Day at Night: Ayn Rand, author, "Atlas Shrugged"

Host James Day interviews philosopher and writer Ayn Rand, who explains her philosophy of objectivism and offers her concept of the ideal man. Rand also discusses her thoughts on rationality, love, morality, free will, and art. She describes her early determination to become a writer, and the ideas encompassed in her influential novels, The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. Taped at WNET in New York.
Day at Night originally aired on public television from 1973-1974. This episode was restored by CUNY Television. (Taped: 03/29/74)
CUNY TV is proud to re-broadcast newly digitized episodes of DAY AT NIGHT, the popular public television series hosted by the late James Day. Day was a true pioneer of public television: co-founder of KQED in San Francisco, president of WNET upon the merger of National Educational Television (NET) and television station WNDT/Channel 13, and most recently, Chairman of the CUNY TV Advisory Board. The series features fascinating interviews with notable cultural and political figures conducted in the mid 1970's.
Watch more at www.tv.cuny.edu/series/dayatnight

[@radwizard]

When I was younger, back in 2004.... I was having a conversation with some fellow shipmates when I was commercial fishing in Alaska. I was saying things that aligned with Ayn Rand. The Boatswain on the ship asked me if I ever read Atlas Shrugged. I told him I hadn't. Himself and another person was blown away. I was handed The Fountainhead when we got back to land. I was told that this book should speak to me. I came to these thoughts from on my own,,, I though it was self evident. When I read Fountainhead, I found it very powerful... I clearly remember the overwhelming feeling of realizing I wasn't alone in the way I think. I finally wasn't alone.... other's thought like I did. At that time in my life, I had spent about 7 years in Portland and never liked or respected the culture there. I often was at odds with people. I followed up with Atlas Shrugged. Ayn Rand had a profound affect on me. Fast Forward and I have a degree in Mathematics, Philosophy, and I'm a Physicist.... and a Business owner. She had a profoundly positive influence on my life. Edit: I should say, she put words and crystalized what I had deep feelings about. She is the perfect foil to Marxism. Whenever I engage in a debate with people... I always ask them "Who owns you?".

[@johncocca85]

AWESOME... thanks for sharing that.

[@XavierBonapart]

Good point!

[@agnipath2743]

You said u had deep feelings, but as per her philosophy an ideal man is not governed by his feelings

[@TastyZoidberg]

@@agnipath2743Your values, your sense of justice may be deeply felt and subsecquently validated by art. If rational, by Rand’s art.

[@minimaxima2640]

I suffered severe depressıon sınce chıldhood at the hands of fanatıcally relıgıous parents and a sıblıng, ıt lasted for decades, then Ayn Rand's phılosophy ended all of that, she saved the rest of my lıfe. A wonderful, wıse and sweet woman.

[@Jazzper79]

Beautiful. She also saved me from my depression.

[@tntstorms7969]

@Ok I am religious and believe the parable of the Good Samaritan by Jesus makes logical sense (example of helping others in need not out of selfishness) and so does the existence of God. If God wants us to care for one another (based on the teachings of Jesus) then Ayn Rand's philosophy is invalid. I am not a big "My brother's keeper" type of person being generally against a bloated welfare state but some basic safeguards for the poor and disabled as a public service makes logical sense not about feelings. I believe we all are given a conscience which prevents us from doing harm to others and turning your back on suffering people also triggers my conscience to help rather than a selfish motive. Lots of her ideas make sense but it assumes you are only doing it for your own benefit which is pure individualism which I like somewhat but it is also impractical since we do have public needs that cannot be privately provided such as military protection which requires a great deal of collective funding. Nevertheless, I am a big believer in what she promotes "pro-capitalist, laissiez-faire, economic freedom and individualism". I am a conservative and Christian so those four ideas are actually very rational and reasonable. Limited government seems to be her goal which is what I agree with. Eliminating God and what God commands: Love thy neighbor as thy self" is contrary to her philosophy and is what I can't and most people can't buy.

[@dinodino1620]

@@tntstorms7969 grew up in the church and preached since 17. Practicing sacrificial love almost took my life. First time I heard Ayn was like hearing the gospel, a breath of fresh air to my soul. The idea that I could actually put myself and my needs first has given me hope. I believe in God and the Christian Gospel at its core makes sense. However, the Christian philosophy and the its practical application today is quite destructive to a good hearted person.

[@cbxxb4841]

Ayn Rand would say she did not save you, you saved yourself using her writing and your own rational process.

[@jimjoe9945]

Religions were not made by God. They are man made rules and rituals deceiving us into believing we know God. Cut out the middleman. There is one God, his son Jesus ( God incarnate) and you. A relationship not religion.

[@georgegeorge2334]

Thank God for Ayn Rand. We need more honest thinking people like her.

[@davidturton3301]

She would not appreciate that sentiment. Where is her god? She refuses to accept anything that is not real.

[@TheJonnyEnglish]

lol

[@boilerhousegarage]

She said she understands when people say "God bless you," they are offering her their highest regards, so she still appreciates it.

[@BUEAU]

She is insane and you are a cult member

[@mattf2545]

"I don't believe a lack of knowledge is a license to start inventing fantasies." Truth

[@Daniela-pr7rz]

so she's against art?

[@mattf2545]

@@Daniela-pr7rz That's an argument against religion actually.

[@Daniela-pr7rz]

@@mattf2545Damn it, i always forget to put that "/s" in there. But... ......"inventing fantasies" IS consistent with art too.

[@mattf2545]

@@Daniela-pr7rz So hard to tell where people are coming from sometimes, especially when having to constantly fight straw- men arguments against Rand. So it can be hard to tell friend from foe. If you're interested in her take on art, I would recommend her non - fiction book, The Romantic Manifesto, if you haven't read it already. I would surmise her take on good art vs bad art would come down to the nature of the fantasy. Glad to discuss further if ya like. ☺️

[@WintersWar]

More like spin.

[@roberts7363]

My life is divided in two parts: The time before I read Atlas Shrugged and the time after it

[@herbertwells8757]

We can only hope for a third act-once you’ve been mercifully deprogrammed.

[@fredred8029]

@@herbertwells8757 I hope you dont like This cow

[@jscottfischer]

Exactly

[@donaldcrowter7767]

@@fredred8029 but I do, for her intelligence.

[@JohnDoe-jq1br]

That is gross to even think of. I am so glad that I don't know you.

