Is John Galt more admirable than Eddie Willers?

[Joynewyeary]

Certainly, John Galt's achievements are more admirable than Eddie Willers' achievements.

Imagine a version of Atlas Shrugged in which Eddie Willers, although having no more capability than the Eddie Willers in the original version, made different choices. For example, imagine a version of the novel in which Eddie Willers applied more effort and thought more carefully before making decisions.

Would it be realistic for Eddie Willers to then achieve as much as John Galt achieved? If it would not be realistic, then is it possible that, as a moral being, Eddie Willers was just as admirable as John Galt?

[softwareNerd]

Check this earlier thread (link) for a related discussion.

[hunterrose]

Would it be realistic for Eddie Willers to then achieve as much as John Galt achieved? If it would not be realistic, then is it possible that, as a moral being, Eddie Willers was just as admirable as John Galt?

IMO if Eddie had more scientific achievements that Galt, he still wouldn't be as admirable - primarily because he was philosophically "decent," but not philosophically ideal.

Galt was admirable from the philosophical standpoint; the engine was secondary. I'd even go so far as to say that Galt wasn't ideal because he made the (striking/sanction of the victim) discovery, but because of his unceasing adherence to reality.

Not sure if that answers the question

[Prometheus98876]

Certainly, John Galt's achievements are more admirable than Eddie Willers' achievements.

Imagine a version of Atlas Shrugged in which Eddie Willers, although having no more capability than the Eddie Willers in the original version, made different choices. For example, imagine a version of the novel in which Eddie Willers applied more effort and thought more carefully before making decisions.

Would it be realistic for Eddie Willers to then achieve as much as John Galt achieved? If it would not be realistic, then is it possible that, as a moral being, Eddie Willers was just as admirable as John Galt?

You are damn right about John!

An alternate Eddie Willers that acheived at Galts level would sort of defeat the purpose would it not? I thought that the point of the Eddie character was to demonstrate the nature of the honest average-man.

It take a stronger philosophical foundation than Eddie has for him to acheive at Galts level, which is what Miss Rand wanted Eddie not to have. Morality on its own cannot provide you with what you need to build engines, you need all the other philosophical concepts like epistemology.

[jrs]

... imagine a version of ["Atlas Shrugged"] in which Eddie Willers applied more effort and thought more carefully before making decisions.

Would it be realistic for Eddie Willers to then achieve as much as John Galt achieved?

Every thing is something specific; and it acts according to its nature.

Eddie Willers is something specific; and he acts according to his nature. If he acted in a different way, then he would not be Eddie Willers.

If it would not be realistic, then is it possible that, as a moral being, Eddie Willers was just as admirable as John Galt?

Suppose there are two people who are equally moral in their choices, but one achieves more because he has a greater ability. Then I think that the one who has achieved more deserves greater admiration.

It is the results which matter, i.e. life matters. So anything which contributes to success is admirable.

[Pidge]

On 10/2/2005 at 11:48 PM, jrs said:

Every thing is something specific; and it acts according to its nature.

Eddie Willers is something specific; and he acts according to his nature. If he acted in a different way, then he would not be Eddie Willers.

 

Suppose there are two people who are equally moral in their choices, but one achieves more because he has a greater ability. Then I think that the one who has achieved more deserves greater admiration.

 

It is the results which matter, i.e. life matters. So anything which contributes to success is admirable.

Yes. I was thinking about what made Eddie different from the others, and basically Eddie's role is to help others achieve. He sees their goals and doesn't understand why others wouldn't want to have a better world. He excels at being an upstanding background character. While he may not have an invention of his own he's pursuing, he wants a world in which those inventions are celebrated. Rather (especially at the beginning) he sees this as a world where this is already the case.