Comments on: Glenn Beck, Ayn Rand, and Social Justice http://www.mjevans.com/miscellaneous/glenn-beck-ayn-rand-and-social-justice How lawyers can use the Internet, social media, online video, and technology to attract clients, be more effective, make more money, and have more fun. Sat, 17 Jul 2010 14:29:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: larry http://www.mjevans.com/miscellaneous/glenn-beck-ayn-rand-and-social-justice/comment-page-1#comment-2 larry Sat, 17 Jul 2010 14:29:42 +0000 http://www.mjevans.com/?p=1273#comment-2 Beck does not appear to me to be an Objectivist, and I have no evidence that he claims to be. For one to be an Objectivist, which is what you seem to be saying by asserting him to be a "follower of Rand", would mean that he had integrated the philosophy. But what he takes from Rand is not the metaphysical , ethical, or the epistimological. The only thing he seems to agree with is the political, and even that isn't fully integrated. So using the definition of philosophy, he is not an Objectivist. He is simply uses her case for capitalism, which is a good one. What is more, he suggests people read Rand and doesn't seem worried that a person of faith would walk away and accept the other parts of the philosophy. Indicating to me that he doesn't recognize, is ignoring, or simply doesn't see the majority of the philosophy as important. I beleive that it is wrong to murder ans steal, I think it is proper to treat people as I wish to be treated, does that make me a follower of Jesus? Of course not. Agreeing with a certain person or philosophy on specific items doesn't make you a folloewr by default, you have to integrate all the parts of the philosophy. Beck doesn't, and I don't think ever has, claimed to where AYn Rand is concerned. Beck does not appear to me to be an Objectivist, and I have no evidence that he claims to be. For one to be an Objectivist, which is what you seem to be saying by asserting him to be a “follower of Rand”, would mean that he had integrated the philosophy. But what he takes from Rand is not the metaphysical , ethical, or the epistimological. The only thing he seems to agree with is the political, and even that isn’t fully integrated. So using the definition of philosophy, he is not an Objectivist. He is simply uses her case for capitalism, which is a good one.

What is more, he suggests people read Rand and doesn’t seem worried that a person of faith would walk away and accept the other parts of the philosophy. Indicating to me that he doesn’t recognize, is ignoring, or simply doesn’t see the majority of the philosophy as important.

I beleive that it is wrong to murder ans steal, I think it is proper to treat people as I wish to be treated, does that make me a follower of Jesus? Of course not. Agreeing with a certain person or philosophy on specific items doesn’t make you a folloewr by default, you have to integrate all the parts of the philosophy. Beck doesn’t, and I don’t think ever has, claimed to where AYn Rand is concerned.

]]>