn't let it go! According to Galt in Atlas Shrugged, "indifference toward a world which should have been ours was the hardest thing to attain." Eddie never attained it, not in Atlas Shrugged nor in Atlas Snubbed. Although the world literally crumbles to dust all around him, he sticks to his principle to do "whatever is right".
2.You are currently reading a parody and still experiencing frustration
3. I do NOT assume you are a libertarian, but the parody is written by one.
4. Libertarian philosophers would support an Eddie as saving civilization over "great" men. Eddie is perfectly able to get the locomotive running and there's nothing special about a Dagny. (I have not read it).
5. I spend a fair amount of time in here. Yoda is an anti-Objectivist concept. carry on!
I would have to go back and review the movie, but I don't believe that was covered in the movie.
In the book, the last we see of Eddie, he is laying on the tracks in front of the train in the middle of nowhere, and everyone else goes off with the wagon train. My impression was that he probably died out there.
In the movie, as they get in the planes after rescuing JG, one of the characters says something to the effect of "you go ahead, we're going to pick up Eddie".
The movie doesn't spend much time on Eddie, but he always seems to be on the right side of things. In the book, his character is very much like Dagny after crashing in the gulch, convinced that he can, and must, keep the wheels turning against all odds, and against all evidence to the contrary. This belief eventually leads to his demise. Is this a moral for the rest of us?
Load more comments...