what do you all think of this quote?

[bobbybeam]

"love is our response to our highest values-and can be nothing else...let him profess that love is not self-enjoyment but self-denial, that virtue consists, not of pride, but of pity or pain or weakness or sacrifice, that the noblest love is born, not of admiration, but of charity, not in response to values, but in response to flaws....if he believes that flaws are values, he has damned existence as evil and only the evil will attract him." ayn rand

[UDP]

incomplete, partial

[bobbybeam]

incomplete, partial

why did you give me the shortest answer you could possibly type? :/
can you please elaborate :]

[Trevor]

Don't like it. Something's off. Dunno what.

[Galen]

I don't understand it, much of it feels like the opposite of what I consider true.

[Suz]

same

[Beautiful sky]

Ayn Rand is ISTp so do you like the quote?

[bobbybeam]

Ayn Rand is ISTp so do you like the quote?

yes, actually. Her characters comfort me. This may sound weird, but whenever I read a chapter of her book, I feel more at ease and secure...and I actually see the world around me...like the objects and just how to go about the task at hand.

I am learning how to drive a stick shift...and I usually get really jittery and nervous before I drive, but whenever I read a chapter of her book before I drive, I don't feel that way anymore...and the task seems totally do-able.

The way she thinks feels so right...at least in her book Atlas Shrugged

[Beautiful sky]

yes, actually. Her characters comfort me. This may sound weird, but whenever I read a chapter of her book, I feel more at ease and secure...and I actually see the world around me...like the objects and just how to go about the task at hand.

I am learning how to drive a stick shift...and I usually get really jittery and nervous before I drive, but whenever I read a chapter of her book before I drive, I don't feel that way anymore...and the task seems totally do-able.

The way she thinks feels so right...at least in her book Atlas Shrugged

That's really interesting that duals can get a sense of comfort even in written information supplied by a dual. It makes sense in terms of how information metabolism works, that is that even language (either written, verbal, or gestural, intonational) has a big affect on the mental well being of duals.

[silverchris9]

Ayn Rand is one of the most obvious and stereotypical Betas in the history of literature. Devalued Fi is rampant, love for Se is all-consuming. She's a beta. I don't know very much about her, tbh. But I know she's a beta.

Anyway, it's half-right and mostly wrong. I mean, a lot of it is right, but she missed a big chunk or deliberately ignored a big chunk of it.

[bobbybeam]

Ayn Rand is one of the most obvious and stereotypical Betas in the history of literature. Devalued Fi is rampant, love for Se is all-consuming. She's a beta. I don't know very much about her, tbh. But I know she's a beta.

Anyway, it's half-right and mostly wrong. I mean, a lot of it is right, but she missed a big chunk or deliberately ignored a big chunk of it.

awww really? I re-read the quote...and I think the reason why the quote means so much to me is because of the "hidden meaning" behind it.

She seems to really admire hard work, especially! haha one thing that I didn't like about the book was the romance that the two main characters had for one another. It was VERY victim/aggressor...and knowing this, I can appreciate the relationship for what it is...haha but there was nooo warm fuzzies!

umm, Dang! Have you by chance read the book? I reallllllllyyyy want to know what you think of the characters...Francisco D'Antonia, especially...and Dagny and Hank Rearden...

[bobbybeam]

Seems too moralistic as well as absolute. But then again, I like to think there are more diverse expressions of love. It doesn't really specify different kinds of love, either. I dunno, not my cup of tea, but whatever.

I think it gives off a preachy vibe and sounds like something you'd hear out of the pulpit...too bliblical, but then again, I am a big fan of 1 Corinthians 13, but that does more to describe really broad attributes of love without giving such a rigid definition.

well, wait! haha the main focus of the book isn't about "love". The romantic relationship is just a side story.

I do believe that the book is about the downfall of society...in particular, America and how socialism would destroy it.
(which is funny, because I use to be kind of into socialist ideas).
I am not a fan of religious (crap)...stuff. I mean, it's fine if somebody else does it, but it won't rule my life...because I think it is not correct!
...which is why I am surprised that you think that it is preachy,

but maybe I am missing something?

