Ayn Rand Quotes

My critics were entirely right in writing that certain fundamental ideas in my article would, if pursued to their conclusion, result in the dissolution of the left-wing cultural movement.

You cannot imprison an idea. You have to fight it with a better idea.

A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.

Each pursues his own theory, little solicitous to correct or improve it by an attention to what is advanced by his opponents.

Socrates, after all, could be an intensely annoying man, all the time questioning passers-by until they became exasperated.

To be a real philosopher all that is necessary is to hate some one else's type of thinking.

A powerful idea communicates some of its strength to him who challenges it.

The history of philosophy is to a great extent that of a certain clash of human temperaments.

There is such a polarized discussion of economics among people like analysts, columnists, bloggers; often, they end up just saying that views other than their own should not even be discussed. I find that frustrating. There is no intellectual progress without considering lots and lots of different views.

There is only one thing a philosopher can be relied upon to do, and that is to contradict other philosophers.

A philosopher who is not taking part in discussions is like a boxer who never goes into the ring.

Ideas can never be defeated by military force. They can only be defeated by better ideas.

How do you fight an idea—especially a new idea?

Be more severe to ideas than to actions; do not over look the strength of the bad cause or the weakness of the good.

In the long run of history, the censor and the inquisitor have always lost. The only sure weapon against bad ideas is better ideas. The source of better ideas is wisdom. The surest path to wisdom is a liberal education.

I don’t attack people. I attack ideas. And some very good people can have some very bad ideas.

We co9me from the tradition of the European Enlightenment, the Age of Reason. So we find it extremely hard to face down the emotional force of right-wing populism using rational arguments.

It's easy to talk a good game in an echo chamber, it's easy to witness to people who think exactly the same way you do, but to test your convictions by going outside your comfort zone is where the ideological battle needs to go.

I am much more interested in defending my ideas than defending my identities.

Prejudice does not mean false ideas, but only ... opinions adopted before examination.

A liberal society stands on the proposition that we should all take seriously the idea that we might be wrong. This means we must place no one, including ourselves, beyond the reach of criticism; it means that we must allow people to err, even where the error offends and upsets, as it often will.

The real battlefield is the realm of ideas.

The pressure to make public retractions of past statements - there's something medieval about it. What does it mean, anyway, to 'retract' what you've said? How can anyone state categorically that a thought he once had is no longer valid? In modern times an idea can be refuted, yes, but not retracted.

As more and more citizens express what they think, and defend it in writing, that will change the way people understand public issues. It is easy to be wrong and misguided in your head. It is harder when the product of your mind can be criticized by others. Of course, it is a rare human who admits that he has been persuaded that he is wrong. But it is even rarer for a human to ignore when he has been proven wrong. The writing of ideas, arguments, and criticism improves democracy.

All scientists know of colleagues whose minds are so well equipped with the means of refutation that no new idea has the temerity to seek admittance. Their contribution to science is accordingly very small.