Ayn Rand Lamp | Hacker News Reader

Ayn Rand Lamp

volcanophile.com

33 pointsjimsojim51 comments

> "Her dramatic eye movements are self-stimulating her brain hemispheres, a technique called bi-lateral stimulation. By panning her eyes back and forth she is unknowingly using this technique to synthesize her brain hemisphere's memory and logic functions connecting complex ideas and accessing enormous amount of information."

Is this satire?

I think so, but even if it's not, it's definitely Poe's law in effect.

That summary seems to be wrong as the technique helps with processing emotional information and not with connecting complex ideas. At least that's what I remember and what the wiki article says as well. It's been a while since I read about it.

I know that it is a well researched and established method for treatment of Parkinsons (short term and midterm results have been empirically solid) and also used to treat PTSD.

According to Scientific American, The journal Brain and Cognition found a correlation with moving your eyes from side to side with increased creativity and improved memory. [1]

1. http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/boost-your...

As an obsessive compulsive, I should not have learned that today... lol

It's called EMDR:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_movement_desensitization_a...

The World Health Organization recommends it as treatment for PTSD.

You can practice it right now on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlfQIRJEsYk

The idea is to think of something emotional that you may be struggling with and keep it in your mind while following the images on the screen. Whether or not the eye movement actually triggers the brain to reconfigure itself, or whether it's simply keeping the emotion "in focus" that brings the changes remains TBD, I think.

Enormous amounts of bullshit.

Am I on the Daily Mail by mistake? Lots of opinions there bereft of supporting observation or the merest smidgeon of reason to go along or not with the opinion ventured.

>Is this satire?

Why do you say that?

Because it's ridiculous, presumably. Nonsensical and pompous.

In other words... Art.

I think it is satire but I like the ambiguity.

It's stuff like this that makes it hard to believe that Ayn Rand started out talking about the virtues of rationality. See also LessWrong.

Not sure what you mean...

When I read the title, I expected something connected to Matt Ruff's novel "Sewers, Gas & Electric" http://www.bymattruff.com/my-novels/sewer-gas-electric/ which features Ayn Rand trapped in a hurricane lamp as one of the characters.

Such a delightful book

a really wacky, fun, and occasionally high-brow read. I really didnt expect to like it as much as I did. (I also immediately thought it was going to be the lamp from that book)

Since there seems to be a lot of Ayn Rand articles lately, you might be interested in the excellent 3 part series by Adam Curtis called "All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace".

It includes a segment on Ayn Rand, including segments from that interview, but also lots of really interesting interviews with silicon valley folks from the 90s, to high-freq stock market trading and "ecosystems".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Watched_Over_by_Machines_o...

"Oh, this is when science didn't need to have a purpose." - Mystery Science Theater 3000

Modern art, ladies and gentlemen!

Nope. Contemporary.

What's the difference?

edit: thank you to all those who responded. No thanks to the person who hit the downvote link.

Modern refers to a period from the 1860s to the 1970s. Contemporary is present day.

'Modern' art is art made from ~1870 to ~1970 (an oversimplification). 'Contemporary' art just means art made in the present time.

Modern Art includes Picasso, Van Gough, etc. Wikipedia says it ended in the 1970s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_art

Contemporary means happening right about now.

I always thought "post-modern" was a weird oxymoron like "giant shrimp".

In that case, the contemporary art created now will in 20 years also be an oxymoron.

They are going to run out of adjectives.

I was in a drug store recently and the cold medicines that used to say full-strength or maximum-strength now say "extreme". They are also going to run out of adjectives.

Sort of reminds me of Ludicrous Speed...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygE01sOhzz0

i have a lot of friends who are recovering meth addicts and so when i first read ayn rand's atlas shrugged and came across john galt's ridiculous 60 page monologue (and no, i did not elect to read it word for word, you are a fucking moron if you do), my first suspicion, not knowing anything about her background yet, was that this sounded like someone high on amphetamines. sure enough, with a little research, i found that she was on benzos the entire time she was writing atlas shrugged. once i saw this interview with the shifty eyes i was convinced. she's tweaked out of her mind. to be clear, i think atlas shrugged is a significant work of art, but i also think parts of it are just the ramblings of someone high on speed, and i'll be damned if i'm going to read all of it.

