From: Les Carpenter Rational Nation USA Purveyor of Truth Time to shed the right -vs- left, socialism -vs- capitalism hyperbole and purchase Thomas Piketty's new book " Capital in the Twenty-First Century. " PARIS — Thomas Piketty turned 18 in 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell, so he was spared the tortured, decades-long French intellectual debate about the virtues and vices of communism. Even more telling, he remembers, was a trip he took with a close friend to Romania in early 1990, after the collapse of the Soviet empire. “This sort of vaccinated me for life against lazy, anticapitalist rhetoric, because when you see these empty shops, you see these people queuing for nothing in the street,” he said, “it became clear to me that we need private property and market institutions, not just for economic efficiency but for personal freedom.” (emphasis mine) But his disenchantment with communism doesn’t mean that Mr. Piketty has turned his back on the intellectual ...
I like my atheists the same way that I like my religionists; humble, out of my face, and lacking in certitude.
ReplyDeleteWill: Athiests with a lot of certitude do cross the line into religious faith. The ones who avoid matters of religious faith most consistently are the agnostics.
DeleteI've always agreed with Ayn Rand completely when it comes to religion, from all the rationales.
ReplyDeleteJMJ
Is it really so easy to split Rand's views like that? To be with her when she opposes religion and theocratic tyranny, but oppose her when for the same reasons she also rails against the illogic and tyranny of those who believe in the divine supremacy of political rulers?
ReplyDeleteIt's called selective reasoning. Philosophically inconsistent, but Jersey isn't alone in this. I'm reasonably certain everyone at one time or another on one point or another could plead guilty.
DeleteSelective reasoning? I've always felt Rand's aesthetics is a good example.
ReplyDeleteIn painting she championed monumental, hard edge realism (I.E. Soviet realism) but she was a great champion of the Romantics in music and went to great lengths and gyrations to integrate them with her rationalism.
Her aesthetics were so limiting (photography merely records reality? Please). Her aesthetics were so poorly constructed that it has colored my whole ttitude toward her.
As you will. There is no explaining taste in the arts.
DeleteOther than that Ducky I've no idea what your point is.
It's hardly difficult.
DeleteShe had this construction of man as a rational being.
Art often emphasizes man's irrational component.
She saw that and tried to construct a rational aesthetics and completely failed.
I'd call that a selective failure in a cult full of failures.