[Galen]

My problem with the quote is that on the whole it feels like she's trying to quantify what love is exactly comprised of, like "do this and love with occur". To me it seems like a pointless endeavor that only demeans the idea of love more than it does glorify it. I don't see love as being defined by self-abnegation; certainly personal sacrifices must be made for love, but it must never be the main mode of being and its entire purpose cannot be just for that. I'm also having a huge difficulty trying to understand what "the noblest love is born not of admiration, but of charity" is supposed to mean, and I'd like to hear what others have to think about it.

awww really? I re-read the quote...and I think the reason why the quote means so much to me is because of the "hidden meaning" behind it.

What sort of "hidden meaning" have you come to understand from it?

[krieger]

Ayn Rand is one of the most obvious and stereotypical Betas in the history of literature. Devalued Fi is rampant, love for Se is all-consuming. She's a beta. I don't know very much about her, tbh. But I know she's a beta.

Another set of obvious and stereotypical betas in history are those in authoritarian 20th century regime leaderships (******, Stalin, Lenin) and Rand explicitly profiled herself in a very sharp contrast to these people.

[xerx]

Another set of obvious and stereotypical betas in history are those in authoritarian 20th century regime leaderships (******, Stalin, Lenin) and Rand explicitly profiled herself in a very sharp contrast to these people.

But did she tend to act in very sharp contrast to these people?

[krieger]

But did she tend to act in very sharp contrast to these people?

The similarities are only very superficial. Yes, she expressed herself confidently to the point of sounding dogmatic, just like the authoritarian collectivists did. And yes, she gathered a support group that raised her to the status of an authority. But her message and theirs were always lightyears apart.

[xerx]

The similarities are only very superficial. Yes, she expressed herself confidently to the point of sounding dogmatic, just like the authoritarian collectivists did. And yes, she gathered a support group that raised her to the status of an authority. But her message and theirs were always lightyears apart.

Betas do have a tendency to gravitate around radical and revolutionary concepts and people. Even delta movements can be co-opted and assimilated.

[bobbybeam]

My problem with the quote is that on the whole it feels like she's trying to quantify what love is exactly comprised of, like "do this and love with occur".

I think this is what she is getting at: *metaphor
let's suppose that you meet someone from school, you chat, you get to know them...and you find out that this person is a narcissist...you feel sorry for him and decide to spends lots of time with him..and become good friends all because you felt bad for his inability to feel.
You view his flaw as something "cute" or "awwww-how sad! I don't want to judge him for that!"...when in reality, you should.

The quote helped me out because I have this problem. I go for the "fix it" guys...the ones who are fucked up in more ways than one...and it is wrong! haha this part in her book helped me see that.

certainly personal sacrifices must be made for love,

I do this ALLL the time! I will subconsciously change my whole freaking schedule to accomodate for the guy I am into....I start thinking about "us" instead of just me...I am not saying that it is wrong, but I am saying that I am not so sure what is right and what is wrong....I mean whether sacrifices should happen or should not (I'm thinking dating, not marriage)

.....but it must never be the main mode of being and its entire purpose cannot be just for that.

precisely!

I'm also having a huge difficulty trying to understand what "the noblest love is born not of admiration, but of charity"

It's saying that IF someone thinks that the noblest (best kind) of love is not born out of deep respect/ admiration of what they do and who they are, but IS born of charity...(you see their flaws, feel bad for them, and instead of viewing their problems as a bad thing, you treat that person's problems as if it was a quality of theirs that made you be with them in the first place)...then you are damning human existence.

What sort of "hidden meaning" have you come to understand from it?

ya, so the hidden meaning...is not so hidden the further and further you get into the book...I mentioned a few of the different things that she was getting at in one of the previous...umm post (?) on this thread

[Galen]

I think this is what she is getting at: *metaphor
let's suppose that you meet someone from school, you chat, you get to know them...and you find out that this person is a narcissist...you feel sorry for him and decide to spends lots of time with him..and become good friends all because you felt bad for his inability to feel.
You view his flaw as something "cute" or "awwww-how sad! I don't want to judge him for that!"...when in reality, you should.

