This is John Galt Speaking

“Do you ask what moral obligation I owe to my fellow men? None-except the obligation I owe to myself, to material objects, to all of existence; Rationality. I deal with men as my nature & their demands: by means of Reason. I seek or desire nothing from them except such relations as they care to enter of their own voluntary choice. It is only with their mind I can deal and only for my own self-interest, when they see that my interest coincides with theirs. When they don’t, I enter no relationship; I let dissenters go their way and I do not swerve from mine. I win by means of nothing but logic and I surrender to nothing but logic. I do not surrender my reason or deal with men who surrender theirs. I have nothing to gain from fools & cowards; I have no benefit to seek from human vices: from stupidity, dishonesty or fear. The only value men can offer me is the work of their mind. When I disagree with a rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn; if I am wrong I will; one of us will win, but both will profit.”

“My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.”

~ JOHN GALT (Book: Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand)

P:S: Just incase you are thinking who the hell this John Galt is, please log on to or


7 responses

  1. Ayn Rand’s philosophy does have a quite a few flaws. But its breathtakingly fresh because for a change a person is asked to live for himself. Sacrifice is overrated, and it barely ever serves you.

    December 15, 2013 at 6:12 PM

    • Dpacino

      flaws, ya I have read somewhere people speaking of its contradictory nature. do u know of what it is? coz I have read some blog posts but I couldn’t understand what they meant &a I never found Ayn Rand contradictory, neither in Fountain head nor in Atlas Shrugged,

      December 15, 2013 at 8:39 PM

      • The first and foremost one. She talks about individuality to an extreme. But to live like that even Galt had to make a small society in the hills right? So his individuality is of no use unless its part of society. That’s the main contradiction.

        December 16, 2013 at 3:02 PM

      • Dpacino

        I think u’re mixing up two distinct things – Individualism (a moral stance) with Being Anti-social (an act)

        December 16, 2013 at 8:28 PM

      • Lol no, I never said Ayn Rand is anti-social. But then that would make an interesting theory.
        The question is, can a man really live like that? Is it so easy let go of what we conceive as duty?

        December 16, 2013 at 8:51 PM

      • Dpacino

        It’s not easy, but it’s not impossible either. some rare could achieve it to the denial of “being for the greater good”, & live by their selves & for their selves. They got to be a part “Of the society”, but they cant transform themselves according to be the one “By the Society” & “For the Society”, tht’s what Ayn Rand meant If I am not wrong.

        December 16, 2013 at 9:33 PM

      • We know what Ayn said, but is that possible? That’s what I wonder.

        December 16, 2013 at 10:42 PM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s