AGAINST INVESTING IN RAND It’s a dead topic. Rands arguments are not bad. It’s h

AGAINST INVESTING IN RAND

It’s a dead topic. Rands arguments are not bad. It’s her followers that tend to be the problem for her philosophy not her work itself.

She made philosophy accessible through literature. But in doing so included those incapable of its mastery, and who instead thrash quotes about like chimps with sticks.

The more relevant question is why in an age of science one would even try to employ rationalism given that the language of discourse is now science, economics and law.

What this means is that the bar to discourse has been raised leaving rationalism ( noncontradiction) behind.

Cooperation is a scientific problem, not

And so you burn energy defending what you understand but which is of no political or innovative value.

Liberty is a genetic preference of a permanent minority. Rand can merely justify that preference and insulate it from moral critique.

But other than that defense there is no solution there and no value there .

And the more opportunity cost you waste on that malinvestment the less investment you make in something useful with which to transform the world and advance existential Liberty.

Science, economics law.