Just finished reading this and it got me thinking:

Just finished reading this and it got me thinking:
why is individualism so frowned upon?
if there's such a thing as human nature, are we a communal species or individualists? are some people/cultures/nations/ethnic groups more individualistic than others?

Can we please go back to the days when posting Rand was a bannable offense?

>why is individualism so frowned upon?
Nice question begging you fucking idiot

how am I begging the question? I was just stating a fact and asking for an explanation

its human nature to want to be in a group of people, that's why only autistic people subscribe to ayn rands fucking stupid ideology

bump

>why is individualism so frowned upon?
It's only frowned upon when taken to an extreme extent.

>he doesn't realize that individuation is a facade fabricated unconsciously by all humans in the attempt to reckon with the reality of each personal experience being dictated by the execution of countless other personal experiences by countless other persons culminating in a grid structure of phenomena which manifests the individual's experience as merely a tension point of the most recent magnitude, accounting for all thoughts and ultimately culture

>human nature
To use free will to achieve values which promote life. As such, there is no communal or individualist nature before considering how to best achieve life-promoting values.

>why is individualism so frowned upon?
Non-cooperational society (even tribes, as status/power earned one the work of others) is 0-sum...as non 0-sum requires safety of non-used property (no stealing), which didn't exist.
But now that action is non-0-sum, and our emotions are tuned to 0-sum, our emotions tell us taht individualism MUST detriment others...when infact non-0-sum actions are possible.

any recs for stuff that touches on this idea or one like it?

Individualism isn't frowned upon. I think there is a difference between individualism and Rand's values in objectivism.

Ayn Rand is a good read for young people or others just getting started. I think a society with Rand's morals would be self destructive though. Keep in mind Rand grew up in USSR and her family felt the oppression of it, which is the origin of her radicalism

for someone just starting to get into lit, i should add.

that doesn't really contradict the idea of individuation, even less so individualism

shouldn't psychological faculties be put into account when thinking about the separate political notion of individualism?

is it too reductionist to suggest that without originality there can be no free will?

It's not that individualism is frowned upon, it's that Rand and other hardcore capitalists espouse a methodological approach to it (often contrasted with holism), creating a false dichotomy between collectivism and individualism, they posit that the structure of society is influenced solely by the individual, such ideas are what give rise to her masturbatory concepts like "the self made man", which is really impractical because you are born and molded by an already pre-existing capitalist order, that might've been true back in the stone ages but not today.

pic fucking related dude

go with the order of things probably

>why is individualism so frowned upon?
because it takes them 600 fucking pages to get to the rape scene and that's more immoral than lolita

no its certainly not, it depends on individuals whether they actually prefer the call of collective society or not

this, they use this to justify capitalism as the "natural order" of society and take away it's class aspect, which is why a lot of her followers don't see themselves as poor, just temporary embarrassed millionaires.

"Self made man" idea is rare in the real world and mostly nonsense which you quickly realise after spending time in any industry, which Rand never did and neither have her supporters. Most people rise up the ranks through playing work place politics well rising above more competent people. I work as an engineer in the mining industry. The top echelon of management and directors in all big mining companies is a boys club who know less and are less intelligent than some people I can come across at any mine.

spot a leftist

>human nature

collectivists have the same goals, they just don't understand economics.

I think this about self help gurus, its like, why don't you do it then instead of motivational speaking other people into doing it?!

Asking "why is individualism so frowned upon" implies that it is "so frowned upon," which it clearly is not, at least Rand's, considering how many US politicians devour her tripe like it's a double-decker bacon cheeseburger

ayn rand is likely the best writer of the last century, but lit is too edgy to admit it

Which fact, you fucking spastic? Shut the FUCK up with your worthless thread

Wow you're so observant, user! Sperg-tastic post

>are some people/cultures/nations/ethnic groups more individualistic than others?
All societies have some degree of individualism, but individualist ethics as Rand understood it is exclusively a product of the Enlightenment, so Western cultures and cultures that have been heavily influence by the West are much more individualistic.

>Most people rise up the ranks through playing work place politics well rising above more competent people.
That's something portrayed in detail in The Fountainhead.

individualism itself isn't frowned upon. it's the context in which ayn rand presents it...

which is individualism as the ultimate virtue. that societies exist because it creates arenas of competition. it's just just not true.

if jim and bob each make 1 product each...that's 2 products. if they work together they can make 3. that's why societies exist. because people are more productive when they work together.

it's also not surprising you presented it in a polarizing way right after reading fountainhead. it's all this either you're this or that idiocy that makes her works immature as hell.