[@fidelheartsmarilyn]

The beauty of this is that, without an inferiority complex, this interview is an exploration into the mind of someone who questions everything and has firm morals while using her own compass based on evidence and rational. So nice to see, a lost art it seems in today’s public sphere

[@johnmicheal3547]

Reason is such a basic thing to human and yet there are those force other not to use reason. IE... "Follow the science"

[@charlesangell_bulmtl]

@@johnmicheal3547 Political 'science'

[@johnmicheal3547]

@@charlesangell_bulmtl no, "Political science" is the study of politic and how it works. "Follow the science" is be a sheeple and get use at the detrimental cost to the sheep.

[@masonrockwood7732]

Look how amazingly aware her eyes are. Like she's a human-machine of pure calculation and wisdom. The happiness just behind the eyes.

[@herbertwells8757]

I don’t see that in this late interview. Here, to me, she just looks fatigued. I have noticed it in earlier interviews, however, and there was a particular chemical cause: Ayn Rand for most of her life was a regular daily user of amphetamines, an addict, in fact.

[@chrisc1257]

@@herbertwells8757 Just as CoCo Chanel was alife long heroin user.

[@WintersWar]

Her eyes are darting at an abnormal rate. Something is off.

[@chrisc1257]

@@WintersWar She was a drug addict.

[@DrMackSplackem]

@@chrisc1257 If you can call someone who smoked 2 packs of cigarettes a day for 4 decades and quit cold turkey one day on the advice of her doctor an 'addict', your program is running on a broken OS. Just consider the average AA gathering as a point of reference.

[@cleaningservicesaustralia8482]

I love this person now since 1979, and more and more every day. Truly one of the most magnificent minds ever.

[@U2GuitarTutorials]

Agree 100%.

[@samuellane8691]

In a Nathanial Branden essay, he wrote, "If you want to know what someone thinks of themself, find out who they sleep with." Heroes sleep with heroines; degenerates sleep with degenerates.

[@reverendbarker650]

you poor deluded bastard. :-)

[@JohnDoe-jq1br]

She is a disgusting human being. I believe that she was addicted to amphetamines. A hate filled woman that pushed a philosophy of being self centered.

[@CarlosRodriguez-cj8oo]

@@samuellane8691 If you allow, I disagree slightly. Michael slept with Barack and she seemed pure and kind-hearted and invested in the well-being of others.

[@LenHummelChannel]

nearly 40 ! years ago! she was a very bright and challenging mind. James Day is such a fine interviewer. excellent programs.

[@herbertwells8757]

Sure, Rand was bright, but I would challenge the "challenging mind" bit--depending what you mean by it. By the time of this interview Rand had long been intellectually stultified, reduced to repeating the same well-rehearsed formulas over and over again. If this were the first you time you encountered her, I suppose you might be challenged (depending on your age and philosophical literacy) by her, but if you had already read her--pretty much at all--, you couldn't reasonably be challenged by much of anything she said, wrote, or did in the last three decades of her life--or so.

[@dd911]

It’s not a formula…….you must not understand the concepts by which she lived. She is asked to explain things and she does……..interview after interview. If you read, and understand, and think about the concepts you will, reasonably, be not only challenged but be changed.

[@mannypardo6509]

​@@dd911yup. the original poster is just naive.

[@ronaldbarrett3112]

Ayn Rand is beyond great and one of the best of intelligent thought.

[@fredslick643]

"The highest tribute to Ayn Rand is that her critics must distort everything she stood for in order to attack her. She advocated reason, not force; the individuals rights to freedom of action, speech,& association; self responsibility, NOT self-indulgence; & a live-and-let-live society in which each individual is treated as an END, not the MEANS of others' ends. How many critics would dare honestly state these ideas & say. "...and that's what I reject"? ---Barbara Branden, author of The Passion of Ayn Rand.

[@RKDTOO]

Interesting that she called it "the passion of Ayn Rand" and not "the reason of Ayn Rand" LoL.

[@doctorx0079]

And that was probably the best thing Barbara Branden ever said. PAR is basically another Mommie Dearest.

[@sheelamonroe7265]

Thanks for your unabashed honesty Barbara

[@herbertwells8757]

Re: "How many critics would dare honestly state these ideas & say. '...and that's what I reject'?" That's a list of platitudes, not "ideas". Anyone can CLAIM he stands for "reason", etc.--or, for that matter "truth, justice, and the American way" (as the old fifties "Superman" TV show used to put it). That means nothing. Calling yourself "rational" doesn't make you rational. Calling yourself an advocate of rationality doesn't make you an advocate of rationality.

[@fredslick643]

@@herbertwells8757 Individual rights is an idea, duh.

[@TheAbsintheS]

1943 the Fountainhead. 2022 and we're still buying and enjoying tremendously her work!

[@BUEAU]

Because you're dumb

[@unregierbar7694]

The western world needs more people with her mindset.

[@CarlosRodriguez-cj8oo]

Her face ALWAYS lights up when she mentions her husband! Love that!

[@johnjordan3851]

it's silly that this is controversial. It is so basic and fundamental.

[@DonCarlosHormozi]

Excellent interview. Educational, informative and not this CNN nonsense of baiting people with childish questions. Thanks for posting.

[@josephcarlbreil5380]

Ayn Rand fan." The Fountainhead" is one of my favourite novels. Rand was a great fan of America's railroads[ways]. She often traveled on NYC's "Twentieth Century Limited", being invited by the engine drivers to travel in their locomotive as the train headed up the Hudson River.

[@ToxicTorgo]

I especially like the rape scene. A man should take what he needs, no matter whose it is.

[@michaelsvoboda1024]

@@ToxicTorgo It's not a literal rape, Dominique gave consent (sure, in a peculiar way, by whipping Roark's face). But symbolically - yes, it's a rape, because Roark forces out a contradiction in Dominique's soul. Read the passage more carefully.

[@mattf2545]

@@michaelsvoboda1024 In fairness, he did clarify sarcasm. I suspect he understands the context. Just sayin'; but yes, I think you're correct in interpretation.

[@Dizma_Music]

One doesn't have to agree with her, to enjoy listening to her perspective.

[@mcflygirl1977]

That's what I'm gathering. I think I disagree with her a lot but I still really like her.

[@Jazzper79]

You need to study

[@JackSutterEtc]

I bet if you guys thought it out all the way through, you wouldn't disagree with her quite as much. Not that I agree with 100% of what she had to say when she was alive, but... *most* of it makes sense. The main hold up in admitting as much for a lot of people, is that it grates against virtually everything they've been taught (from external sources) is "right" their whole lives. Once you get past that though, imo it's pretty easy to see she didn't get much wrong.

[@greywinters4801]

Totally. 99% of her critics only know what her through what other critics have said. Yes read Aristotle first then Rand all of their works then tell me how horrible you think she is, until then who really cares what your irrational conclusions amount to.

[@Jazzper79]

Jack Sutter what do you disagree with?

[@prodosworldwide]

Thanks. Greatly enjoyed James Day's interview with Ayn Rand.

[@herbertwells8757]

It would be more illuminating for her to have been interviewed by someone like Bryan Magee in the manner that Noam Chomsky was in 1978 (look for the KZbin video-or any other in the series), although I’m afraid she may have been flailing, lost at sea, in this more heady milieu. Her knowledge of philosophy in general was too superficial and spotty and her own “philosophy” too threadbare and derivative.

[@radnikagupte2053]

Ayn Rand's self belief is so infectious and inspiring that you are happy to follow her.

[@herbertwells8757]

Cult leaders have that ability, that magical, mystical charm. Even Donald Trump has it. (Obviously the spell doesn’t bewitch everyone.)

[@2tycade]

@@herbertwells8757 A cult is a religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader. I don't think Rand's saying to live realistically is a religion. She doesn't tell you how to live, you are free to choose between reality and imagination not what you must do, she is only saying that to be an individualist you must live within realty of what's going on around you in the present time.

[@jasiowpl]

This is a very good interview! I love her !

[@michaeltjoelker3415]

Toward the end, when she lists achievement and romantic love as two of the most joyous things in life... little doubt about that. I’ve always found Ayn Rand to be someone that I understood and agreed with in the main, than man should live rationally and ethically and free, but disagreed with on some specific issues, such as some of her views on art and the value of religion. The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are both essential reading, the latter being cumulatively the second largest selling book of all time in the English language, after the Bible. She was quite a gal.

[@drstrangelove09]

agree, except about religion... she was spot on about religion as well... surprised that you do not see that

[@johnnynick6179]

I don't know of a single individual in my life that I have agreed with 100% of the time on 100% of the issues. Not my parents, not my wife, not my kids, not my friends...nobody. I agree with Ayn Rand over 90% of the time. That's pretty amazing. And the small number of issues I disagree with her on...I'm not positive I'm right and she's wrong.

[@rt3box6tx74]

I'm still working on wrapping my head around her definition of selfishness. I believe she's been heavily misinterpreted in that vein, but I need to focus there exclusively until I understand her pov. It's the only aspect of her philosophy I have trouble grasping after reading her most popular books multiple times and the others at least once. They were gifted to me by a sweet man who after we conversed a few months assumed I'd read them. Reading them was like meeting a wise old grandmother whom I never knew.

[@madmed6672]

Funny how most people have to twist her words in order to criticize her, she was a brilliant mind.

[@Daniela-pr7rz]

@Skip White I am not trying to bash her, but some of the things she said seemed to me not feasible. She speaks here about how a man should be rational with self esteem. If nothing else would motivate a man, she and other old women, would all be alone in old age, as no rational man would choose an old, bitter woman to a young , beautiful one. I heard her say how monopolies cannot form under unregulated economic environment, where the government stays away from it. How would she know? there's no example of a government that completely stayed away. Just because monopolies formed under economies where government is active , is no proof that monopolies would not form in free economies. Also, she said no taxes, private roads, private everything. So poor men should stay on house arrest, because they cannot afford to use the roads and a s a consequence they would never have a chance to prosper? What about valuable minds that would not have a chance to shine without a scholarship, or some sort of help to get started? i like personal freedom and not forcing people to sacrifice for others, but she is a little too extreme in a way that would make her ideas not work in real life.

[@srenjensen3817]

@@Daniela-pr7rz Well- no rational man with self esteem would choose to be with an old woman, unless she was rich or had other features, like intelligence to make her interesting. I think she is mostly right about the claim that monopolies cannot form in unregulated economies. Because if very big corporations did not have the option to bribe politicans, they would have to keep createting value to the custumers, to keep competision at bay. Noting is wrong with a big corporation that creates more value than the competion.

[@ducksticks6707]

@@Daniela-pr7rz She is a genuine pipe dream with a philosophy that will never be tested, just trying to set it up goes against it's own grain... But she is brilliant.

[@bobbyb.6644]

Way ahead of her time ! We’re living her Atlas Shrugged scenario NOW ! 😢

[@beth-rg8bm]

Why do you think her critics hate her!

[@oskartheme5233]

@@beth-rg8bm For exposing them.

[@TheAbsintheS]

Exactly my thought on every page!!! The spiritual descendants of the looters never ceased to exist...

[@appalachianwoman561]

I was introduced to Ayn Rand's works 24 years ago by a slightly older friend in college. It changed my way of thinking, made me a hard worker and due to Ayn and her Objectivisim I am who I am today. I think Ayn would weep today seeing the state of not just America but the West entirely as we've fallen so far, government has gotten too big, monopolies are everywhere propped up by crooked big governments and people think a homeless junkie that's never worked a day in their life or contributed in any way is more important and worthy of saving than a businessman or inventor who've truly made other's lives better thru their work. All Charity and helping others does is cause them to value nothing, because watch how someone treats something they were given vs something they've had to work for. They will take better care of and value that which they worked hard for.

[@tomservo75]

Oh the state of America and the West was plainly evident during Rand's time, she saw plenty of it. Today's state of society would be no surprise to her, in fact what's happening now is exactly what she predicted. People say that Atlas Shrugged being published in 1957 was prophetic. It wasn't as much so as people think. The signs and root of our current societal degradation, at least in hindsight, have been visible for over 100 years. Rand was just one of the first to call our attention to it.

[@beth-rg8bm]

People either love her work or hate it... Personally speaking...I was entertained by her work and that's enough for me!

[@hectortellez7776]

Read Ayn Rand in college! Changed my life, but it took years to absorb the concept! At 68, work in progress still!

