Nietzsche or Ayn Rand?

Hello Acmepride, Now this is a topic to sink one's teeth into. Sorry I didn't find it earlier. Let me preface by saying that it's been decades since I last read "Thus Spoke Zarathustra". And little else of the Nihilist philosophy made an impression on my psyche. I simply do not buy into the supposition that life need be all that difficult. Criminy, the Nihilist road to the 'overman' is just about the biggest bummer I can think of. Now that's not to say that there is value in Nietzsche's thoughts, because there is. Yet, I disagree with the basic premise that to be of value, it must be accompanied by strife and anguish. Nihilism decries the basic truth (for me, that is) that God is benevolence, manifest. On the other hand, Ms. Rand is undeniably one of my personal heroes! For eighty years she has been erroneously equated with selfishness. Objectivism has nothing to do with selfishness. Rather, it is the struggle against collectivism, or in today's terms, Socialism/Communism. Had the world of intelligencia taken her more seriously in the 1930s, we might have avoided Karl Marx's utopic bastardizations (USSR, Cuba, Venezuela ...) altogether. I believe Ayn Rand's wee, little book "Anthem" most accurately exposes the concepts behind Objectivism. "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead" were scourned because of the basic misunderstanding of the protaganists reasons for placing the 'self' above the 'collective'. Let's face it, there can be no collective without the self. Ms. Rand accurately understood man's need to self-actualize. Self-actualization is a naughty term to collectivists. Mankind's road to enlightenment is the road of each individual's enlightenment. If the basic characteristics of mankind are not explored and reconciled by the individual, then mankind has no hope of ever reaching any new paradigms in consciousness. The 'one' must never be sacrificed for the sake of the whole. Because the whole's very existence depends on the existence of its individual components. Ms. Rand never contradicted the basic rules of decency, set down by virtually all unrelated civilizations through history. Her message was for each individual to advance themselves, while abiding by the rules of decency, so that one man's elevation leads to the next man's elevation, and so on and so forth. Ms. Rand's character Howard Roarke, from "The Fountainhead" perfectly embodied the individual Ms. Rand sought to inspire. He recognized the collective attachment to adherence, obedience, and archaic/obsolete restrictions. And, sought to seek a more advanced vision of what could be. Without the Howard Roarke's of the world, we would never have medical advancement, engineering advancement, technological advancement, etc... In summary, the spark of creativity is never divided equally amongst all. The 'one' must always take the lead, that others may benefit from his vision, thereby seeking their own advancement. It comes down to this basic difference: I can accomplish anything (says Objectivism), or I can only accomplish what I'm told is allowable (says collectivism). Oh, and for the Nihilists it would be: I can accomplish most anything, but man it's gonna' suck getting there!

I really haven't read any Ayn Rand... I think I have a book on my shelf - I just haven't had the time yet. I have read a lot of Nietzsche and I can agree to an extent with a lot of what he has to say. I enjoy reading about the existentialist philosophy - just not as depressing as most of them were. I think that the better philosophy to follow - would be a balance of the two ideas. As in Buddhism - don't go to either extreme, but walk the middle ground.

I am a fan of Ayn Rand and have read most of her works. I love Fountain Head and Atlas Shrugged. FountainHead is a small book and easy to read and it stirrs our conscience. It leads us towards perfection. It shows how to handle our crisis. I infact suggest this book to every young person so that they can draw a leaft or two to make their life more interesting and more challegining I mean to emulate the characteristics of Howard Roark.

...both to me seem a little self centered.. Nietzsche can't get past his own intense anger.. and Ayn Rand, If I'm remembering correctly, seemed to think one's own path is so important even if you have to sort of disregard even elbow others.. I'm way more altruistic and of a one global family mindset, where all are enlightened, just all differently.. Nietzsche never pondered the free-will of man and how that might have influenced life as we know it?! And if the universe, as Ms Rand portrays, truly is survival of the fittest, I find that to be a cold hard, even an iron universe.. It's impossible. Never could endure, it's way too imperfect, which imperfection is the root of all disintegration.. So such a thing is transitory at best, and cannot be ultimate reality.

I have read all of Ayn Rand's books many years ago and found they to be profound and thought provoking I have to agree with her, I haven't read any thing by Nietzsche so I can not comment on that, but Ayn Rand was a way a head of her time and now we are into the me society and here words are needed more and more

I'm not familiar with Nietzsche but Ayn Rand is kind of insane in my opinion. I've read the Fountainhead which has some good ideas but the relationship between Howard Roark and Dominique Francon, in my mind, should NOT be idealized. It's abusive and twisted (not that a lot of popular book couples aren't) and it seems like the man's ego is the only one that really matters. I wasted a large chunk of time reading that book and didn't get the scholarship :(

I read Ayn Rand, that book about everyone had to be as intelligent and work to achieve the same level as the lower intelligent person, so that not so smart person would not feel so hurt. I gather there are lots of people who read her book and some in government circles, because now we cannot call a person mentally retarded or crippled, because we might hurt their feelings and they may cry, boo hoo. I watched the Fountainhead on Tv and I liked it. I do not admire her philosophy nor that of Nietzsche (although I did love Conan the Barbarian and Conan the Destroyer and have them on Vhs) because I do believe not everything that goes against you makes you stronger. Sometimes it is the opposite. I believe that Hitler was a disciple of Nietzche so there is a warning there.