Merry Christmas

Posted by sdesapio 13 years, 5 months ago to Culture
14 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

From all of us at Atlas Shrugged, we would like to wish everyone a Merry Christmas and Happy Holiday season. We truly appreciate having the opportunity to interact with all of you daily and look forward to what 2013 may bring.

"The charming aspect of Christmas is the fact that it expresses good will in a cheerful, happy, benevolent, non-sacrificial way. One says: “Merry Christmas”—not “Weep and Repent.” And the good will is expressed in a material, earthly form—by giving presents to one’s friends, or by sending them cards in token of remembrance." - Ayn Rand

We swear by our lives,
Atlas Shrugged


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by flanap 13 years, 5 months ago
    I see that Ms. Rand's statement addresses the "charming aspect" of Christmas, but what about Christmas itself? Seems she is referring to "Christmas," not Christmas.

    I would have loved to have an audience with Ms. Rand, as Donahue and Wallace did, to ask her, without the constraints of network time boundaries, about this concept of "Christmas."

    I guess, I would likely ask her whether she is being inconsistent with her philosophy, which implies atheism since she developed it outside of acknowledging a God exists, where she is encouraging a "religious" holiday which relies on a base level existence of a deity.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jmlesniewski 13 years, 5 months ago
      Rand never implied atheism. She was an atheist. She explained why belief in god was incompatible with objectivism in Galt's speech. Here's a relevant excerpt:

      "“The good, say the mystics of spirit, is God, a being whose only definition is that he is beyond man’s power to conceive-a definition that invalidates man’s consciousness and nullifies his concepts of existence. The good, say the mystics of muscle, is Society-a thing which they define as an organism that possesses no physical form, a super-being embodied in no one in particular and everyone in general except yourself. Man’s mind, say the mystics of spirit, must be subordinated to the will of God. Man’s mind, say the mystics of muscle, must be subordinated to the will of Society. Man’s standard of value say the mystics of spirit, is the pleasure 0f God, whose standards are beyond man’s power of comprehension and must be accepted on faith. Man’s standard of value, say the mystics of muscle, is the pleasure of Society, whose standards are beyond man’s right of judgment and must be obeyed as a primary absolute. The purpose of man’s life, say both, is to become an abject zombie who serves a purpose he does not know, for reasons he is not to question. His reward, say the mystics of spirit, will be given to him beyond the grave. His reward, say the mystics of muscle, will be given on earth-to his great-grandchildren."
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by itisntluck 13 years, 5 months ago
        But in Galt's speech, Ms. Rand also said "They claim that they perceive a mode of being superior to your existence on this earth. The mystics of spirit call it “another dimension,” which consists of denying dimensions. The mystics of muscle call it “the future,” which consists of denying the present. To exist is to possess identity. What identity are they able to give to their superior realm? They keep telling you what it is not, but never tell you what it is. All their identifications consist of negating: God is that which no human mind can know, they say—and proceed to demand that you consider it knowledge—God is non-man, heaven is non-earth, soul is non-body, virtue is non-profit, A is non-A, perception is non-sensory, knowledge is non-reason. Their definitions are not acts of defining, but of wiping out.".

        If that doesn't inply atheism, nothing does.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by flanap 13 years, 5 months ago
          I guess I would like to know what jm thought of this.

          Additionally, from reading jm's and itisntluck's responses, it appears that, assuming that Ms. Rand is communicating her exactly her own thoughts through Mr. Galt and not stating what Mr. Galt would say only as a character in a fictional work, I don't see much discussed in the way of God revealing Himself, just that somehow He is bullying man around, to get to the point, and that this is despised by Ms. Rand.

          I guess, I keep getting back to origins...does Ms. Rand's philosophy require evolutionism, or is there any room for a being outside of man/nature/universe? God has provided direction through His Word and stated His reasons enough for man to function in a way pleasing to Him. No, God hasn't revealed all that He is, but why does He need to? Don't we need just enough to know Him enough to live in a manner pleasing to Him because, originally, He created us?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo