An exchange between professors Susan Dawn Wake and Alan Kors.
Description: In this interview, David N. Mayer expands upon a talk he gave at the IOS/Cato-sponsored conference, “Atlas and the World.” The main point of that address was: “Atlas Shrugged is significant because, through the novel, Rand shows us what we must do to complete the American Revolution, to complete the unfinished work of 1776, and the hope that it represents to the world.” 
I've reread Thorton Wilder's The Ides of March many times, always with the equivalent of a slight mental frown: Why do I like this book so much? It is by no means a suspense novel that races (or even lopes) toward its climax. In fact, it deals with one of history's best-known stories: the events surrounding the assassination in 44 B.C. of Gaius Julius Caesar, dictator of Rome. Wilder does not so much tell this story as meditate on it. Each of the book's four sections returns to the same unfolding drama, but within successively wider frames, like a movie camera dollying back to reveal more context. As it does so, we enter into the life of Rome as republican government is giving way to empire. (It was supposedly to save the republic, of course, that Brutus, Cassius, and the others killed Caesar.) Some giants move across that landscape: Cicero, Cato, Catullus, Cleopatra, and the amazing matrons of republican Rome. At the center, obsessing their thoughts, dominating their ambitions, stirring their hatreds is Julius Caesar, one of history's most commanding minds. Wilder's portrait of that mind arrested the attention of the philosopher Brand Blanshard, one of our era's rare academic champions of reason. (Many readers will recall that The Objectivist Newsletter recommended Blanshard's Reason and Analysis, a critique of trends in epistemology.) In the title essay of a collection of his talks, In Defense of Liberal Education (Open Court, 1973),...
Many of my friends and patients consider Jack Kevorkian a hero for helping sick people escape from their suffering. And many of my own patients—not only those facing cancer and other terminal illnesses, but also those in despair over disability, immobility, and pain arising from arthritis, diabetes, and strokes—have asked me to give them something to end their life. Thus far, I have not felt it legal or appropriate to do so. There is, in the first place, the difficulty of knowing whether they are speaking in rueful jest. Beyond that, whatever sympathy and temptation one might feel in such a situation, emotional and ethical discomfort—as well as fear of liability or sanctions—is always present, especially for physicians. The Terms of Debate Suicide, assisted suicide, and euthanasia—though they differ in critical ways—are not always carefully distinguished. Suicide, of course, is the taking of one's own life by one's own hand, even if one uses equipment or substances supplied by someone else. Assisted suicide, then, is a subcategory of suicide: "the act of intentionally killing oneself with the assistance of another, who deliberately provides the knowledge, means, or both." (Quoted definitions are from the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide.) The issue of assisted suicide has come to the fore because, in many cases, an individual may not have the knowledge, ability, or means to commit suicide without assistance, particularly if the individual is sick or...
BOOK REVIEW:  Journals of Ayn Rand. Edited by David Harriman. (New York: Dutton, 1997. 727 pp. $39.95.)


Donate to The Atlas Society

Did you enjoy this article? If so, please consider making a donation. Our digital channels garner over 1 million views per year. Your contribution will help us to achieve and maintain this impact.

× Close Window

logo cymk 400x200

Newsletter Signup

Sign up for our email newsletter to receive the most recent news and articles directly to your inbox.