Newest xkcd Comic

[01503]

http://xkcd.com/610/

Note the title, and roll over the image for the uncanny reference.

I am disappointed, really. Even updated my almost-never updated blog about it.

http://progressofcivilizationblog.blogspot...tting-xkcd.html

[Myself]

I thought it was funny. It's a legitimate satire of the beleagured sense of superiority some people project after reading Atlas Shrugged.

In the comic, all of the people on the train baselessly assumed that the people around them were "glassy-eyed automatons" and that they were the only "conscious humans." This exposes not only the "malevolent universe" fallacy, but also brings to mind the Peter Keating fear "of that mysterious entity of consciousness within others" that marks the second hander's view of life.

Like it or not, "the Randroid" is a very real and very unpleasant phenomenon. On that count, xkcd was right on target.

[brian0918]

xkcd went down the crap shoot a long time ago. I find myself frequenting xkcdsucks more than the real thing.

[Eiuol]

I thought it was funny. It's a legitimate satire of the beleagured sense of superiority some people project after reading Atlas Shrugged.

I take it to mean something else. Even a "sheep" thinks themselves not a "sheep", and thinking that their thoughts will never become real, they do nothing about it. It's not that there is any superiority involved, just surprise or awe.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Eiuol

[Randroid]

Like it or not, "the Randroid" is a very real and very unpleasant phenomenon.

Sorry. I'll try to be nicer in the future.

[01503]

I think you're looking too deep into it. I saw it as a cheap shot at Oism, calling Oists "Sheeple" (see title), and unthinking.

[Atlas51184]

Can someone explain why this is thought to be an Ayn Rand or OCON reference? I just see stick figures on a train. What am I missing?

Ohhh, never mind. I didn't follow what "roll over the image" meant.

[K-Mac]

I think it's funny. It would be insulting if quite a few O'ists weren't like that.

I suppose you could take something constructive away from it...don't be that way! Change the common image of the O'ist!

[Atlas51184]

Jeez if anyone thinks that attitude is unique to Ayn Rand fans, they must be living in another universe. That's the thought that goes through the head of every alienated high schooler, Rand or not!

[Axiomatic]

http://xkcd.com/610/

Note the title, and roll over the image for the uncanny reference.

I am disappointed, really. Even updated my almost-never updated blog about it.

http://progressofcivilizationblog.blogspot...tting-xkcd.html

Agreed. Its a dig at O'ists, its intentional, its malicious and its false.

[Greebo]

Agreed. Its a dig at O'ists, its intentional, its malicious and its false.

No, it's a dig at Ayn Rand fans.

Not all Ayn Rand fans are O'ist.

[Axiomatic]

No, it's a dig at Ayn Rand fans.

Not all Ayn Rand fans are O'ist.

Pfft, you think that was the intention, just to dig at Ayn Rand 'fans'?

[Eiuol]

I think you're looking too deep into it. I saw it as a cheap shot at Oism, calling Oists "Sheeple" (see title), and unthinking.

Sheep would usually be thought of as mindless zombies. Those people were not thoughtless zombies, so they were people. But they're also sitting like sheep at the same time. Therefore, Sheeple (people that are sheep-like). I found it clever and funny. I see no attack at Oists. I'm not looking into it deep at all. I described it all on one line. It's just a little bit of irony. I found it funny because I expected it to be one person thinking it, but actually, all the figures think the same thing!

Edited July 15, 2009 by Eiuol

[Axiomatic]

Sheep would usually be thought of as mindless zombies. Those people were not thoughtless zombies, so they were people. But they're also sitting like sheep at the same time. Therefore, Sheeple (people that are sheep-like). I found it clever and funny. I see no attack at Oists. If the standing figure was holding a copy of AS, you could have a point. I'm not looking into it deep at all. I described it all on one line. It's just a little bit of irony.

Hold your cursor over the image, an offensive caption should appear.

[Eiuol]

Hold your cursor over the image, an offensive caption should appear.

Ah I see. I fixed by previous post to reflect that. Either way, I don't find it offensive.

[softwareNerd]

Here's the thing though... most of my nice neighbors and colleagues go along with most of this. These are not evil people by any stretch of imagination. They really would like to support what's right. They say they really don't want hand-outs. They say they really don't want to impose their views on others. They really don't have moral and political views that are integrated and firm. As a result, they usually go with views they hear in the culture, rejecting anything that sounds too "extreme". Slowly, but surely, they are thus led down the road of the leading cultural voices. So, the sheep metaphor does ring true.

[01503]

Here's the thing though... most of my nice neighbors and colleagues go along with most of this. These are not evil people by any stretch of imagination. They really would like to support what's right. They say they really don't want hand-outs. They say they really don't want to impose their views on others. They really don't have moral and political views that are integrated and firm. As a result, they usually go with views they hear in the culture, rejecting anything that sounds too "extreme". Slowly, but surely, they are thus led down the road of the leading cultural voices. So, the sheep metaphor does ring true.

Yes but it's referring to Ayn Rand fans and O'ists as sheeple, not the mainstream of people.

[softwareNerd]

Yes but it's referring to Ayn Rand fans and O'ists as sheeple, not the mainstream of people.

The author starts in a nihilist/subjectivist place. From that vantage point one would conclude that the problem with people like the Ayatollahs is not so much that they're wrong as that they think they are right. It's like the old video that said that our big problem is all the "-isms". Yeah, the author thinks that if 5 people agree on something philosophical, they are obviously not thinking for themselves. So, to him, 5 people thinking "those people are not thinking for themselves" is ironical and funny.

[khaight]

Yes but it's referring to Ayn Rand fans and O'ists as sheeple, not the mainstream of people.

I agree that it's intended to be offensive. I just found it eye-rollingly off-target. Anybody who actually attended the OCON (or any other large gathering of Objectivists) knows that we spend more time arguing with each other over a wide range of topics than just about anything else. Sure, there are some people in the movement who have the attitude depicted in the strip -- but there are people with that attitude who have never heard of Ayn Rand at all and would hate her if they did. (Consider 1960's hippies 'expressing their individuality' by all dressing the same way.)

As Objectivism gradually assumes a higher cultural profile we're going to see an increasing amount of this sort of thing. It's a sign of progress, and we can't afford a glass jaw. Howard Roark didn't care that much about the viciously unjust cartoons that Wynand's paper ran against him during the Stoddard trial, because he understood that the people he wanted to reach weren't really influenced by that kind of thing.

[01503]

As Objectivism gradually assumes a higher cultural profile we're going to see an increasing amount of this sort of thing. It's a sign of progress, and we can't afford a glass jaw.

You're right. Reminds me of that quote.

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win."