[@BUEAU]

Out of work unemployed and can't pay your house payment, think again

[@nobakwaas5161]

i am greatly enjoying reading atlas shrugged

[@oasissands8584]

Finished yet?

[@Steelers72]

I have the same thought that she does when I see that men or women are the best in something, it provides me much enjoyment. Just watching someone like Mike Tyson or reading about the Wright Bros. is awe inspiring.

[@thequantartist]

Wonderful, a long time I haven't seen such a good interview!

[@kasyapa]

An ever-fascinating mind.

[@JohnLemieux]

As a case study...

[@herbertwells8757]

A mind trapped within the narrow confines of its overbearing, claustrophobic, and insufficiently informed and insufficiently imaginative ideology.

[@kieran1a2]

@@herbertwells8757 She simply stated facts.

[@objectivelybased5477]

She stated a philosophy, which helps interpret facts. Nice try guys 👍

[@tonyinuae]

Amazing to hear her talk about what a person should never do, when that is exactly what she did with Nathaniel and Barbara, acting purely out of feelings of rage and frustration

[@johnnynick3621]

I do not agree that what she did was react through feelings. Brandon lied to her. He pretended to agree with certain aspects of her value system and received her endorsement and cooperation as a result. When she discovered that he had been misrepresenting himself to her she reacted by cutting him off from her support and exposing his hypocrisy. There are a few areas where I disagree with Rand. Had I been in Nathaniel Brandon's position I would have brought up those differences in discussion. That would have been the honest thing to do. I would have risked losing her support, of course, but that is a risk I would be willing to accept in order to remain an honest person. He was unwilling to do that and chose to lie instead. She reacted rationally.

[@primategaberocco]

Ayn Rand was a brave, smart and sincere woman. I disagree vehemently with much of her notions, but on mysticism leading to dogma I'm on a unity ticket with her 100%. Nobody is perfect I guess. But she had courage.

[@t.d.e.review1937]

Its always hilarious to me when someone explains that they disagree with someone without stating why. Its like waiting to state an opinion until everyone else has already agreed with it.

[@drstrangelove09]

I see no reason to disagree with her.

[@primategaberocco]

@@drstrangelove09 Your post is four words too long.

[@drstrangelove09]

@@primategaberocco huh? ... nope... it was correct as is... maybe you can elaborate... how is her views against mysticism wrong? are you saying that mysticism makes sense? this is 2022... and you think there is no such thing as reason...? seriously? you cannot be serious

[@holeysmoke217]

It sounds like she said if you pay someone fair wages & you make money from their labor that is a good thing. Sounds like a win win when practiced fairly. Some one should try it.

[@Chromanoutdoors]

Have you ever had a job? Thats fair.

[@ronnation630]

No she’s saying that someone from whom you seek a job will pay you for the value of your labor.. not necessarily fair in the sense of a comfortable wage.

[@michaelsvoboda1024]

Ford did.

[@patrickwatrin5093]

Lol hell yeah I'm willing to try it. Too bad that is a thing of the past and for books that no one has ever read. I'm 41, I don't know anyone else who has read Atlas shrugged, not one..... I've encouraged everyone I know to read it but I don't think anyone cares, one way or the other. So I say that they will get what they deserve, fuck them they will be fine slaves

[@alexanderscott2456]

The "fair" wage is the market wage, whatever a person can get through voluntary, non-sacrificial dealings with others. But a "living" wage (a meaningless concept), as the altruists demand, is still based on the ethics of sacrifice.

[@spiritfilled5758]

An inspiration and wonderful role model for mankind. Atlas shrugged should be given to each individual person when they enter into adulthood. Best, Self development & political governance available

[@richardterrell1946]

She says art should never be didactic. Amazing. Atlas Shrugged in arguably the most didactic novel of the past century. She's teaching and "preaching" on just about every page.

[@WintersWar]

She was often inconsistent, but was an excellent self-promoter.

[@jscottfischer]

Is there a difference between expressing your opinion and intending to instruct?

[@richardterrell1946]

​@@jscottfischer I would say yes. Opinions are what they are and can be quite free of any factual basis or knowledge of a subject under discussion. Instruction, however, assumes (or so it seems to me) a body of knowledge to be conveyed. Intending to instruct would be grounded in that. I can't imagine Rand seeking to instruct on the basis of mere opinion, as she detested "opinions." Her weak characters exercise and state their "opinions." Ironically she claimed that she did not offer opinions while maintaining throughout her life her decision at the age of 12 or so that there was no God. This was nothing other than an immature opinion formed in youth. But it's a question she seems never to have studied. For an alleged philosopher, she seemed very uninformed about religion and theology, other than to ridicule it by repeating popular, conventional bromides.

[@t.d.e.review1937]

@@richardterrell1946 Nothing is more adorable than going to all the old greats interviews and noticing the First year Philosophy students spewing their newly purchased vocabulary words

[@theatomicredpill7761]

I would say her art more-so portrayed her philosophy rather than preached it. In which case, it is just an honest expression of herself rather than an exercise in didacticism.

[@JoeBlow_4]

"Facts don't care about your feelings"

[@drstrangelove09]

Great interview. Mush more reasonable than the Donahue and Wallace interviews. This one and Carson's and Snyder's are great!

[@h.w.randall3355]

Humans are born into the arms of a mother. There is a dependency without which we could not live. It is a social dyad in which 'love' is crucial for development. The baby cannot be self-sufficient. The baby learns to become independent over many years, yet he/she typically would continue to value the parental love. Empathy is developed as is insight to another human who therefore is no longer an 'object', even though he/she lives behind a different physiognomy, ' (There are unfortunate examples when a baby does not receive loving care. Some died even though they had been fed.) The experience of genuine parental 'love' contributes to establishing contact between humans that are objectively separate. Physics and a meta-analysis of parapsychological experiments (mind interconnectedness of 1.3x10 to 104 places probability) indicates we are more interconnected if not interdependent than the conscious mind can consciously perceive. Believing one can be the sole author of one's thoughts and self-care would be illusion.

[@hkievet]

Brilliant

[@timotheetournier8630]

I love the light-hearted 'because-you-felt-...' moment at 03:23! 😋

[@sheelamonroe7265]

I agree with her and love her mind and philosophy

[@herbertwells8757]

You don’t “agree with her”; she has dictated to you what you should think, and you have submitted. She has dictated to you what you should love, and you have submitted.

[@truesonofliberty3267]

Beautiful thinking!

