Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

h2oclerk

Regulars
  • Posts

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • State (US/Canadian)
    Florida
  • Country
    United States
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted
  • Real Name
    Jerry Tabbott
  • School or University
    CUNY
  • Occupation
    Vessel Agent

h2oclerk's Achievements

Novice

Novice (2/7)

0

Reputation

  1. I agree. The book is not really dated, but the movie - set just a few years in the future - can become dated very quickly, especially given the amount of surgery the story will have to undergo to make the transition. There are many current events which suggest the course of events that'd be depicted in a modern screen version. However, there are an overwhelmingly large number of everyday events which would appear to be in contridiction of events which would have to be portrayed in the movie. Realistically, there are a large number of business entreprenuers worldwide that do positive things to promote respect for the Objectivist work ethic. Unlike the novel though, we don't have a John Galt, systematically collecting and removing the talent. The result is that we daily see both camps - the producers and the looters - and both camps are successful at recruiting. The character of Dagny didn't see the looters winning, until the end of a chain of extraordinarily excessive abuses. Today's individuals do see some extraordinary abuses, but are also regularly witness to extraordinary examples of accomplishment and reward. I expect that people watching the film - should it ever be made - will try to relate its events to what they see around them, and will be thus distracted from the deeper statement the book intended. Keeping to the book, to its alternate view - what might have happened if - instead of to the view - what could happen if - would be far more effective. Viewers can easily dismiss the alternative history angle to concentrate on the story, but are harder pressed to be convinced about their future. For myself, I would think that with the right amount of time, money, and purpose, the book might be successfully 'modernized'. That still will not make it better, and given the trouble so far bringing this work to the screen, I doubt that it will get that dedicated treatment we'd all like to see.
  2. One could say that Ayn Rand liked drugs, or at least nicotine, because most of her characters were furious smokers. Of course, smoking dangers weren't as well documented or receiving as much notoriety when she penned her novels, and she clearly liked the using cigarettes as symbolism of man's intellect (controlling the flame). All that aside, it is clear that any recreational drug that adversely affects the ability of ones mind to reason would be 'reasoned' to be dangerous to one's own good - and therefore contrary to Objectivist ethic. Less powerful drugs such as cigarettes, alchohal, caffeine, and marijuana may be argued to be 'acceptable' in controlled situations. However, by the addictive nature of some, the question of control may only be an irrationalization. The danger of these lesser drugs ultimately depends upon the individual, their awareness, and the cautions they take. Fully appreciated, more people probably abuse these lesser drugs than those that abuse themselves with the harder drugs. Back to the question though, I think Objectivist philosophy must clearly reject the hard core, mind altering drugs. However, I think that the 'soft' drugs - thinking here of those mentioned above - may not be damned, but that usage must be confined within the context such that all usage will be conducted responsibly. These soft drugs are basically mild relaxants or mild stimulants. Booze can be both (for those of you who like to multi-task). As such, they can be considered to provide a valuable service when properly used. Improperly used, well - look at the sad statistics of DUI/DWI accidents.
  3. The goal has to be rational to have value. Irrational goals have no true value. Humans seeking self preservation, prosperity, health, and happiness will seek true values, a clear statement of their rationality. Each human's life is a value unto itself. Everything outside of its own existence, but which impacts on its existence can be either beneficial to or detrimental to its life. All relationships that life experiences are analyzed by that life and evaluated as good or bad. It is well documented in nature that life simply choses living, growing, and reproducing - automatically. Nature imposes value to existence. Life simply is value. I believe Rand's concern is that humans not forget their lives - their value - as some popular philosophies would have people believe. There's no real debate. Free will is self evident. Enlightened free will - that might be questioned.
  4. I'm 55 and signed up for this forum because I have recently re-read Atlas Shrugged (about 5th or sixth time), and started looking on-line for information about the upcoming movie. The forum is relatively easy to find, and signing in and voting (my age) were part of my renewed curiosity. I have two comments - 1) older people who are immersed in business are usually quite involved in emails and the internet - and for any leaning towardss objectivism, it's immense value as an informational resource is abundantly clear and enticing. 2)older people, who have probably read Ayn Rand years back, haven't necessarily moved away from the philosophy, but have -as should be expected - nevertheless moved on with the focus of their lives, and so do not always seek out objectivist sites. My re-reading of AS renewed my interest and curiosity, so I've checked back in. Unfortunately, I work 60-80 hour weeks right now, so I know I won't be as active on this list as some.
  5. Although, he is not available (and would now have been too old) for the role of Franciso D'Anconia, from the first time I ever read this book..I have always clearly pictured Gilbert Roland as Francisco D'Anconia. The had the bemused confidant smile, a rugged good face, the humor, and the proud carriage that helped define Francisco. They need to find someone that looks like Gilber Roland for that role (he'd even played a 'Cisco' once before). http://www.briansdriveintheater.com/gilbertroland.html
×
×
  • Create New...