Talk:The Virtue of Selfishness

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Objectivism, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.ObjectivismWikipedia:WikiProject ObjectivismTemplate:WikiProject ObjectivismObjectivism

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook

Philosophy: Literature Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Reception section

I removed the Critical Reception Section, the only thing in there was a reference to a modern library reader's poll which of course has nothing to do with reception by critics.Jtmeijer (talk) 12:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see the section has been expanded, I still think the poll is a bit ... typical ... but I'll let it stand for now.Jtmeijer (talk) 19:14, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again removed the reference the the reader's poll. Firstly, a reader's poll decades after publication hardly has anything to do with reception. Secondly, and in my eyes more importantly, the reader's poll shows a clear bias; this is especially clear in the novel poll at the same site which has 4 works by Rand and 3 by L.Ron Hubbard in it's top 10. A large discrepancy with the board's list.Jtmeijer (talk) 14:34, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the term "selfish"

Isn't Rand's use of the term more consistent with the Japanese sense of the term "selfishness" than the normal English or American sense? I see the word "selfish" appear in subtitles of Japanese anime films in which it seems to be used in strictly the Randian sense: to mean not unjust action (such as force) to others in deference to one's self as we associate the term, but simply as a refusal to follow the crowd. I think this latter sense of "selfishness" is the sense Rand means rather than the former. The article could use a better explanation of this, perhaps with quotes from the book. --134.193.112.62 (talk)

I think there is a lot of equivocation in Rand's use of the term "selfishness." In some contexts, she seems to mean something like the pursuit of one's enlightened self-interest. In other contexts, she seems to mean simply a refusal to follow the dictates of the crowd, as suggested above. And in still other contexts, she seems to mean something like the more ordinary meaning of the term. It seems to me that via this equivocation she is able to glorify even the more usual meaning of "selfishness" as a moral virtue. JimFarm (talk) 13:50, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]