How do you deny something for which there is no evidence?
That is some narcissistic God you have there. Punishing a human for acting as it made her. That freewill excuse will not work for you, since omniscience sees all future actions of a human, unless your god has lost its omniscience.

IMHO, a human sitting there turned off would be a John Galt.

been there..Good point, but I still feel stupidity has an equal danger, especially when coupled with arrogance..as we have observed throughout the last 7 years of inept leadership in Washington

Is there really such a thing as intelligence without reason? I don't think so. Just saying.

"...intelligence will only carry one so far."

Intelligence not guided by reason is the most dangerous thing in the universe.

Bullseye !!!!!

+10

Chambers is a Statist Gasbag.

Certainly. I will be glad to. Why not start another discussion? Not trying to be evasive or snotty...it's just off topic for this discussion.

Buckley was a right wing Statist. It shouldn't surprise anyone that there was a hit piece in his magazine back then. Guess what? He's dead and no longer has a say. If you are critical of the recent articles, is it because you believe National Review moved to the too far Left, or too far Right?

I think that its a bad idea to associate too much, or trust too much, anyone who is really into religion. You never know what their "god" will tell them to do.

When it comes to muslims, I really want nothing to do with them. I dont want to help them at all, since they openly say they want to kill infidels (me !!)

Would you please elaborate on your disagreement?

In a way, that is better than those who in a few sentences just dismiss Rand with "just naive realism", or "it isn't literature", or "it is just escapist fantasy", or "about a lot of people who think they are better than others". The first I read of such a comment was in a history coarse in 1963 in Riesman's "The Lonely Crowd", as a comment about those who would mention "The Fountainhead" in his class. I did not read Rand's works until 1965, as recommend by a guy, whose subscription had been cancelled to "The Objectivist" for asking a question wrongly. An other book with that type of dismissal was "The Closing of the American Mind" (1987). I read Atlas Shrugged while waiting to see if I would be made to be cannon fodder in Vietnam.

I, too, recently re-read Atlas and came away from it with a deeper appreciation of what that book really says. For too many years, I accepted the typical diatribe that Rand was a clunky writer and that her book was just another form of science fiction.

I read it once when I was a teen, once again in my 30's, and now in my late 50's. Even though I had a built-in bias against her as an artist, and even though I hold a bachelors degree in literature, I found Atlas to be stimulating and...emotional. I surprised myself when, upon finishing a section during which Hank Reardon has a soliloquy in his head describing his deep loneliness, I found myself in tears. What? When was the last time I was moved to tears by a piece of fiction...never? Especially with a story I've read multiple times? Atlas can be unbelievably beautiful and powerful.

I acknowledge that Rand sometimes used unusual imagery or clunky verbiage ("inter-office-communicator" anyone?), but those flaws pale in comparison to the powerful passages.

I always keep in mind that Rand was not a native English speaker, and that she learned some of her craft from writing for Hollywood (it shows most in her melodramatic love scenes). This may keep her out of the ranks of the truly polished writers, but is it better to write well or have something valid to say? I've not seen many writers who could do both.

Here's why I disagree with Chambers: : https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...

What a belligerent, antagonistic, pedantic fool.

The review by Whittwker Chambers was a lot of hot air. Yes, it took some fortitude to read all that morass. Critics are not visionary, they can't see the future. Everything that is happening today is what Ayn Rand wrote about. She saw man (men & women) could become producers and innovators if the govt would get out of the way. The astronomical regulations that is imposed on American Industry stifles innovation and productivity.

To this, I would have to say "Read it, yourself and draw your own conclusions...don't just take another's word for it".

That is less a review, than an arrogant diatribe, seeking to discredit the book and author with nothing more than philosophical ranting. yet isn't this the same national review that almost 50 years later is attacking Trump? Makes me sort of want to like Trump...not enough, but sort of..

Now that is absolutely superb! Wraps it all up nice and neat.

excellent

lol

RE: "author, dodging into fiction"
Interesting point especially when falling back on religion is the biggest dodge of all in a debate.