>>17
I agree. I think Rand had some really good ideas, and she took them very very seriously. Her critics attacked her for this and she responded by taking it a little to the extreme.
You can say a lot of things negative about the woman herself, but in the end her stance was PRO REASON. She wrote a lot about how the mind is used as a tool (and essentially the only tool) to know the world. She gave praise to some great thinkers and was highly critical of others. Her books bring people actively into philosophy--whether you agree or not, to argue effectively for or against her you really have to UNDERSTAND the points she makes and the points that other philosophers make.
Rand's philosophy is very introspective and critically analyses ideas and how human beings form concepts of the world around us.
One thing that I think turns a lot of people off to Rand is that she talks a lot about morality. I get the impression from reading her books that she uses the word very differently than what passes for the common notion. In her view every rational decision you make reflects your ethics and your morality since those are the devices by which you make rational decisions.
Rand was optimistic. She thought that this was a world that was understandable to the degree that humans need to understand it to live happily here. I like that.