Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Whyz

Regulars
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Whyz

  • Rank
    Novice

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Real Name
    Adam Wise
  • School or University
    Vanderbilt University
  • Occupation
    Sr. Software Engineer
  1. Thanks for the responses. This was along the lines of what I had hoped to hear -- that it wasn't a rape at all. Dominique herself does not come to that conclusion, when she recounts the tale towards the end of the novell, and despite Rand's explanation, Roark did not at all seem interested in 'romance' at this stage of the novell. She specifically writes that he did it out of 'disdain', at the time, and later he was surprised that he still thought of her at all. Anyway, I'm glad to hear the responses so far are in this vein. Did anyone believe there was truly a rape involved?
  2. Here's a very basic question. I imagine everyone on this board has, in some way, found justification or explanation for Howard Roark's rape of Dominique. So I'm wondering what people on this board think.
  3. If one believes that Stadler hates mankind in general, then the distinction is very easy. In my original reading, I interpreted his actions differently. Having trouble dealing with people, especially scientific incompetence, or people who don't share his work ethic would be sufficient for him to utter the phrase "what can you do when you're dealing with people". In my first reading, it was not clear the extent to which it indicated general misanthrope. Similarly, when he doesn't stop development of the death ray, or the publication of anti-science drivel in his name, it is clearly a charac
  4. After considering this question at length, I believe there is basically one central idea that separates Stadler from Roark. Stadler wants what he hasn't earned. He wants respect and power and freedom for himself, but in a context where he gets this unconditionally, without effort. From this one central flaw, so many others follow. The passive acceptance of tyranny, the defence of death ray project, the implicit support of government control of Rearden Metal, etc. Stadler is a man of conflict, because at some level he does seem to understand the truth. He is disturbed and mentally t
  5. I am starting to appreciate the distinctions between Stadler and Roark, but let me press the point... Some people reduce objectivism to 'selfishness' + egotism. Stadler's blocking of Rearden Metal was both. And yes, Stadler looked down on industrialists as greedy dollar chasers, but remember Howard Roark lived very sparsely. Howard never compromised his singular purpose for money, even when he truly needed it. And if he thought of it, he might have similar disdain for an architect of similar talent to his own, who compromised his art for money. Roark certainly had no love for money, an
  6. If we study the specifics of this distinction, it still seems to boil down to subtleties of political philosophy. I understand, for example, how Hank Rearden's brother is genuinely not working to support his life. Or how Jim Taggert coasts on his sister's abilities. But unless I missed something Stadler does work very hard. His particular work happens to be tweaking out the mysteries of the universe. But the argument that there is value in this isn't hard to make. Basic science understanding often has lead to products and discoveries that have benefited everyone, including private b
  7. One thing that bothered me in my first reading of Atlas Shrugged, was the degree to which Dr. Robert Stadler actually reminded me of Howard Roark. Both Stadler and Roark are single minded in pursuit of their passions -- the persuit of pure architecture, and the persuit of pure architecture. Money is of no concern to either of them. Both of them are willing to sacrifice or eschew nearly anything that would detract from the purity of their art. Their differences come down almost entirely to 'politics'. But neither of them is a politician, or a social scientist, or a philosopher, or an aut
×
×
  • Create New...