ayn rand saved my life i wish i could thank her in person life is not about suffering and don't listen to the looters that try to make you feel guilty for being happy and living the life you want. thanks for posting this interview
It's a difficult balance though she most certainly mentally arms everyone and assures them that they have the right to think and act for themselves with no expectation of ode to her. I adore her spin on the term "Selfishness" which almost trades spots with Selflesness and in that sense eliminates expectations to be nice, thus when you are, you genuinely are nice out of your SELF-ishness, in sense actual niceness. I think that her version of selfishness is what most folk get caught up on, when she doesn't really mean it in that sense rather a sense of empowerment to yourself, not entitlement, just you can live your life, and that is far from selfish in the current meaning as everyone can do that! It's like Ayn Randism isn't a philosophy, rather an encouragement for those to adapt a degree of objectivism in their own sense to their own life.
@@MrTredBear loving people for their virtues instead of their vices is also a great message I think. I used to hang around complete losers that technically never screwed me over so I considered them friends. But once I got away I realized just how much they were messing up my life by just existing in it.Same with girlfriends
when she said that her very first manuscript was probably bombed out of existence in Leningrad I was like holy fucking shit. This womans been through some fucking SHIT
So happy to have come upon this. Me wondered about the process of writing Atlas Shrugged, keeping the structure and details straight. Very happy to have you address that very thought and so simply. Happy to be in the company of a like mynd and also to recognize from the convo, the legitimacy of all this philosophers' (mei) werk and how ITS specific contributions fit into what was shared here. Time we'll spent ...this. . Interviewer, It also appreciated yore authenticity and vulnerability.
@@Kalopsiage hi. thx for your question. In the fashion of Gurdjieff and certain others who made a practice of referring to self in the third person, it uses ME to force one to acknowledge that the body is not I. Also for me, "perspective is everything". Its being-ness consists of me, myself, and I -- actor, reactor, and observer (as one way of perceiving the three). This writer can and does create flawless grammatical prose. Presently, however, grammatical correctness aids none-at-all in interrupting thought patterns that are largely on autopilot, and merely paying rent on a life barely lived and consciousness not explored to know what is it really -- these actions etc. I call "I." Hope that gives access to some different perspectives that can be considered.
Absolute rubbish. She created a philosophy which she claimed to live by and died miserable, despite the fact that she claimed numerous times that it would bring happiness. So fundamentally her philosophy was a failure. She was a cruel woman that cuckolded her husband, hated charity and did nothing but give mean spirited rich people and young people with a sense of failure something to latch onto.
26:09 Snyder: "And look at how you have been attacked. How you have been criticized. There have been many people in this country, forgive me, in this world, who think you are daft." Rand: "They don't. They want you to think that. Others are worried because I'm preaching totally the opposite of the Kantian philosophy by which they live, Kantian and derivatives."
Rand nails it at 17:40: "Today, you are supposed to apologize to every naked savage anywhere on the globe (edit: or your next-door neighbor in the USA) because you are more prosperous, because you have earned your money. You have to feel guilty and apologize for it, while he hasn't and doesn't intend to learn from you. He just wants your money. That's what we're being taught."
So we steal the land from the original people (her racist reference was "naked savages") and then we make the excuse, self interest. This woman is like an old drunk uncle. What a bore.
@@alexander33221 You do realise that you dont even understand the very basics. When she talks about America prospering, you understand that means you right? Youre neighbour, every single american citizen would live better. The entire premise is that it BENEFITS EVERYONE. You just want to keep your handouts and call it "justice". lol
At the end of her life she was penniless and received government assistance to keep her from languishing on the street as an old woman. Almost like a system based on compassion for all provided for her when her objectivism failed to.
@@Xanlet wrong leonard peikoff was her financial and intellectual heir and pretty sure she was close to a millionaire at the time of her passing this is always brought up and is a lie
@@tomharrison6607 Evva Pryor, who worked as a consultant to the law firm that represented Rand, admitted to helping the aging author and her husband apply for and receive Social Security benefits in the mid-1970s. In 2010, freelance writer Patia Stephens reported obtaining a Social Security Administration record via FOIA request showing that Ayn Rand collected a total of $11,002 in Social Security payments between 1974 and her death in 1982 (her husband, Frank O'Connor, also collected benefits until his death)
@@Xanlet yes i know that she paid into it so of course she should take it even if i am worth millions when i am old i will still take the old age pension and social security or whatever you want to call it if you paid into it you should get as much back as you can they took money from you by force they didn't ask nicely
@@Xanlet also i am pretty sure the state ie government took more than 11002.00 in taxes her whole life ps if a robber takes your wallet by force on the street and steals the 100.00 that was in there and as he is running away drops a 20.00 bill you are going to keep it not hand it to the robber who just robbed you
Utterly amazing how an interview from 1976 can speaking so articulately and predictably to what is going on in our world today. Go back to the 14:00 mark and tell me she isn't speaking to the mess our world is in right now.
Pretty sure our country is being torn apart not least because of hypercapitalistic, profit-first philosophy similar to that which Ayn Rand championed. I don't think altruism is wrecking our country the same way selfishness is, at least at the top.
@@lebe220 Show me any political mechanism that doesn't have an entity in last place? There will always be sets of people lacking. Sets of people at the end of the train. If you want to eliminate selfishness, you'd have to take everything away from anyone who's ever earned anything on their own slot them into the lowest group of unachievers. It's like sports, isn't it? There's a winner and a loser. Progressives seem to think we should all be winners. Newsflash - it's never happened in the history of man - not will it happen.
@@ElvishShellfish Altruism in our day is expressed by negating and damaging individualism. Today's altruism is the desire to have everyone on a level playing field. Instead, we seek equality by blocking affluence. Blocking innovation. If you do this, then there's no influence by all, and thus you've achieved the altruistic aim of equality. That's what she speaks to. Capitalism doesn't block - it allows freedom of individual skill and innovation.
She also describes modern conservatism, with her disdain for government removing peoples rights (Republicans hate gay rights, etc), her disdain for industrialists and capitalists who abuse their governmental sway, which they shouldn't have to begin with, to gain welfare and protection, which modern conservatives seem to hold as proper. She clearly was very objective and didn't swing for one team or the other. Not to mention she also did not support government decisions based on religion, which is in contrast with modern conservatives who believe our government should create laws that restrict rights, and are based on religious ideals. Sure she is clearly referring to liberalism in some ways, but that is most certainly not to say she is the hero of any conservative.