[@NotAnEconomist]

It's funny how even under this video not many people understand that!

[@iurk0_streaming]

I am to this day trying to find critics of her philosophy that tackle the philosophical issues and not her possible personal shortcomings.

[@franka4312]

jeep23862. I think you have it backwards. One cannot prove a negative.

@@franka4312 I think you are in the wrong comment section. By my post 2 months ago I was simply saying to ElAngel that I would be quite willing to discuss Rand's nonsense philosophy rather than her personal shortcomings. Whats negative or positive about that?

[@franka4312]

jeep23862. When a person wishes to challenge a concept/philosophy/evidence THEY must bring a counter-positive argument to challenge it, provided the original concept has evidence. Example: If I were to say that drinking water kept my brain alive AND I have personal and observed evidence to back my claim, You have every right to not pay any attention to me. If you wish to call it non-sense though, you must bring some kind of explanation/theory/evidence to suggest why. Example 2: if I were to say that ghost exist because I like the idea, but have NO evidence. Then all you can really say is that I have no Reason for such a claim, but you are not called to provide any evidence that they do NOT exist. (Proving a negative) The main thing really is.... what issue do you have with Objectivism specifically?

[@Tore_Lund]

@ Finally someone discussing what she is saying in theís interview. Help me with this one: She denounces religion, was Atheist, yet she often comes back to the notion of being moral and good? How does that work when you dont have responsibility for others, is it a purely utilitarian motivation not to hurt others because they or society will sanction you and you will have done yourself a disservice?

[@Tore_Lund]

@ Sorry, this was not the "Atheists are not moral, because they don't believe" question. Literally I'm asking: How do you define good or moral behaviour? Do you define it by law? Who is to decide who is living up to these standards and who's not? When she says that people, presumably most, are inclined to act morally by themself, if they are free to act solely on their own impulses, she has never considered how corruption or price fixing works? I do understand her background, and in that context, moving to America was a liberation as well as a shock when she learned that the same communist mentality existed there too to some extent, but how did she conclude that society can work without oversight? How would environmental protection work?: Successful farmers around a lake prosper, but the fishermen on the lake have their business destroyed, because of excessive Nitrates, so does the Farmers say "Sorry" we are going to reduce our yield by using less fertilizer by themself? Are these farmers guilty of using "force against another free man" are they guilty of a crime? What one think is reasonable and fair, is often highly offensive and damaging to someones else freedom. How would this ever be manageable in a government free society? The "zero tax" argument with volunteer charity for the disabled should work in principle, But it would also have people dying in the street, because some elderly or sick wouldn't have any close family to support them.

[@wisemanspoke]

Excellent talk on art (around 20:00)

[@sgsmozart]

I have seen many Rand interviews on KZbin but this one was the most informative. The interviewer was not confrontational...he just camly asked questions and she calmly responded. I totally agree with her views about faith and God but not about abstract art. She has made some ignorant and offensive comments in the past that would not hold up today. For example: calling Native Americans "savages" that deserved to be conquered. Still ..a fascinating lady.

[@cromwellfluffington1627]

Very interesting choice of words, "religious training."

[@peterbrown3944]

That a great interviewer- very c

[@alexkalish8288]

This woman lived through the Russian Revolution - that injustice formed much or her thought. That said, she is startlingly original.

[@germank7924]

the RR was a great justice lol

[@MiyamotoMusashi9]

She still either innately or by early conditioning had the moral template from Moses code . It was at least in her sub. So yes she lived life but she had a template under her shoes as foundation. She knew it but ignored it . Otherwise this woman would have been a monster

[@TheAbsintheS]

Interesting idea...

[@Magsent]

To elevate reason above the heart of man is the most unintelligent thing you can do. Man is more than the sum of his/her parts. This kind of reductionism has lead mankind down many blind alleys and enabled the narcissists and psychopaths to predate on the unwary. Those who know nothing of love and wisdom are not qualified to define who and what we are. For 'The Heart has its reasons, of which reason knows nothing' (Pascal)

[@normbograham]

If the USA had followed this philosophy, we would be 100 times better off. A Laissez-faire style government.

[@ducksticks6707]

Hey look, it's another theory to go with Ayn's theories.

[@rebeccavoodoo2191]

My favorite writer Ayn Rand y Jack London

[@janehampson1533]

She is a bit robotic, I don't think people are as simple as her theories outline, humans are complicated filled with contradictions and emotions we are not as logical as robots this is good thing. Some people have backgrounds which lean towards abuse and cannot just be explained away by her theory of man having confidence in themselves if it was that easy people would not abuse drugs and alcohol in order to self medicate themselves in order to deal with their past abuse, in Ayn Rands world these problems do not exist, but they do exist in the modern world.

[@GaryGoRound-to7ld]

never thought I'd hear a woman say that about feelings ...I know so many women that treat their feelings as if they are more important than facts and reality

[@David-ng7cr]

Well said. I agree

[@norobbery]

As a Christian (and not necessarily a very good one) I agree with a lot of Ayn Rand's assertions, of course with exceptions. I know Ayn Rand was an adamant atheist but for me personally (since I'm using my own reason), I find added joy when after a long, brutal winter, I see that first daffodil coming up, knowing fully well that I didn't create that flower. It was created for me and its own environs. Since no man created it, the answer must lie elsewhere. I choose God because it brings me happiness and I'm selfish. This is not a falsehood to me because it took me many years of thought to reach this conclusion that I feel is in my own best interest.

[@norobbery]

I see!

[@doyleclanperth]

I appreciate your points. I have been doing a great deal of research. Positive psychology, philospphy, Ayn Rand and The Bible. Modern positive psycology embraces spirituality because it is proven scientifically. Ergo, Rand would be forced to notice, Jesus was a great philosopher too. Of course, those who can't be bothered to understand the Bible are judging on "feeling", not concept. Rands concepts of good and evil are modern, but the concept, not by any means is original. Truly rational, except her hope of mankind (John Galt) makes us all into saviours, if we want to be. Hmmm.

