Francisco's money speech was not a new definition of morality/ethics. It was an application of objectivist ethics, the idea that money is a tool and the user determines its value. If anything is similar to content to the Sermon on the Mount, it is Galt's radio address. Here is a bit more of what Rand said on morality; http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/morali...

try to look past the simplistic notions of what they literally said and try to think about their environment, how they framed their message, the mindsets of their audience, etc. There is much more at play here than "these men's beliefs are not the same and therefore have nothing in common."

wow..that is a gross simpification of my comment. It's not just that they are speaking about morality. It's that they are challenging the misguided cultural assumptions of morality. yes, their philosophies are opposed, but that is not the point. The point is that in the same way that Jesus Christ sought to radically alter our perceptions on right and wrong, D'anconia sought to do the same by proposing something that sounded preposterous for that time: that greed is actually a virtue (much like jesus in saying to love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.)

try to look past the simplistic notions of what they literally said and try to think about their environment, how they framed their message, the mindsets of their audience, etc. There is much more at play here than "these men's beliefs are not the same and therefore have nothing in common."

How else is a speech given if not in front of or broadcast to a crowd?

So you are asserting that the two speeches are similar because:
a) They are both speaking about morality to a crowd
and
b) They are diametrically opposed

Using that same logic (?!) , any of Hitler's speeches are connected to a sermon by the rabbi of your local synagogue.

I acknowledge that the morality of D'anconia is not a cent similar to Jesus Christ. But that is part of the beautiful contrast in my view. Can you truly not see the resemblance between the rhetoric of D'anconia, who defends the desire of money as something to be praised to a culture that found it abhorrent, and Jesus Christ, who defends humility and meekness as something to be blessed to a culture that found such things shameful?

With respect, jesus preaching to a crowd has more in common with any other preacher (real or imaginary) than with D'anconia's assault on that very morality. D'anconia simply points out the true meaning and root of money in shockingly plain language, daring to expose that the emporer (the money is the root of all evil platitude) has no clothes. Jesus' "sermon" was pablum in comparison - blessing the meek and the peacemakers and whatnot.

i like frankonia on my waffles.

fred: one can see on the surface how tyler may see what he sees being that FD was a student at the Patrick Henry University and a friend of JG, therefore being at least worthy of attracting a flock in which to impart wisdom? Maybe?

They ARE both fictional characters speaking to crowds, and so I suppose in the broadest sense there are superficial similarities - of course Willy Wonka talking to the parents and children in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory also fits that bill, as does most any fictional character speaking to a group.

its ok sanfrancisco

I beg to differ. Read over that scene one more time. d'Anconia gathers eager listeners, just like sermon on the mount. He radically establishes a new way to look at moral issues, just like sermon on the mount. He teaches using real life examples, just like sermon on the mount. the similarities are striking.

There simply is no connection nor correlation between the two.

None whatsoever.

My apologies. The character is actually d'Anconia. Please have mercy on the fool who hasn't read the book for over a year ;)

Welcome to The Gulch tylerhernandez09. I'm going to have to think about that one for a minute.

"frankonia" - I laughed so hard! I love it. Sounds like a children's food. "I'll have some cheese franconia please."