@@ZZ-bt2jr u guys are smoking. conservatism, liberalism? nope. she always HATED conservatism and liberalism, loving only CAPITALISM. conservatism is a disease. conservatism is religion, tradition, original sin - it is not capitalism.
I haven't respected myself for a while. I've settled. Thanks Ayn for the reminder. I've experienced the toxicity of the mediocre who are envious of my success. My hard work diminishes them.
Ayn describing herself in school may be the perfect glimpse into what inspired her philosophy. It feels like an unfed, beautiful, perhaps autistic mind looking for that gratification
The phrase about death is from Epictetus. I love this woman! Her system of thought , her time of voice, the spark of her eyes! An intelligent, confident human being. I'm reading Atlas Shrugged and I can't wait to explore more of her work!
She was angry with Immanuel Kant, a man who had lived 250 years ago. She has been thinking that Kant’s ideas were still the main principles that time; however, Kant had believed in God and his interpretation of God, the absolute reality was impossible and it is true only if you have a God belief; BUT even that day the belief of God was diminishing, so today we don't mind what Kant thought about absolute truth, God. She couldn't see that. Apart from that, I agree that people should use reason more than emotion, but people shouldn't kill the emotion which is making us emotional beings.
It matters when his literature had and still has a very real effect, consequences, and ramifications we still experience to this day, which she mentioned with the colleges.
No, not at all. Look at the smile on her face at the end. He wished her the highest possible and she was clearly grateful. I thought this was the best interview with Rand I’ve seen, maybe besides the James Day one.
Reality is subjective and it's widely self-demonstrated in the fact that no two people see reality or truth the same way. Everyone has different experiences and reactions in life that shape their current perception of reality and it's happening 24/7 in many small or large increments at any given moment. Even now as you are reading this, your perception shifts in one way or another. Most of the time it happens in such small increments that you don't even notice how much your perception changes in 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, etc. Reality is not static, it's relative. The kind of world we see is relative to the structure of the sense-organ. The qualities of the external world (texture, color) are possessed by it only in relation to the organism that perceives it. The structure of our visual system confers light and color upon outside energy. Sound is not something that exists in the external world. Sound is a RELATIONSHIP between vibrating air, and certain kinds of organisms. These organisms confer with the vibrations to create what we call sound, which in an earless world would make no noise.
@@StreetN1ckel In Objectivism, objective means it's based on cognitive thought, and subjective means no cognitive thought, like choosing orange flavour over apple flavour. Things can be relative and objective at the same time.
@@johnathanvale8634 I used to be a socialist but realized it was based on wrong fundamentals, so I dropped it. I don't want to waste my life supporting wrong ideas.
@@conveyor2 well, I started out as a moral relativist. I was a blank slate, and very open to knew ideas. I never held a wrong conviction, and I tried to be as intellectually honest as possible.i never had fundamentals, until I found them
Since she was ‘two and a half’. And just like that is clearly as bonkers as every other philosophy, guru, religion or nut. Ffs. Disappointed but I should have seen it coming,
Sadly probably not. The people who are in power refuse to adopt it, and for very obvious reasons, why the hell would they want to make you strong and wise and confident? Bill gates doesnt want to compete with you, neither does any other big company, why would they make strong competitors, that benefits society and the world, but it doesnt benefit them,
beautiful mind, explaining what is real self love. I believe people intuitively will follow her philosophy. Remember what Jesus was saying, God choose the simple people, not the priesthood, not the "intellectual" elites
@@charliehooper8679 I have to disagree with you. I hope there is an afterlife I mean there probably isnt. But my point is that believing in a afterlife is usually not out of selfishness or narcissistic desire but a form of coping with the idea of death.
@@Daud-ix4tm if you believe in the after life because of fear of death and its your coping mechanism then you deny death itself. You deny the reality that you are going to die and that others before have died as well.
Rand's philosophies had glaring gaps 1. Altruism and self sacrifice is bad? Okay, but America and every other nation was built on personal sacrifice. People who served in the military and sacrificed everything including their lives being a prime example Also, in order for altruism to be wrong you essentially have to believe that the receiver's of that altruism have and will never have value 2. Your primary motivation should be obtaining personal happiness through productive output? Okay how do you build fellowship or a community? If everybody is solely concerned with the happiness of themselves and the small number of people they personally care about, whilst simultaneously desperately trying to be productive would that create a pleasant society? Like most well thought out philosophies Rand's has merits but struggles in practical application
Rand said: "I will not die, its the world that will end." That statement is the fundamental principle of what the Catholics believe in afterlife. Catholics believe: "Life does not end, life changes." The rest is for you to think about.
nope. i knew that reading these comments would trigger me no one gets ayn rand, no one understands her it is just so sad to read people's opinion on ayn rand it's incredibly frustrating how no one understands anything she says because she's too intelligent for most of you
@@beyond_hell I am agnostic. However, according to Roman Catholic theism when it comes to death, Catholics believe life does not end, rather it changes (form). This aligns with Rand's perspective that at death, you don't die, the world dies. I.e. life does not end. Life changes.
I took a class in political philosophy in college many years ago and it was taught by a gentleman who was devoted to Ayn Rand. I have never thought much of her - in fact, I think her “philosophy” is a lot of simplistic nonsense although I share her atheism. Her ethos of selfishness offends my moral sense. I don’t think she understands anything about capitalism or socialism at all. She renounces emotions and altruistic ethics and makes a fetish of reason and self-interest.
