TTI Forums

for those of you who have read 'we the living'

there is a part where leo and kira are talking. vaguely i remember the conversation going like this: leo asks kira what she wants to do or what she wants to accomplish or something like that. Kira responds, I want to build a glass tower. and leo's response is "so then what?"

and i distinctly remember frantically reading all around that section looking for an answer... but rand never gave one.

once the glass tower is built? then what? build another? learn to play the flute? smoke cigars eat salt lick bbq all day?

why even build the tower in the first place? why not skip the building and do what you would do anyways?

as long as one is self sustaining then what else is neccesary? like the dagny in atlas shrugged.... could she not have done a basic job, taken home her paycheck and lived like that? is she is hired to work an 8-5 vp of operations jobs why then did she work 18hrs a day/7 days a week?

working for mere self sustainance is not leeching... but not fanatical production either.

so.... we have 3 options perhaps.... leeching, selfsustainance, and full out production.


to me, at my point in life.... i really dont give a flip about glass towers or uber bank accounts (even though i keep accidentally acquiring more wealth than those around me). i would rather live my life than run around fanatically pursuing value or monetary wealth or massive ramses II constructs. I would rather be an above average office worker (sry i dont chat on cell phone nor sleep on the job), and then read books, play my flutes and irish whistles..... i really dont care to pursue promotions or pay raises or anything like that.

self sustainance is a subset of production ( i am fulfilling my job reqs, producing what i am asked and taking home my paycheck).... but none of rands "good" characters really seem to address this as an option. eddie willers perhaps seems to come the closest as i recall.

i mean sure... more than a third of my paycheck goes to a bloated government. but i think of it differently..... I agree to be paid what im seeing as an end result.

This is a question for the ages DT.

Each life holds great promise. At birth there really is no difference between a villain and a hero. It is only through our choices that we rise or fall. We can be greater than Gandhi, or less important than a lowly street sweeper. I keep a great quote from Napoleon Hill close at hand, “You are the most important person in the world, greater than all that have come before. Find that greater purpose that you are here to fulfill.”

I am currently reading one of Sam Keen’s books, The sacred journey your quest for life's higher meaning. He gives some great insights on this topic and some specific advice to move forward spiritually. One of the points he makes is that negative emotions like boredom or depression are good. He says we should embrace these feelings when they come to us. The feelings are sending signals that some things in our lives are causing us dis-ease, and that there is a opportunity to renew our passions. Without introspection and change during these times we set ourselves back.

Sam is one of my favorites. He has written on a very broad group of topics, check him out.

so continual production is a go or no go?

i believe that was the view rand put forth in atlas.... when man stops producing is when man becomes uh lifeless?

must we always be producing something?

DagnyTaggart wrote:must we always be producing something?

Absolutely not. One of the messages I took from Atlas is that the producer has a responsibility of control. Just as Galt’s power plant self destructed, and Danconia destroyed his mines before shrugging - every producer should maintain the capacity to withdraw the fruit of his mind.

A large portion of the plot centered on Taggart and Rearden’s unfaltering support of a society that was insidiously attempting to control (failing control – destroying) them. The capacity to produce is a powerful tool, and like any tool it must be used responsibly.

Everyman should seek his own happiness and spiritual growth. Obviously production is a factor because our material sustenance is primal. But beyond the standard of living that we choose for ourselves, wealth becomes just another tool to aid us in turning our dreams into reality.

Actually I enjoyed the Leo Kovalensky character in We The Living. Because he embraced his pasion disconnected from the desire to sustain himself. Ultimately he was pounded to dust. I am sure Rand would say this life with its tragedy is more desirable than a life of unfulfilled pasions.

masashi wrote:

DagnyTaggart wrote:must we always be producing something?

wealth becomes just another tool to aid us in turning our dreams into reality.

well i've wasted 3 years of my life getting to that.

so rand has not given me a philosophy to live by, but a philosophy to stand on.

although i think there is some merit in holding the view that any form of production is healthy.... me playing the flute (horribly in private) as an example. im not "producing" anything for public consumtion... but im still "active"

there was one section in one of peikoff's writings that talks about production as life.... something like that.