Sorry to be pedantic, but benzos are not amphetamines and have almost the opposite behavioral effects. They're sedative and would make it much harder to write anything at all.

benzedrine is an amphetamine. what am i missing here? or did i use the incorrect slang? don't know, wasn't alive during the 60s.

she was on benzedrine, then dexedrine and dexamyl

http://randwatch.blogspot.com/2011/03/was-ayn-rand-drug-addi...

Yes, incorrect "slang". Not from the 60's, it's actually very 21st century. Benzos almost universally refers to Benzodiazepines (Xanax, Klonopin, etc...). Doctors even say Benzos, it's a legitimate abbreviation.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzodiazepine

i stand corrected.

Benzos = Benzodiazepine [1] Bennies = Benzedrine [2]

[1]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzodiazepine

[2]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Benzedrine

I've also heard "bennies" used to refer to diphenhydramine (Benadryl — hence the term). This is used off-label as a sleeping pill in low dosage (causes dependence), as a sex enhancer in medium doses, and as a recreational deliriant in high doses. It's not particularly good for you.

Figured it was worth leaving this here in case some SV person tries to find amphetamines on the street by looking for "bennies" and gets the wrong stuff.

nice PSA. good looking out

Is Benadryl at normal doses bad for you? I occasionally take one to combat insomnia. I'd stop if I found out this wasn't a benign thing to do.

As an aside: I've heard on Reddit that taking Benadryl to hallucinate results in a guaranteed nightmare trip. You're exclusively subjected to frightening and disturbing imagery such as giant spiders and shadows monsters.

Here's the thread: https://m.reddit.com/r/Drugs/comments/1fmizz/how_to_trip_saf...

Not sure I understand the appeal.

Diphenhydramine isn't great for your liver, but occasionally taking a 25-50mg dose shouldn't be an issue unless you have preexisting issues(not a doctor, this isn't medical advice, etc.)

As far as spiders, monsters, and whatnot, http://erowid.org has good write ups in the experiences section for it.

I've also heard them called "bennies", but you're probably not getting OTC benadryl off the street, so I can't see there being much confusion.

Perhaps he meant to say Benzedrine, which was a brand name for amphetamine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Benzedrine

She used "diet" pills, i.e. amphetamines, prescribed by her doctor most of her life. It wasn't uncommon at the time. Even Paul Erdos the mathematician used amphetamines to boost creativity/productiveness, I am sure there were many others.

i have nothing against drug use for creativity. heck the beatles must have taken speed for their "all night" recording sessions. but they didn't take their 12 hour recordings, put it on an album and call it art. they gave us the finished product. i only wish ayn rand and her publisher and editor extended her fans the same courtesy. not a huge deal; i'm just making a point that doesn't seem obvious to most people. that woman was high as fuck.

I think most people just don’t care about the personal life of a creator when evaluating its content. Even deplorable people can have good ideas. Why reject the ideas because of the source.

I read all of it. Whyever not? Slogging through a mere 70-page rambling monologue written in tiny print never hurt anybody ;)

Straight after the speech:

    "It wasn't real, was it?" said Mr Thompson.

I had to laugh at that. Those were pretty much my thoughts exactly, too...

you're a better person than me. i just couldn't stomach it after page 20.

Don't fret, it wasn't written for you anyway.

clarification: i read the whole book (and fountainhead), both of which i enjoyed; i stopped reading galt's monologue 20 pages in. it's like when your friend starts rambling while he's high; i love u man but bro i'm going to sleep. see u later

When I was in High School I wanted to like her books so badly. At the time, I was very much a libertarian and I had heard so many good things about them from that crowd.

Her writing style just isn't very good. It seems like hours and hours of fictional context to set up a big political rant that is supposed to be self-evidently correct within said context.

I only finished Anthem for required reading. I really didn't like it. The Rush album based on it (2112) is sooo much better.

So I’m a fucking moron if I read something in its entirely that you didn’t actually completely read? Got it. And benzos aren’t amphetamines. They are in the neighborhood of being the opposite.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzodiazepine

Please provide links to your easily found research. Thanks. Also, many great authors artists are/were on drugs. I don’t see how that’s relevant.

This is seriously awesome. That's enough internet for me today.

I'm with you on this

Reply on news.ycombinator.com