Watch her interview with Phil Donahue, I have it on my channel. Phil is a liberal offering good push back throughout the interview, might help you understand her perspective. I think history before & after Ayn Rand supports much of her conclusions.
this isnt an attack or trying to have a dig. you clearly know your stuff since youve studied it and im sure your very intelligent. this is just me trying to help you understand what Ayn Rand is really trying to say and see the more positive side of the philosophy. the fact that her ethos of self interest offends your moral sense proves everything she is talking about. all shes saying is that its okay to take pride and acknowledge your own value. and you shouldnt be responsible for giving others value. the result is a far more happier life where your not constantly sacrificing yourself just to please others who dont appreciate it or do the same in return. it advocates a strong sense of self esteem and self respect which has never been more lost than in todays society with the younger generation. look at cancel culture for example. Ayn Rand managed to foresee the social issues of self degradation before it even hit. Objectivism provides a way to live free from the judgement of others.and on that front she absolutely right. Look at the sky rocketing Mental Health cases and suicide rates. it all come back to the persons self image and what you call selfishness. I shall leave you with this thought: "Selfishness is misinterpreted: it does not mean exploiting others or putting others down for personal gain; but rather it means working in harmony with others to achieve your personal goal and aspirations. You can be selfish without being immoral. All Ayn Rand is saying is that is if you are sacrificing yourself or giving yourself to others at the cost of your own happiness, you are doing yourself and society a great dis-service. because it shows you lack acknowledgement of your own value. you must believe you are worth something and you are valuable." and thus Ayn Rand says; altruism is inherently evil. it demands sacrifice. and it has proven to be devastating. we now live in a world were taking pride in yourself is immoral and selfishness and arrogant. if you think you are special or something of a good person your are classed as egotistical. They say to believe in yourself to achieve, but you have to give credit to others when you eventually succeed. And to accept the fact that you worked for your success and you earned it and should reap the rewards and profits of your own exploits is essentially taboo. which is what Rand was saying towards the end of the interview about getting criticised for her success. As for her understanding of capitalism and socialism. she does. she lived it. she lived through soviet Russia. communist china. she lived through the Nazi's and the Cuban crisis. History has proven and justified her opinions and views. and the fact is that communism and socialism cannot be put into practise. because it leads to the sacrifice of men. people become disposable and have no worth under a communist or socialist regime. Communist china had the worst man made famine in history killing over 100 million people in the name of industrialisation and progress. the Nazi's and WW2. The Soviet union and the Cold War, and the civil war, and the millions that died building propaganda projects that were never used (the White Sea canal). So I would say she absolutely knows about socialism and communism. I wont speak about capitalism because im not well versed in it because im not a huge fan of economics. im definately more a social studies kinda guy than politics or economics so I cant talk about that. I urge you to read up or I can send you some documentaries if you would like about the communist and socialist regimes and even give you the official doctrine of Karl Marx and the communist manifesto because it is really fascinating. I'm going to repeat myself here, this isnt an attack or trying to have a dig. you clearly know your stuff since youve studied it and im sure your very intelligent. this is just me trying to help you understand what Ayn Rand is really trying to say and see the more positive side of the philosophy instead of just narrowly thinking that selfishness or self interest is a bad thing. you should be able to live for yourself. not just other people. if you took the time to read all this I really appreciate it and your entitled to your own opinion in the end of the day..
I don't understand your point. I'm not an objectivist. I love aym rand on most issues. I've listened to people who consider themselves objectivists. I don't understand the cult label.
I've heard that talking point before & find it so stupid. Look at your paycheck. You by force pay into social security. If you happen to not agree with the program that has been taking money from you every year of your entire working life. How are you under some moral obligation to forfeit all that money robbed from you in the first place to the very government you don't approve of. It seriously is a fucking retarded argument. You forfeit any appeal to morality trying to falsely paint a dead person as a hypocrit just because you want your student loan debts forgiven.
So....people who oppose forced redistribution of wealth are hypocrites for recapturing the wealth they were forced to surender to the scheme. Cool story
Having children is thinking of oneself. They don't get here without the desire to have them by their parents. Selfishness is in many forms but the foundation is " I want this" or " I want that" but selfishness sometimes affects others ( ie. Bringing an unconsenting child into the world) versus not affecting others ( ie. Remaining childfree)
While religions like Christianity and Judaism aren’t perfect, they are largely backed up by reason and rationality. So rand is wrong on that front. Also, rand greatly overestimates the rationality of human beings. Check out the website or book named: you are not so smart… In order to see several dozen ways in which humans are not smart or rational. The great thing about a religion like Christianity is that it was founded by one of the smartest and most emotionally and spiritually advanced humans to ever exist. I went to a top 25 American university and graduated in the top 10% of my class there, but Jesus was way smarter than me and had tons more wisdom than me… And more than almost anyone on earth today or in the last 2000 years. I’ve gained far more by tapping into his wisdom than when I had just tried to use only my own rationality. Furthermore, I have also greatly benefited from connecting with the love and peace of God. Those are two massive benefits that are not available with Rands approach. Also, keep in mind that rand was a messed up person and her philosophy didn’t help her much. She was depressed, she was angry, she was vengeful and she was often irrational and emotional. Her life is basically an advertisement for choosing some other path than her philosophy. In fact, I would readily choose following any of the world‘s major religions over following her philosophy.
reason and rationality? religions believe in 'immaterial', they are against objectivism, against reason.they are against the law of identity, they believe that one thing is another thing. please, don't be stuuuuuuuuuuuadfi0sssssfjiokdfofd
To continue to try to cast shade on Ayn Rand's work 50 years later because she had an affair with someone younger who wasn't even underage is ridiculous. You aren't alone. I've received many comments like this on Ayn Rand videos. It really shows how much you anti freedom folk don't have any real arguments to support empire.
yeah governments threaten you with prison if you dont pay your taxes, religions threaten you with infinite torture if you dont pay your tax - I can see why she's totally opposed to one but loves the other. religions certainly don't threaten or coerce you, right? you just made a perfectly rational choice to follow your congregation or become ostracized
she is brilliant, but I don't agree with what she said about religion. I am Christian. While I am capable of having emotional religious experiences, those came much after I realized that it is very likely that there is a self aware creator, and that is it quite likely that Jesus is who he said he is. therefore my faith is a rational response to the reality that my human senses interact with. I have to suggest that Christianity falls into, or under objectivism. it is not separate from it.
You're deluded - religion as in belief in a god is not compatible with objectivism. You cannot show that a god exists or measure its effects on the world and be certain that the effects you propose are attributable to it. There's no reasonable justification for a belief in God.
@@nuvz66, there are all sorts of non-metaphysical things that we have theories about, but that we do not yet have the technology to measure or discover. there are things in science that require faith. much is unknown. the pursuit of science is the pursuit of the unknown. and there have been academic studies done on miracles and other religious experiences.