[@daieast6305]

the promotion of the daffodil by humans helps that flower to evolve and flourish...so that is a relationship and not works of any creator god, but good and bad are a matter of use, so whatever floats your boat

[@herbertwells8757]

Ayn Rand used the term “selfish” equivocally. This is rhetorical sleight of hand for rhetorical effect. “Selfishness” is a quality, not a thing, and thus its pejorative aspect is part and parcel of its denotative meaning. The word cannot reasonably be denuded of its pejorative intent. If you object to its premise, you’re certainly welcome to avoid it altogether or to complain about it, but Rand, rather, twists its meaning to be provocative and still seem virtuous (by her own lights), to have her cake and eat it too. That’s not arguing in good faith. The term “selfish” does not mean “self-reliant”, “”self-confident”, “self-sufficient”, or anything of the sort, just as “childish” doesn’t mean “child-like.” If I were to conflate the latter two terms, I could argue that because it’s admirable to be innocent, playful, and open, it’s also admirable to be petulant and unruly. Clearly there’s a breach of logic here, and it’s the same breach Rand commits every time she extols what she calls “selfishness”.

[@ericwilliams626]

Someone in her position has not benefit in claiming they believe in God. It just mixes things up and the sheep go crazy with opinions.

[@andrewmiller4885]

She is a smart and very articulate woman. No question, ...but I cannot say I wholly agree with her worldview. . This idea of the individual verses the collective, objectivism as she calls it., sounds terribly right, as she begins to define it, and I believe some aspects of it are. However, I think it's a fundamentally flawed Philosophy. I truly believe her atheism has played a big part in the formulation of her ideology. Thank you for this video.

[@PH--ov7tf]

The philosophy that she advances is part Aristotle, Adam Smith, Nietzsche, Locke, etc. In actuality she did not propose anything new, but it seems that she had convinced herself that she really did. Her philosophy is very idealistic and does not consider the fallibility and imperfection of individuals. She failed to adopt an approach based on balance and optimal measure, this is where her ‘reasoning’ breaks down in the real world. Anything, even a good thing, when pushed to the extreme becomes toxic. She did not respect this fundamental axiom.

[@jamwest3146]

Try reading her work, and stop reading about it.

[@PH--ov7tf]

@@jamwest3146 - No thank you, that would be a total waist of time.

[@nicholasschroeder3678]

Exactly...but that's why adolescents love it so. Its black and white, like all religions

[@johncocca85]

@@jamwest3146 EXACTLY

[@johncocca85]

@@jamwest3146 You nailed it. "...and stop reading ABOUT it." on the money!

[@meredrums1]

This was not her format to say the least. She wasn't a "Philosopher:," or a "Writer", or any of those noisy things. She was a Woman of Ideas though. 8:50 for those that think that she was black and white.

[@suetipping4841]

She is talking about doing for duty and honor not for feelings. Americans seem to run on feelings and look at the mess we are in. And we believe what we are told. Tsk tsk.

[@OrangeNash]

Isn't honor altruistic? And she rejected altruism. Her ideas seem full of inconsistencies and paradoxes. Irrational, basically.

[@suetipping4841]

@@OrangeNash I enjoyed her story. Business owners suffering government mistreatment will walk away. That's the story. Oh, and the business owners walk with their intellect intact. .

[@MrBigangry]

People listen to her and dont understand. You can still have reason lead you to faith. Love is a selfish desire it isnt altruistic. It doesnt take a lot of logic and willpower to understand that what is best for yourself is often doing what is best for others. Yes that is selfish.....

[@theelvenvampirehakathriel8902]

Shes very matter of fact.

[@scotnick59]

oh, very much so & a refreshing woman because of that

[@ducksticks6707]

Or very much matter of theory if you will.

[@aurelnegrea7617]

People like this. Just don’t exist anymore.. we depend on technology can’t exist without it.. sadly

[@LM-dd9fe]

Brave woman

[@nagarajhere1]

Don't know whether god created this Universe. But definitely Man created god.

[@obergssin]

And who created you ... ? Yourself ...? Reason and science and all observation and experience prove that the effect cannot be greater than the cause. EG entropy, motion, or in more plain terms the painting is lesser than the painter and the table less then the carpenter. As you are the “effect” then your cause is one greater than you. In the simplest terms this is a way to prove God ... your own existence and consciousness. Consciousness and thoughts being immaterial effects prove that there is an immaterial cause of your mind and consciousness as well. Mind could not have come from nature as it is sovereign to nature ... it is greater than nature. So nature could not have been the cause of the mind. Whatever .....

[@beth-rg8bm]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/hXXIpYJ7a8iVmMU

[@beth-rg8bm]

@@obergssin Parents...

[@beth-rg8bm]

@@obergssin kzbin.info/www/bejne/hXXIpYJ7a8iVmMU Here...educate yourself! It's only 9.5 minutes long...but most religious people are cowards when it comes to the truth!

[@XavierBonapart]

Good one!😂

[@haroldcheeseburger]

Interesting set design.

[@bowlineobama]

I wonder if she ever studied Buddhism because it is very similar to Buddhist teaching with added comparsion to it.

[@herbertwells8757]

Rand castigated all Eastern religion, philosophy, and thought in scathing, vitriolic terms. She would be aghast at your suggestion.

[@avalanche9026]

Career romantic love ?? It’s exactly what I miss in my life. 2023. Hardly exist these days. I trying about everything in my 26 years of marriage. No life. It’s work pay bills and repeat till you die. Hmm

[@01107345]

It's weird how both she and Irving Stone said they started to write (or wanted to be a writer) at the age of nine, on the same show.

[@herbertwells8757]

I wanted to be a writer at the age of nine too-and an astronomer at the age of eleven, a classical composer at the age of twelve, a rock guitarist at the age of sixteen. I wanted to be a Beatle at the age of eight and James Bond at the age of ten. At the age of five I wanted to be a grocery-store clerk. It doesn’t matter when you WANTED to do something; it only matters when you actually did it-and whether you did it continuously from then on. (As it happens, I did, in fact, write stories at the age of nine and music from the age of eleven and so on, but I did lots of things back then. I didn’t have to earn a living.)

[@manuelgallego3196]

Ben Shapiro also promotes facts and minimizes feelings. Both he and Rand say stuff that many times is kinda coldhearted.

[@NotAnEconomist]

Ben Shapiro is religious or at least pretends to be religious, he is also pro-life and is a conservative...while some things he says are correct and good, Ayn Rand would have zero respect for him because he is not fully rational or pro complete individual freedom.

[@ducksticks6707]

@@NotAnEconomist Ben Shapiro is a pretender in all aspects of his show he calls a life, money grubbing requires it.

