According to Ayn Rand, “The mind is an attribute of the individual. There is no such thing as a collective brain. There is no such thing as a collective thought. An agreement reached by a group of men is only a compromise or an average drawn upon many individual thoughts. It is a secondary consequence. The primary act—the process of reason—must be performed by each man alone. We can divide a meal among many men. We cannot digest it in a collective stomach.” In short, Rand means to say that a man must be able to create an identity in himself and go against collectivity and make his own decisions this is impacted due to the aspect rationality that censorship is depriving people. If historical accounts are censored, not only is society losing a vital piece of teaching material to educate future generations of the past and how not to enter another period parallel to the movements and is creating a loss of personal identity, because it disallows a reader to formulate his literary identity and also create his own opinions of the event. Censorship is perpetually invalid because the only way people learn things beyond personal experience is reading about them. And who would like to experience a genocide to educate themselves on the
According to Ayn Rand, “The mind is an attribute of the individual. There is no such thing as a collective brain. There is no such thing as a collective thought. An agreement reached by a group of men is only a compromise or an average drawn upon many individual thoughts. It is a secondary consequence. The primary act—the process of reason—must be performed by each man alone. We can divide a meal among many men. We cannot digest it in a collective stomach.” In short, Rand means to say that a man must be able to create an identity in himself and go against collectivity and make his own decisions this is impacted due to the aspect rationality that censorship is depriving people. If historical accounts are censored, not only is society losing a vital piece of teaching material to educate future generations of the past and how not to enter another period parallel to the movements and is creating a loss of personal identity, because it disallows a reader to formulate his literary identity and also create his own opinions of the event. Censorship is perpetually invalid because the only way people learn things beyond personal experience is reading about them. And who would like to experience a genocide to educate themselves on the