@@625098evan I'm not sure that faith is a part of science. If a theory suggests something is possible then it's a matter of developing technique and tools to persue your hypothesis. You still start out with a decent model based on facts. The fact that science can investigate a religious miracle claim isn't evidence for it by the fact it's been looked into. There's no evidence of God whatever. You don't know what you're looking for or how to measure it or its precise nature. Science would simply say 'case open - we don't know' - that's an honest answer. You're adding in things which you don't even know if it's a possibility. You don't know that god's do or can exist.
@@nuvz66, science investigating religious claims would suggest that there is something being looked for and measured. unless it is crap science, which is a claim that you might like to make, as you are here to win an argument, not exchange ideas. evidence is not proof. God remain un-provable, but there is evidence of him. some assumptions have to be made in science just to move forward. most of what we have are theories. there are often multiple theories at work. one is selected that best explains the reality we observe, and then we move forward. Science would not get very far if scientists were determined discover/prove absolute fact before moving forward to the next thing. Scientists act on the faith that they have things mostly figured out correctly. th-cam.com/video/PS63OxfGXgU/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=Unbelievable%3F
@@625098evan what is the evidence of God? Why do you say him? How do you know what any of the qualities of God are? The assumptions in science are not based on pure conjecture. They're based on models that correlate to reality and the reliability of the method proves itself over time. It produces consistent results.
@@DutchManticore I listened to her and I don't agree with much of what she said, which is why I said she is trippin. I didn't make an ad hominem attack on her. Actually you are making one because you're off the point. No one should be followed blindly or absolutely without question.
Rand was atrocious, and her philosophy is awful. holding that the highest good is selfishness. In this video here, for example, she holds that "your mind is valid; that the reality you perceive really exists, and that is epistemology," and this is absolute nonsense. First off, epistemology is the study of knowledge and how we "know." What she describes is akin to solipsism and cannot be defended. For goodness' sake, read some good books; if you need a list, I'll give you one. Peace.
I disagree with you. I don't know what "solipsism" is. I'm sure you're super intelligent. You wrote a lot of words in some academic language that I don't understand. I've disagreed with certain things from Ayn, but for the most part I love her perspective & don't understand your pearl clutching. For goodness sake read some good books! I recommend Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Murray Rothbard, Ludwig Von Mises, Ron Paul, Tom Woods, & Michael Malice.
If you want to help someone and you help that person just because you want to help him ,than you are selfish but if you help that person just that he will think you as a great person and that make you feel good and you will be talked about that is selflessness you are selling your self and what he thinks about you is all what you want ,that is ayn rand
She never implied shallow. And she laways emphesized to be rationally selfish, which is an importnat distinction from the cllasic use of the word "selfish"
@@TheY2K1987 there is no "classic" use. The word "selfish" has always meant only one thing: to act according to YOUR interests. Ayn Rand explains the true nature of YOUR interests from a philosophical point of view.
This is the interview with Ayn Rand that I like most. Tom Snyder was a good interviewer, and it seems to me that she was very comfortable.
You might be one of the stupidest people on the planet
@@BlackBubblesJblack That might be you!
Rand herself said as much IIRC. I remember reading that in a biography of her.
ayn rand saved my life i wish i could thank her in person life is not about suffering and don't listen to the looters that try to make you feel guilty for being happy and living the life you want.
thanks for posting this interview
It's a difficult balance though she most certainly mentally arms everyone and assures them that they have the right to think and act for themselves with no expectation of ode to her. I adore her spin on the term "Selfishness" which almost trades spots with Selflesness and in that sense eliminates expectations to be nice, thus when you are, you genuinely are nice out of your SELF-ishness, in sense actual niceness. I think that her version of selfishness is what most folk get caught up on, when she doesn't really mean it in that sense rather a sense of empowerment to yourself, not entitlement, just you can live your life, and that is far from selfish in the current meaning as everyone can do that! It's like Ayn Randism isn't a philosophy, rather an encouragement for those to adapt a degree of objectivism in their own sense to their own life.
@@MrTredBear loving people for their virtues instead of their vices is also a great message I think. I used to hang around complete losers that technically never screwed me over so I considered them friends. But once I got away I realized just how much they were messing up my life by just existing in it.Same with girlfriends
when she said that her very first manuscript was probably bombed out of existence in Leningrad I was like holy fucking shit. This womans been through some fucking SHIT
well said =)
So happy to have come upon this. Me wondered about the process of writing Atlas Shrugged, keeping the structure and details straight. Very happy to have you address that very thought and so simply. Happy to be in the company of a like mynd and also to recognize from the convo, the legitimacy of all this philosophers' (mei) werk and how ITS specific contributions fit into what was shared here. Time we'll spent ...this. .
Interviewer, It also appreciated yore authenticity and vulnerability.
(me) asking about your grammatical misuse of (i). Is this metaphor or a perhaps a translation issue. Objectively useful in either form imho.
@@Kalopsiage hi. thx for your question. In the fashion of Gurdjieff and certain others who made a practice of referring to self in the third person, it uses ME to force one to acknowledge that the body is not I. Also for me, "perspective is everything". Its being-ness consists of me, myself, and I -- actor, reactor, and observer (as one way of perceiving the three). This writer can and does create flawless grammatical prose. Presently, however, grammatical correctness aids none-at-all in interrupting thought patterns that are largely on autopilot, and merely paying rent on a life barely lived and consciousness not explored to know what is it really -- these actions etc. I call "I." Hope that gives access to some different perspectives that can be considered.
Thank you for posting this interview
So Relevant in 2023
This woman was a genius who was ahead of her time! Down-to-earth wisdom but still brilliant in her philosophy!
Absolute rubbish. She created a philosophy which she claimed to live by and died miserable, despite the fact that she claimed numerous times that it would bring happiness. So fundamentally her philosophy was a failure. She was a cruel woman that cuckolded her husband, hated charity and did nothing but give mean spirited rich people and young people with a sense of failure something to latch onto.
“It’s probably bombed out of existence in Leningrad.” I’ve watched this a couple of times and never caught that part.
At her parents’ house when they died
Oh man, the universities now have gotten far worse.