I don't think I'd ever view narcissism in an "oh how cute" light, and I wouldn't spend lots of time on a person I dislike for the sole reason that I feel sorry for him.

The quote helped me out because I have this problem. I go for the "fix it" guys...the ones who are fucked up in more ways than one...and it is wrong! haha this part in her book helped me see that.

o
Well to each their I suppose haha

It's saying that IF someone thinks that the noblest (best kind) of love is not born out of deep respect/ admiration of what they do and who they are, but IS born of charity...(you see their flaws, feel bad for them, and instead of viewing their problems as a bad thing, you treat that person's problems as if it was a quality of theirs that made you be with them in the first place)...then you are damning human existence.

Oh, I thought she was saying the exact opposite of that. Seems kinda weird that she'd tack on what seems to be a "just kidding" clause after that whole section in ellipses.

[silverchris9]

Another set of obvious and stereotypical betas in history are those in authoritarian 20th century regime leaderships (******, Stalin, Lenin) and Rand explicitly profiled herself in a very sharp contrast to these people.

Well sure. Many people also type gandi as IEI, and I'm pretty sure any sane person would profile him as different from osama bin laden. Quality of human being has nothing to do with socionics. Also, don't forget Mussolini, i.e., the least bad of all the incredibly evil dictators of the WWII period. Dualz. ...

That said I haven't read the book or this place where Ayn Rand profilied herself in contrast to ******, Stalin, etc. But I mean... unless she was getting down to things obviously related to socionics, I don't think that really means much. I mean, I can tell you some very fundamental differences between myself and Harold Bloom, or Percy Shelley or Yeats or whoever. Doesn't change the fact that we're all IEI.

@bobby, I haven't read any ayn rand and I don't really want to: feels a little bit like a poor exchange of intellectual/spiritual quality for time/number of pages, plus I'm on a Shakespeare kick right now. But I bet the characters are beta too.

[glam]

"love is our response to our highest values-and can be nothing else...let him profess that love is not self-enjoyment but self-denial, that virtue consists, not of pride, but of pity or pain or weakness or sacrifice, that the noblest love is born, not of admiration, but of charity, not in response to values, but in response to flaws....if he believes that flaws are values, he has damned existence as evil and only the evil will attract him." ayn rand

i can understand the attempt to define a love that is "better" than another, but i don't understand how it follows from the rest that someone is "damning human existence" and will only be attracted to "evil" by not loving the "right" way; it seems extreme and overly moralistic. also, (i thought this was obvious) what someone may see as a flaw or a value won't be to someone else. for this quote to be "true" you'd have to presuppose that "flaws" and "values" can be objectively measured... which i don't.

i could think more about this (and i will) but for now i disagree with this in general, and think the bolded is particularly bullshit.

[Suz]

i can understand the attempt to define a love that is "better" than another, but i don't understand how it follows from the rest that someone is "damning human existence" and will only be attracted to "evil" by not loving the "right" way; it seems extreme and overly moralistic. also, (i thought this was obvious) what someone may see as a flaw or a value won't be to someone else. for this quote to be "true" you'd have to presuppose that "flaws" and "values" can be objectively measured... which i don't.

i could think more about this (and i will) but for now i disagree with this in general, and think the bolded is particularly bullshit.

that part is exactly what i disagreed with too.

[Blaze]

Ayn Rand is one of the most obvious and stereotypical Betas in the history of literature. Devalued Fi is rampant, love for Se is all-consuming. She's a beta. I don't know very much about her, tbh. But I know she's a beta.

Anyway, it's half-right and mostly wrong. I mean, a lot of it is right, but she missed a big chunk or deliberately ignored a big chunk of it.

i always had thought she was an ILE.

her quote, like Ryu says, reflects one certain aspects of love.

[redbaron]

I've only read The Fountainhead, some years ago. I thought it was worth reading, I really liked it. It's not like Anna Karenina or something but very interesting nonetheless.

The quote, eh, I didn't really understand what she was getting at and it seems like it *may* have been taken out of context. Like maybe it would make more sense if I read the entire book. Which I'm not going to do.