Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ayn Rand Really, Really Hated C.S. Lewis
First Things ^ | March 27, 2013 | Matthew Schmitz

Posted on 05/11/2013 12:12:17 PM PDT by JerseyanExile

Ayn Rand was no fan of C.S. Lewis. She called the famous apologist an “abysmal bastard,” a “monstrosity,” a “cheap, awful, miserable, touchy, social-meta­physical mediocrity,” a “pickpocket of concepts,” and a “God-damn, beaten mystic.” (I suspect Lewis would have particularly relished the last of these.)

These insults and more can be found in her marginal notes on a copy of Lewis’ Abolition of Man, as printed in Ayn Rand’s Marginalia: Her critical comments on the writings of over 20 authors, edited by Robert Mayhew. Excerpts appear below, with Lewis’ writing (complete with Rand’s highlighting and underlining) on the left and Rand’s notes on the right.

(Excerpt) Read more at firstthings.com ...


TOPICS: Religion; Science; Society
KEYWORDS: abolitionofman; atheism; atheists; aynrand; cslewis; cslewismysticism; evilwoman; lewis; libertarians; magic; medicalmarijuana; misquoting; objectivism; pages; rand; randians; science; tao; theology
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-179 next last
To: reasonisfaith; OldNavyVet

As John Lennox of Oxford University points out: the theory of evolution presumes the existence of a mutating replicator, but it tells us nothing about how the mutating replicator got there in the first place.

The specific problem involves this: a certain number of highly complex genes must have been present in the very first theoretical living cell in order for it to produce more organisms.


141 posted on 05/12/2013 11:35:16 AM PDT by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: driftless2
Rand seems to sneer at those who aren't at the top. Nevertheless, they're important too. It's not just the "great men" who make the modern world possible. It's everybody doing their part...great and small. Rand seems to have missed that

The odd thing is, she actually did seem to have noticed it, or at least to have had some intuition about it, but didn't know what to do about it. It's been years since I've read her work, but I remember in Atlas Shrugged, she had two characters who supported her philosophy but weren't "great men": Dagny's childhood friend and her sister-in-law. Rand killed off both characters; I believe they both despaired. It was like Rand couldn't imagine what such characters would do in the world she dreamed of creating.

142 posted on 05/12/2013 11:51:19 AM PDT by Kanakabaraka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: driftless2
But even the not so great or so-called takers, as Rand might put it, make wealth possible.

Isolating this specific sentence from your post for a reason: What do the "takers" contribute to our society that makes wealth possible?

When the takers get their "free" Obamaphones, how does that benefit you and I? Fact is, it does NOT. I'll be very specific in my response in saying that Non-American nationals like Carlos Slim of Mexico, a billionaire benefits because he's plugged into the Obama White House. The same Obama White House that's paying 3x, 5x the cost of the phone, the service, and cannot control the program and the corruption within it.

How does that benefit you and I? It doesn't. The "takers" DO NOT PROVIDE ANY BENEFIT to a Capitalistic society whatsoever, thus their name, "takers."

You and I have become tax slaves to "feed the takers." They eat by using the force of the Federal Government via their votes to redistribute our hard earned wealth to them. They drive cars, because our wealth is taken from us by force of Government, and re-distributed to them. They watch cable tv and have all the benefits of our society without contributing one iota of effort to it. The problem: They outnumber us at this point and they vote. They vote each and ever election for bigger, more government to steal my/our wealth, and redistribute it to their no good lazy government cheese eating fat lazy asses. That to me means NOTHING this government does at any level is via my "consent."

My voice is not heard, my voice does not matter to this Government. The only thing that DOES matter to this government is that I keep working so they can keep stealing the results of my labors, and re-distribute it to the TAKERS.

Are those the takes you mean, or did you have a different definition of the word?

143 posted on 05/12/2013 11:55:04 AM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Menehune56

She pegged the left in her novels, but her idea of good guys was awful.


144 posted on 05/12/2013 12:06:29 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
YIKES!!!

Dear Ms. Rand (wherever you are): If the shoe fits, wear it.