She was brilliant
26:09
Snyder: "And look at how you have been attacked. How you have been criticized. There have been many people in this country, forgive me, in this world, who think you are daft."
Rand: "They don't. They want you to think that. Others are worried because I'm preaching totally the opposite of the Kantian philosophy by which they live, Kantian and derivatives."
Rand nails it at 17:40: "Today, you are supposed to apologize to every naked savage anywhere on the globe (edit: or your next-door neighbor in the USA) because you are more prosperous, because you have earned your money. You have to feel guilty and apologize for it, while he hasn't and doesn't intend to learn from you. He just wants your money. That's what we're being taught."
How can this be? When Africa has all of the World's resources
@@swordofcarthage1734 For the same reason Western Civilization advancements happened everywhere but Africa.
You do realize what she's preaching is pure psychopathy, right?
So we steal the land from the original people (her racist reference was "naked savages") and then we make the excuse, self interest. This woman is like an old drunk uncle. What a bore.
@@alexander33221 You do realise that you dont even understand the very basics. When she talks about America prospering, you understand that means you right? Youre neighbour, every single american citizen would live better. The entire premise is that it BENEFITS EVERYONE. You just want to keep your handouts and call it "justice". lol
Rand predicted what would roll out of Berkeley years before it happened.
Watching this video is like taking a deep breath of life-saving air.
"Why has it worked for you? Because it's TRUE." Beautifully said.
At the end of her life she was penniless and received government assistance to keep her from languishing on the street as an old woman. Almost like a system based on compassion for all provided for her when her objectivism failed to.
@@Xanlet wrong leonard peikoff was her financial and intellectual heir and pretty sure she was close to a millionaire at the time of her passing this is always brought up and is a lie
@@tomharrison6607 Evva Pryor, who worked as a consultant to the law firm that represented Rand, admitted to helping the aging author and her husband apply for and receive Social Security benefits in the mid-1970s.
In 2010, freelance writer Patia Stephens reported obtaining a Social Security Administration record via FOIA request showing that Ayn Rand collected a total of $11,002 in Social Security payments between 1974 and her death in 1982 (her husband, Frank O'Connor, also collected benefits until his death)
@@Xanlet yes i know that she paid into it so of course she should take it even if i am worth millions when i am old i will still take the old age pension and social security or whatever you want to call it if you paid into it you should get as much back as you can they took money from you by force they didn't ask nicely
@@Xanlet also i am pretty sure the state ie government took more than 11002.00 in taxes her whole life ps if a robber takes your wallet by force on the street and steals the 100.00 that was in there and as he is running away drops a 20.00 bill you are going to keep it not hand it to the robber who just robbed you
Utterly amazing how an interview from 1976 can speaking so articulately and predictably to what is going on in our world today. Go back to the 14:00 mark and tell me she isn't speaking to the mess our world is in right now.
Pretty sure our country is being torn apart not least because of hypercapitalistic, profit-first philosophy similar to that which Ayn Rand championed. I don't think altruism is wrecking our country the same way selfishness is, at least at the top.
@@ElvishShellfish Selfishness is wrecking the whole world.
@@lebe220 Show me any political mechanism that doesn't have an entity in last place? There will always be sets of people lacking. Sets of people at the end of the train. If you want to eliminate selfishness, you'd have to take everything away from anyone who's ever earned anything on their own slot them into the lowest group of unachievers.
It's like sports, isn't it? There's a winner and a loser. Progressives seem to think we should all be winners. Newsflash - it's never happened in the history of man - not will it happen.
@@ElvishShellfish Altruism in our day is expressed by negating and damaging individualism. Today's altruism is the desire to have everyone on a level playing field. Instead, we seek equality by blocking affluence. Blocking innovation. If you do this, then there's no influence by all, and thus you've achieved the altruistic aim of equality. That's what she speaks to. Capitalism doesn't block - it allows freedom of individual skill and innovation.
@@jggallow01 Spiritual people have a different view on who is a winner and who is a loser.
why interviews cant be like this today
So much sense! So many people put others opinions above their own! She is so right! What she is describing is liberalism, pure and simple!
She also describes modern conservatism, with her disdain for government removing peoples rights (Republicans hate gay rights, etc), her disdain for industrialists and capitalists who abuse their governmental sway, which they shouldn't have to begin with, to gain welfare and protection, which modern conservatives seem to hold as proper. She clearly was very objective and didn't swing for one team or the other. Not to mention she also did not support government decisions based on religion, which is in contrast with modern conservatives who believe our government should create laws that restrict rights, and are based on religious ideals. Sure she is clearly referring to liberalism in some ways, but that is most certainly not to say she is the hero of any conservative.
@@ZZ-bt2jr u guys are smoking. conservatism, liberalism? nope. she always HATED conservatism and liberalism, loving only CAPITALISM. conservatism is a disease. conservatism is religion, tradition, original sin - it is not capitalism.
Such an intelligent woman from the past. Incredible to listen to her speak of her time.
Very interesting lady
Thank you for sharing this 💜
What's the mame of the writer she mentioned at 23:20 did she say Dostoevsky? I couldnt find anything about that story she told
Yeah she said Dostoevsky
I haven't respected myself for a while. I've settled. Thanks Ayn for the reminder. I've experienced the toxicity of the mediocre who are envious of my success. My hard work diminishes them.
"No no no you look right at Tom, that will be fine"
Ayn describing herself in school may be the perfect glimpse into what inspired her philosophy. It feels like an unfed, beautiful, perhaps autistic mind looking for that gratification
What a beautiful mind this woman had.
So much of wisdom and intensity even if you don't agree 100% to what this lady says.
The phrase about death is from Epictetus. I love this woman! Her system of thought , her time of voice, the spark of her eyes! An intelligent, confident human being. I'm reading Atlas Shrugged and I can't wait to explore more of her work!
Ayn Rand, ‘Philosopphy: Who Needs It’. Great short read. I wouldn’t say quick.
Absolutely brilliant on both ends
She was angry with Immanuel Kant, a man who had lived 250 years ago. She has been thinking that Kant’s ideas were still the main principles that time; however, Kant had believed in God and his interpretation of God, the absolute reality was impossible and it is true only if you have a God belief; BUT even that day the belief of God was diminishing, so today we don't mind what Kant thought about absolute truth, God. She couldn't see that. Apart from that, I agree that people should use reason more than emotion, but people shouldn't kill the emotion which is making us emotional beings.
It matters when his literature had and still has a very real effect, consequences, and ramifications we still experience to this day, which she mentioned with the colleges.
Talk about an information download!
“Who is John Galt”
The greek philosopher who influenced her was aristotle. She admitted in her 1959 interview he is the only philosopher to of influenced her in her life
Starting at 28:18, it seemed that Snyder started getting snide.
No, not at all. Look at the smile on her face at the end. He wished her the highest possible and she was clearly grateful. I thought this was the best interview with Rand I’ve seen, maybe besides the James Day one.
Imagine Ayn Rand on Joe Rogan!
Objectivism maybe the closest thing I have seen to true divinity
Reality is subjective and it's widely self-demonstrated in the fact that no two people see reality or truth the same way. Everyone has different experiences and reactions in life that shape their current perception of reality and it's happening 24/7 in many small or large increments at any given moment. Even now as you are reading this, your perception shifts in one way or another. Most of the time it happens in such small increments that you don't even notice how much your perception changes in 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, etc.
Reality is not static, it's relative. The kind of world we see is relative to the structure of the sense-organ. The qualities of the external world (texture, color) are possessed by it only in relation to the organism that perceives it. The structure of our visual system confers light and color upon outside energy.
Sound is not something that exists in the external world. Sound is a RELATIONSHIP between vibrating air, and certain kinds of organisms. These organisms confer with the vibrations to create what we call sound, which in an earless world would make no noise.
@@StreetN1ckel why dont you listen to Ayn rand’s refutation to subjectivism. It takes only as much time as you write down your subjectivism.
@@StreetN1ckel In Objectivism, objective means it's based on cognitive thought, and subjective means no cognitive thought, like choosing orange flavour over apple flavour. Things can be relative and objective at the same time.
@@StreetN1ckel two people seeing reality differently have nothing to do with reality which exists as an absolute.
Aristotelian logic: if Trump, then Biden, therefore America crumbles from the inside…
After Trump election this all rings so true , who is with me?
what a beautiful mind.
Wow. Imagine not only having a philosophy, but also never having to change the fundamentals.
why would you?
@@conveyor2 you would do that if you were wrong. but rand is just built different. Idk man
@@johnathanvale8634 I used to be a socialist but realized it was based on wrong fundamentals, so I dropped it. I don't want to waste my life supporting wrong ideas.
@@conveyor2 well, I started out as a moral relativist. I was a blank slate, and very open to knew ideas. I never held a wrong conviction, and I tried to be as intellectually honest as possible.i never had fundamentals, until I found them
@@johnathanvale8634 No you haven't.
14:32
And look whats happened here in America..
I would have given my eye teeth to spar intellectually with Ayn. Would have gotten my ass beat, but, ah, the struggle!!
She's obviously never been to Norway
A high tax mixed economy.. BTW whatever happened to the vaunted Swedish model?
Since she was ‘two and a half’. And just like that is clearly as bonkers as every other philosophy, guru, religion or nut.
Ffs. Disappointed but I should have seen it coming,
Wow, just wow.
Yep. She was an absolute genius & hopefully her writings & videos like this live forever
She is so wise
She has apparently never heard of the American Gilded Age
She is well-educated on all that
14:20 That certainly feels familiar.
When American TV actually delivered some substance.
You have to apologize to every naked savage on this planet.
That’s a winner!
Not comfortable with cameras around
I wonder why
Lol
Can we safely say that Ayn Philosophy contributed to the development the the USA?
No
Sadly probably not. The people who are in power refuse to adopt it, and for very obvious reasons, why the hell would they want to make you strong and wise and confident? Bill gates doesnt want to compete with you, neither does any other big company, why would they make strong competitors, that benefits society and the world, but it doesnt benefit them,
Thank God
Talking about gas lines, distrust b/n nations etc here we are again.
beautiful mind, explaining what is real self love. I believe people intuitively will follow her philosophy. Remember what Jesus was saying, God choose the simple people, not the priesthood, not the "intellectual" elites
17:40 🫡
28:06
18:01 Emmanuel Kant
Biden should be made to listen to her .
Biden has already heard it a million times. He knows better--and so should you.
Biden will just hear noises he cannot process
😍AYN
I love her.
Me too.
All is Mind.
But what is mind without heart?
Believing that your spirit will live on once your physical being dies, is an egotistical view to rationalize the finite existence we all have.
Best outro of all time
@Camp Wire reference?
very much agree. believing you are somehow special and deserve to carry on after death is, in my opinion, the pinnacle of narcissism
@@charliehooper8679 I have to disagree with you. I hope there is an afterlife I mean there probably isnt. But my point is that believing in a afterlife is usually not out of selfishness or narcissistic desire but a form of coping with the idea of death.
@@Daud-ix4tm if you believe in the after life because of fear of death and its your coping mechanism then you deny death itself. You deny the reality that you are going to die and that others before have died as well.
Rand's philosophies had glaring gaps
1. Altruism and self sacrifice is bad?
Okay, but America and every other nation was built on personal sacrifice. People who served in the military and sacrificed everything including their lives being a prime example
Also, in order for altruism to be wrong you essentially have to believe that the receiver's of that altruism have and will never have value
2. Your primary motivation should be obtaining personal happiness through productive output?
Okay how do you build fellowship or a community?
If everybody is solely concerned with the happiness of themselves and the small number of people they personally care about, whilst simultaneously desperately trying to be productive would that create a pleasant society?
Like most well thought out philosophies Rand's has merits but struggles in practical application
you don't know how to think. i read the first lines and i won't even read more. 'personal sacrifice' xd, you know nothing about anything. give up.
Along with Aind Ryand..... I am also trumbling ....... its no effort for me..... it is very basic
Hmmmm
Ironically Ayn Rand's statement on death was very eastern and very Christian/catholic.
how so.
Rand said: "I will not die, its the world that will end." That statement is the fundamental principle of what the Catholics believe in afterlife. Catholics believe: "Life does not end, life changes." The rest is for you to think about.
nope. i knew that reading these comments would trigger me
no one gets ayn rand, no one understands her
it is just so sad to read people's opinion on ayn rand
it's incredibly frustrating how no one understands anything she says because she's too intelligent for most of you
@@beyond_hell I am agnostic. However, according to Roman Catholic theism when it comes to death, Catholics believe life does not end, rather it changes (form). This aligns with Rand's perspective that at death, you don't die, the world dies. I.e. life does not end. Life changes.
I took a class in political philosophy in college many years ago and it was taught by a gentleman who was devoted to Ayn Rand. I have never thought much of her - in fact, I think her “philosophy” is a lot of simplistic nonsense although I share her atheism. Her ethos of selfishness offends my moral sense. I don’t think she understands anything about capitalism or socialism at all. She renounces emotions and altruistic ethics and makes a fetish of reason and self-interest.
Watch her interview with Phil Donahue, I have it on my channel. Phil is a liberal offering good push back throughout the interview, might help you understand her perspective. I think history before & after Ayn Rand supports much of her conclusions.
this isnt an attack or trying to have a dig. you clearly know your stuff since youve studied it and im sure your very intelligent. this is just me trying to help you understand what Ayn Rand is really trying to say and see the more positive side of the philosophy.
the fact that her ethos of self interest offends your moral sense proves everything she is talking about. all shes saying is that its okay to take pride and acknowledge your own value. and you shouldnt be responsible for giving others value. the result is a far more happier life where your not constantly sacrificing yourself just to please others who dont appreciate it or do the same in return. it advocates a strong sense of self esteem and self respect which has never been more lost than in todays society with the younger generation. look at cancel culture for example. Ayn Rand managed to foresee the social issues of self degradation before it even hit. Objectivism provides a way to live free from the judgement of others.and on that front she absolutely right. Look at the sky rocketing Mental Health cases and suicide rates. it all come back to the persons self image and what you call selfishness. I shall leave you with this thought:
"Selfishness is misinterpreted: it does not mean exploiting others or putting others down for personal gain; but rather it means working in harmony with others to achieve your personal goal and aspirations. You can be selfish without being immoral. All Ayn Rand is saying is that is if you are sacrificing yourself or giving yourself to others at the cost of your own happiness, you are doing yourself and society a great dis-service. because it shows you lack acknowledgement of your own value. you must believe you are worth something and you are valuable."
and thus Ayn Rand says; altruism is inherently evil. it demands sacrifice. and it has proven to be devastating. we now live in a world were taking pride in yourself is immoral and selfishness and arrogant. if you think you are special or something of a good person your are classed as egotistical. They say to believe in yourself to achieve, but you have to give credit to others when you eventually succeed. And to accept the fact that you worked for your success and you earned it and should reap the rewards and profits of your own exploits is essentially taboo. which is what Rand was saying towards the end of the interview about getting criticised for her success.
As for her understanding of capitalism and socialism. she does. she lived it. she lived through soviet Russia. communist china. she lived through the Nazi's and the Cuban crisis. History has proven and justified her opinions and views. and the fact is that communism and socialism cannot be put into practise. because it leads to the sacrifice of men. people become disposable and have no worth under a communist or socialist regime. Communist china had the worst man made famine in history killing over 100 million people in the name of industrialisation and progress. the Nazi's and WW2. The Soviet union and the Cold War, and the civil war, and the millions that died building propaganda projects that were never used (the White Sea canal). So I would say she absolutely knows about socialism and communism. I wont speak about capitalism because im not well versed in it because im not a huge fan of economics. im definately more a social studies kinda guy than politics or economics so I cant talk about that. I urge you to read up or I can send you some documentaries if you would like about the communist and socialist regimes and even give you the official doctrine of Karl Marx and the communist manifesto because it is really fascinating.
I'm going to repeat myself here, this isnt an attack or trying to have a dig. you clearly know your stuff since youve studied it and im sure your very intelligent. this is just me trying to help you understand what Ayn Rand is really trying to say and see the more positive side of the philosophy instead of just narrowly thinking that selfishness or self interest is a bad thing. you should be able to live for yourself. not just other people. if you took the time to read all this I really appreciate it and your entitled to your own opinion in the end of the day..
You almost sound religious there..
you know nothing. i hope you've changed, because if u didn't, my boy, just give up on everything.
No brag just facts but she is Russian oy vey
If Objectivism was a philosohy it became a cult quicker than any religion.
I don't understand your point. I'm not an objectivist. I love aym rand on most issues. I've listened to people who consider themselves objectivists. I don't understand the cult label.
You don't understand the meaning of 'cult'.
Popper (Open society) and A.v.Hayek (Road to Serfdom) are more concise.
That's as may be, but those are entirely different philosophers. Rand thought Hayek would only endorse half-measures and compromises.
1,3,21
Ayn tried to seduce Tom
I ran after watching this monstrosity of backwards justification for selfishness.
“Use another word: self-esteem”. Clearly u run too much and listen too little
What a hypocrite! Government benefits constitute immoral redistribution of wealth, yet she drew social security.
I've heard that talking point before & find it so stupid. Look at your paycheck. You by force pay into social security. If you happen to not agree with the program that has been taking money from you every year of your entire working life. How are you under some moral obligation to forfeit all that money robbed from you in the first place to the very government you don't approve of. It seriously is a fucking retarded argument. You forfeit any appeal to morality trying to falsely paint a dead person as a hypocrit just because you want your student loan debts forgiven.
Cliche remark debunked many times.
it's her money?
So....people who oppose forced redistribution of wealth are hypocrites for recapturing the wealth they were forced to surender to the scheme. Cool story
She never had children so never had to think about anyone else but herself.
Having children is thinking of oneself. They don't get here without the desire to have them by their parents. Selfishness is in many forms but the foundation is " I want this" or " I want that" but selfishness sometimes affects others ( ie. Bringing an unconsenting child into the world) versus not affecting others ( ie. Remaining childfree)
While religions like Christianity and Judaism aren’t perfect, they are largely backed up by reason and rationality. So rand is wrong on that front. Also, rand greatly overestimates the rationality of human beings. Check out the website or book named: you are not so smart… In order to see several dozen ways in which humans are not smart or rational.
The great thing about a religion like Christianity is that it was founded by one of the smartest and most emotionally and spiritually advanced humans to ever exist. I went to a top 25 American university and graduated in the top 10% of my class there, but Jesus was way smarter than me and had tons more wisdom than me… And more than almost anyone on earth today or in the last 2000 years. I’ve gained far more by tapping into his wisdom than when I had just tried to use only my own rationality. Furthermore, I have also greatly benefited from connecting with the love and peace of God. Those are two massive benefits that are not available with Rands approach. Also, keep in mind that rand was a messed up person and her philosophy didn’t help her much. She was depressed, she was angry, she was vengeful and she was often irrational and emotional. Her life is basically an advertisement for choosing some other path than her philosophy.
In fact, I would readily choose following any of the world‘s major religions over following her philosophy.
reason and rationality? religions believe in 'immaterial', they are against objectivism, against reason.they are against the law of identity, they believe that one thing is another thing. please, don't be stuuuuuuuuuuuadfi0sssssfjiokdfofd
"Rule your life based on reason not emotion" - from a married woman who had an affair with her best friend's husband 20 years her junior.
To continue to try to cast shade on Ayn Rand's work 50 years later because she had an affair with someone younger who wasn't even underage is ridiculous. You aren't alone. I've received many comments like this on Ayn Rand videos. It really shows how much you anti freedom folk don't have any real arguments to support empire.
yikes
Like today's political atmosphere, attack on virtues.
yeah governments threaten you with prison if you dont pay your taxes, religions threaten you with infinite torture if you dont pay your tax - I can see why she's totally opposed to one but loves the other. religions certainly don't threaten or coerce you, right? you just made a perfectly rational choice to follow your congregation or become ostracized
She hates both
she is brilliant, but I don't agree with what she said about religion. I am Christian. While I am capable of having emotional religious experiences, those came much after I realized that it is very likely that there is a self aware creator, and that is it quite likely that Jesus is who he said he is. therefore my faith is a rational response to the reality that my human senses interact with. I have to suggest that Christianity falls into, or under objectivism. it is not separate from it.
You're deluded - religion as in belief in a god is not compatible with objectivism.
You cannot show that a god exists or measure its effects on the world and be certain that the effects you propose are attributable to it. There's no reasonable justification for a belief in God.
@@nuvz66, there are all sorts of non-metaphysical things that we have theories about, but that we do not yet have the technology to measure or discover. there are things in science that require faith. much is unknown. the pursuit of science is the pursuit of the unknown.
and there have been academic studies done on miracles and other religious experiences.
@@625098evan I'm not sure that faith is a part of science. If a theory suggests something is possible then it's a matter of developing technique and tools to persue your hypothesis. You still start out with a decent model based on facts.
The fact that science can investigate a religious miracle claim isn't evidence for it by the fact it's been looked into.
There's no evidence of God whatever. You don't know what you're looking for or how to measure it or its precise nature. Science would simply say 'case open - we don't know' - that's an honest answer. You're adding in things which you don't even know if it's a possibility. You don't know that god's do or can exist.
@@nuvz66, science investigating religious claims would suggest that there is something being looked for and measured. unless it is crap science, which is a claim that you might like to make, as you are here to win an argument, not exchange ideas. evidence is not proof. God remain un-provable, but there is evidence of him.
some assumptions have to be made in science just to move forward. most of what we have are theories. there are often multiple theories at work. one is selected that best explains the reality we observe, and then we move forward. Science would not get very far if scientists were determined discover/prove absolute fact before moving forward to the next thing. Scientists act on the faith that they have things mostly figured out correctly.
th-cam.com/video/PS63OxfGXgU/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=Unbelievable%3F
@@625098evan what is the evidence of God? Why do you say him? How do you know what any of the qualities of God are?
The assumptions in science are not based on pure conjecture. They're based on models that correlate to reality and the reliability of the method proves itself over time. It produces consistent results.
#1 She is trippin. #2 Who is she that we should be listening to her?
You might want to investigate the merit of her arguments instead of trying to divert to Ad hominem
@@DutchManticore I listened to her and I don't agree with much of what she said, which is why I said she is trippin. I didn't make an ad hominem attack on her. Actually you are making one because you're off the point. No one should be followed blindly or absolutely without question.
@@Outta12 she’s a philosopher. Who the fuck are you
she is the most intelligent person that ever stepped on earth and if u don't agree, then u have no iq
Tom is a horrible interviewer. He seems above his level of intellect here.
If you ever go through psychosis you will know God exists
Interesting, would you please elaborate?
#Hero
⁰
Rgv 🤩🤩
Rand was atrocious, and her philosophy is awful. holding that the highest good is selfishness. In this video here, for example, she holds that "your mind is valid; that the reality you perceive really exists, and that is epistemology," and this is absolute nonsense. First off, epistemology is the study of knowledge and how we "know." What she describes is akin to solipsism and cannot be defended. For goodness' sake, read some good books; if you need a list, I'll give you one. Peace.
I disagree with you. I don't know what "solipsism" is. I'm sure you're super intelligent. You wrote a lot of words in some academic language that I don't understand. I've disagreed with certain things from Ayn, but for the most part I love her perspective & don't understand your pearl clutching. For goodness sake read some good books! I recommend Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Murray Rothbard, Ludwig Von Mises, Ron Paul, Tom Woods, & Michael Malice.
Rational self-interest isn't the same as selfishness. Rand's philosophy is based on the former, not the latter.
If you want to help someone and you help that person just because you want to help him ,than you are selfish but if you help that person just that he will think you as a great person and that make you feel good and you will be talked about that is selflessness you are selling your self and what he thinks about you is all what you want ,that is ayn rand
She says to be a morally virtuous person by doing what is best FOR YOU. I'm not sure why that's so atrocious.
She born Jewish but know nothing about it. SAD.
What she's basically saying is that it's perfectly fine to be a shallow & selfish person.
Not selfish in the popular understanding of the word. Rationally selfish.
Shallow, no - quite the opposite. Rationally selfish, yes.
Your comment is a perfect example of irony. Not to mention, projection.
She never implied shallow. And she laways emphesized to be rationally selfish, which is an importnat distinction from the cllasic use of the word "selfish"
@@TheY2K1987 there is no "classic" use. The word "selfish" has always meant only one thing: to act according to YOUR interests.
Ayn Rand explains the true nature of YOUR interests from a philosophical point of view.
21:01
26:09