[@NotAnEconomist]

@@ducksticks6707 there you go, I didn't even go that deep to learn about him since everything was already on the surface.

[@jacobkorving3440]

I have heard her reasoning and respect her opinion but she forgets one aspect of life that reason cannot give you and that is the consciousness of a creator who by His choice gave you the ability to choose whether you live with Him or without Him. Cyphering God [HIM] out of your existence does not make Him go away. God is not a concept you can learn, He reveals who He is by the knowledge that something is missing in life, like life itself which is the quickening that happens upon surrender to Him and recognizing the need to accept the offer of redemption which we lost through Adam who came up short on, don't eat of that tree for it is the tree of good and evil. Up to this point evil was not know in paradise. The plan of redemption was in place from the beginning and the offer is in place today, the difficulty with that is the simplicity wherewith it must be accepted through this statement, Unless you become as a little child you cannot enter. Is intellect a hindrance to faith, can you look at the sky at night and not see the this is a big Universe you could not get your intellect around without saying, there may be something out there I can't figure out just yet, like, is there anybody else up there? Well, there is and reason does not give you an answer. Debates do not satisfy but humility and surrender to the one who says, Come, ask of me, I am the only one who can quicken you, that means, put eternal life in you and redeem your soul which through the fall in paradise got lost and can only be found through repentance. John the Baptist had a one sentence sermon, repent for the Kingdom of God is here. You may not have any money but you can [PAY] attention. Eternity is lonnnngggggg.

[@n.m.sh.8706]

Her russian accent here is stronger than in her earlier interviews, see "The Mike Wallace Interview with Ayn Rand".

[@boilerhousegarage]

Is it? Wallace even emphasised that she said "faith," because in that 1959 interview, her accent made it sound like she was saying "face."

[@paulgoebbels86]

Dearest Ayn Rand, please marry me! I know you are gone! But like Marilyn Monroe, you have a billion people who love you. Both men and women. I was introduced to you while working in Ringling Brothers Barnum Bailey Circus and the Fountainhead was a love letter from you, given to me by the General Manager of the Red Unit. I was never so taken by a literary story. That is until Atlas Shrugged. WOW 💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙😍. I wish I would had met you. But now it's a little late. The Greatest Show on Earth was a easy place to live out the hardships of the human experience. Striving to enjoy the life I'd chosen as a child in school. Living where I work. Working where I live. The Greatest Show on Earth gave me what my Father instilled in me. Don't quit. Think before you act. Mother gave me quitters never win, winners never quit. You gave me a girl to be on the lookout for Dagny💜Taggart 👍😍.

[@michaelsvoboda1024]

You can still meet her serious heirs (Peikoff and Binswanger)

[@L5player]

She finds belief in God is irrational--it lacks evidence--yet then admits that man doesn't have omniscience--he doesn't know everything. Isn't the conclusion that God doesn't exist irrational, then? After all, God could exist in those things man doesn't (yet) know. One would have to be possessed of total knowledge to conclude God doesn't exist, or else the statement that He doesn't is drawn without sufficient knowledge.

[@fedelixtaboe1842]

Very intelligent point

[@JohnLemieux]

"I don't quite understand love" That's about all you need to know about Ayn Rand as a philosopher.

[@greywinters4801]

John Lemieux A rather primitive way to judge a philosophy.

[@WashingtonMonster86]

John Lemieux Cause that wasn't taken out of context.

[@greywinters4801]

John Lemieux Ya Pepi Lemieux , I bet you are an expert on love. Self love. lol

[@Jazzper79]

And you don't understand Ayn Rand.

[@greywinters4801]

Then tell us all Mr Pepe LePew love master extraordinaire about the mysteries of love.I'm all ears bozo.

[@rosejohnson6857]

Sounds great in theory.

[@oskartheme5233]

"Reality is the final arbiter."

[@ducksticks6707]

Bingo

[@shawngreenforussenate6277]

If you plant the seed it will grow.

[@windycitybeats6724]

Maan, I wish there was a debate between Karl Marx and Ayn Rand, what a clash of minds it would be! I know it's impossible but could you imagine🧠

[@fredred8029]

Reason. try and save a baby instead of saving the mother that has the best odds . Baby lives mother dies . good or bad . Imorral or Imorral . This bitch is dangerous. she aint no aristotle

[@windycitybeats6724]

@@fredred8029 What?

[@herbertwells8757]

Marx wouldn’t have bothered, and even if he had bothered, Rand would have failed to appear. Sartre and Rand were contemporaries, for example. How many times did Sartre and Rand debate? Pretty much any philosopher with actual credentials and stature would have considered (or, in the case of contemporaries, did consider) it beneath him to debate Rand, and Rand, for her part, carefully avoided everyone and anyone who would publicly challenge her.

[@TomDoesUtube]

Act on what you know is rational. Do no do evil.

[@francoisebianchi7282]

Une pensée forte.

[@XavierBonapart]

Moi aussi

[@arekgadek1277]

what year is this interview???

[@NotAnEconomist]

27:22 - says at the very end, 1974

[@stevejbons]

Let's not forget that Ayn Rand, a life long chain smoker, lived her last days on public assistance and under free medical care for her lung cancer courtesy of the American Medicare system.

[@johncocca85]

She paid PLENTY of taxes to that system, taken from her book sales at gunpoint. So she's just getting her own money back. ...And medicare is MANDATORY.

[@XavierBonapart]

By her own choice? She made a lot of money selling books.

[@ducksticks6707]

@Stephen Bonser...........BINGO and her whole philosophy gone.........up in smoke.

[@johnnynick3621]

Ignorant people spouting baseless rumors. Ayn Rand NEVER received public assistance. She left an estate worth approximately one MILLION dollars to an institute that still to this day teaches her philosophy. Her books NEVER went out of print and sold throughout her lifetime. She was paid for the movie rights to her novels; she was an in-demand paid lecturer up to the year of her death and she had thousands of paid subscribers to her monthly newsletter. She NEVER received nor qualified for public assistance.

[@stevejbons]

@@johnnynick3621 Wikiupedia: "Rand underwent surgery for lung cancer in 1974 after decades of heavy smoking.[113] In 1976, she retired from writing her newsletter and, after her initial objections, allowed a social worker employed by her attorney to enroll her in Social Security and Medicare.[114][115] During the late 1970s, her activities within the Objectivist movement declined, especially after the death of her husband on November 9, 1979.[116] One of her final projects was work on a never-completed television adaptation of Atlas Shrugged.[117] On March 6, 1982, Rand died of heart failure at her home in New York City.[118] At her funeral, a 6-foot (1.8 m) floral arrangement in the shape of a dollar sign was placed near her casket.[119] In her will, Rand named Peikoff as her heir.[120]" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand

[@dorianedwards8522]

A society with zero altruism is no place worth living in. Period. It's the main thing that separates us from the animals. The animal world is pure Objectivism.

[@herbertwells8757]

I think it depends which animals you mean. Dogs, chimpanzees, and elephants unquestionably exhibit empathy. Reptiles not so much-which might partly explain why the term “Reptilian” is pejorative.

[@ToxicTorgo]

I left a sarcastic comment below, having some familiarity with Ayn Rand, and I do not consider myself a fan. She was a facile, stunted, narcissistic person, alas. Considering her childhood and the events that befell her family before escaping the USSR, it’s understandable that she took some baggage with her. However, I’m very happy to have found a cache of these interviews from the years before TV became such a cesspool. I did not know of this interviewer until today. I like this guy!

[@animalblack8482]

Lively open discussion thxu

[@JensHove]

Collectivism is a scourge upon the world.

[@snidelywhiplash6889]

Define rational! Rational is a loose term just like concern. It's not about sacrafice it's about respecting all of our rights while co existing at the same time. That's the problem with todays world. To much selfish rationale at the expense of others and instead of respecting others rights it's all about ME and my rights. So when i rationalize taking a dump on your porch or in your washer that's just the way it is. When i rationalize playing with your 7 year old it's great for me. It's all good until it's not. When living in close proximity we HAVE to be aware, not sacrifice per say, but be aware and since we all effect each other in many ways sometimes selfish acts don't help anybody. So this is how the American education system got polluted. I always wondered where it came from. I'm not a bible thumper just a reasonable person that has to acknowledge all surroundings before rationalizing. Religion doesn't designate "man" as inferior beings unless you let yourself take it that way.

[@DeviaNZe]

She looks like my mother, my mother was Jewish.

[@drbonesshow1]

Rand's book The Fountainhead was too-intellectual and obviously non-commercial said the publishers and yet the public made the book a best-seller. This is another example of those in charge so to speak controlling the minds of the public.

[@Civilwarpiper]

What a cold Godless existence…I couldn’t live 1 minute in such a world.

[@NickNicometi]

24:07 On abstract art.

[@rosesprog1722]

How about kindness?

[@tribalisnt]

If you reason through it and decide that kindness is a trait that you admire then i guess Rand would probably suggest that you pursue socialising with kind people. She would want those people to be kind through choice rather than obligation though.

[@rosesprog1722]

@@tribalisnt Kindness is communicating that you enjoy interacting with others, it is a shell in which the message is contained, a la McLuhan if you want, in that sense it is neither a choice nor an obligation, it is a state of mind that flows without conscious intervention. Wouldn't it be a natural way of being human, wouldn't cold efficiency be a choice instead? Her way of being herself makes me very uncomfortable, I cannot say why.

[@tribalisnt]

@@rosesprog1722 I would say that both are a choice and most people can be both cold and kind, there is no kind default so to speak. She would want you to be yourself (as long as you are thinking through your decisions in a rationale way) and if you do that and don't like her she'd probably like you. Her delivery and mannerisms aren't everyones cup of tea but she's cool.

[@scottm8579]

Define kindness. if you mean giving the poor money, I believe you're not being kind. Your being altruistic and it causes more damage to that person's life than it helps. If you mean helping that person by giving them advice, becoming their friend, etc. I'm all for it.

[@rosesprog1722]

@@scottm8579 Oh no, kindness is a state of mind, like smiling, saying a nice word, listening well, softness, not being rude, etc... it is caring about what you say but also about how you say it.

[@Gigaloader]

I believe I reasoned!

[@poooopsy5666]

The trans movement needs this.

[@DejanOfRadic]

Though sincere, her ideas seem like thought experiments performed in a vacuum

[@HotStuffinChicken]

She was so wise.

[@cheyenneasiafoxe292]

she was a genius--who is john gault? Dagny Taggart my heroine

[@herbertwells8757]

I’ve read Atlas Shrugged several times, enjoying it each time (except for John Galt’s tedious and plodding peroration, which I skipped on subsequent readings), much as I enjoyed twice reading Robert Heinlein’s “Stranger in a Strange Land”, for example: that is, in the way that I enjoy engaging genre fiction. While reading Atlas I projected myself into the protagonist, as one is wont to do, but I wonder why you should take her as your heroine otherwise. Because she flits capriciously from lover to lover? Because she inherited her wealth and position from her father? Because she resists any decision involving her company that might not serve to maximize profit, even if it-rather, particularly if it-cuts off railroad service to those who desperately need it? Because she rails against rejection of the gold standard even though gold obviously has no intrinsic value? (It happens to be shiny, hence its appeal to primitives.)

[@michaelcullen5308]

Recent science is saying the opposite of her "we come to a rational conclusion, then act" theory. It appears now that most if not all of our decisions are made subconsciously, and the brain then sends reasons after the fact, to give us the impression we consciously made the decision.

[@srenjensen3817]

I agree with her and with you. I would guess that 99.9% of what I do and say is "made" when I sleep. But that does not really contradict my attempt to act on rational conclutions.

[@shuroom57]

Initially, a religious person such as myself would red flag this woman's philosophy, but in the long run I fully agree with her. In the Mike Wallace interview she declared that her support of her husband, if necessary, stemmed from her "SELFISH" love for him. If we are all free to choose our own destiny, those many among us who possess the altruism and self sacrifice for our fellow man will accomplish the same OBJECTIVES (!) as the current tax-heavy system THINKS it does; we will voluntarily kick in a fair share to such causes.

[@ducksticks6707]

@shuroom57 Stephen Bonser 1 month ago Let's not forget that Ayn Rand, a life long chain smoker, lived her last days on public assistance and under free medical care for her lung cancer courtesy of the American Medicare system. Turns out it's just a lot of words brilliantly put together. Reply

[@arielatz5199]

Communist countries are guided by reason and that is why there are charity organizations. Emotions lead humanity toward charity, kindness, and acts of goodness.