Thanks so much for writing, grey_whiskers!

145 posted on 05/12/2013 12:20:20 PM PDT by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: OldNavyVet

These kinds of logical problems present a very serious challenge to Rand’s ideology, given that her atheism seems to be fundamental to her ideology and these problems describe reality in terms which refute atheistic naturalism.


146 posted on 05/12/2013 12:23:47 PM PDT by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: OldNavyVet

According to the Bible, Genesis in fact, our days are not God’s days. Ours are but the blink of an eye.


147 posted on 05/12/2013 12:41:25 PM PDT by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: BCrago66
Your moral thinking has never progressed beyond that of a 5-year old or a literal savage. You cannot conceive of the operation of moral principles in the world - that’s apparently beyond your intellectual capacity - so all you can do is rely on supernatural rewards and punishments, the equivalent of Mommy or Daddy giving you extra desert, or swatting your behind.

You're suffering from a Prometheus complex. I'll send liver.

The answer is that you seem to be neglecting the concept of legitimate authority and deserved loyalty.

Cheers!

148 posted on 05/12/2013 1:17:02 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: usconservative

I’m not talking about the real takers/parasites who don’t do a lick of work and expect everybody else to house and feed them...I’m talking about the millions who work hard for not-rich wages. Rand seems to think little of those people. But they contribute as well. That’s all. It’s not just a tiny groups of technical and financial geniuses who make the country work (many of whom vote for Obama). It’s everybody who works hard and loves their country.


149 posted on 05/12/2013 3:13:57 PM PDT by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: driftless2; usconservative

>> “I’m not talking about the real takers/parasites who don’t do a lick of work and expect everybody else to house and feed them...I’m talking about the millions who work hard for not-rich wages. Rand seems to think little of those people” <<

.
Little? - She detested them; she was an admirer of the ultra-wealthy. (especially those that did absolutely nothing to deserve their wealth.


150 posted on 05/12/2013 3:28:38 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

You sound like them “occupy wall street” idiots I have to push my way past every day to get to work ... sure you’re on the right forum?


151 posted on 05/12/2013 3:59:32 PM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

“she was an admirer of the ultra-wealthy. (especially those that did absolutely nothing to deserve their wealth.”

You obviously haven’t read Atlas Shrugged, or if you did you did not comprehend it.


152 posted on 05/12/2013 3:59:38 PM PDT by Okieshooter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Okieshooter

You nailed it.


153 posted on 05/12/2013 4:01:10 PM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Okieshooter

I comprehended it quite well.


154 posted on 05/12/2013 4:05:01 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: usconservative

I’m on the right forum, but apparently you are not?

You apparently support the unproductive marxist socialist idle class?


155 posted on 05/12/2013 4:06:41 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

“I comprehended it quite well.”

Your posts suggest otherwise.

http://youtu.be/qYJtHd28BXU


156 posted on 05/12/2013 4:13:18 PM PDT by Okieshooter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: JerseyanExile

For the naturalist (such as Ayn Rand), joy is peripheral while sorrow is central. This is because the superficial questions of life are answered but the fundamental questions are unanswered.

For the Christian (C.S. Lewis), sorrow is peripheral and joy is central. Superficial questions are unanswered, but the fundamental questions of life are answered.

(from G.K. Chesterton)


157 posted on 05/12/2013 4:20:48 PM PDT by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Okieshooter

You have created the false god you worship under the name Ayn Rand. I commented on the real one.


158 posted on 05/12/2013 4:47:06 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

That is the essence.


159 posted on 05/12/2013 4:48:43 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Atlas Shrugged is has really nothing to do with religion and god, but with of a free market as opposed to crony capitalism.

As far as her religion, she was an atheist and I do not agree with her on that. Most likely the real god you speak of is not the one I believe in, but that has nothing to do with what is being discussed here. There is really no point in discussing our religious differences, because I fully understand your commitment to what you believe and that makes it impossible for you to understand mine.


160 posted on 05/12/2013 5:00:53 PM PDT by Okieshooter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-179 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson