Ayn Rand is easily one of the most controversial, provocative, and rejected philosophical minds of the 20th century. It is completely absent in Donald M. Borchert's Encyclopedia of Philosophy, where only a brief reference to Rand's compatriot Vladimir Solovyov's “...objective forms of moral life” (125) alludes to anything it also has to do with remotely with Rand. Rand's total rejection of the mainstream philosophical community stems from her controversial views on various topics and her fierce criticism of intellectuals. Jonathan Chait in his review of the book "Ayn Rand and the Invincible Cult of Selfishness in the American Right" describes Rand's philosophical objectivism as, “…based on the absolute centrality of logic to all human endeavor.” (Chait) Chait also draws parallels between parts of Rand's philosophy and Marxism: “Bifurcated class analysis did not end the similarities between Rand's worldview and Marxism. Rand's Russian youth imbued her with a belief in the polemical influence of fiction. She once wrote to a friend that "it's time we realized, as the Reds do, that spreading our ideas in the form of fiction is a great weapon, because it arouses in the public an emotional, as well as an intellectual, response to our ideas ". cause." (Chait) Now, considering the time period in which Rand lived, it is not surprising that any view that even remotely resembles Marxism is dismissed with prejudice. Ironically, even with these similarities, Rand was definitely not a communist and even wrote in 1950 The Screen Guide for Americans in which he outlined how the film industry could avoid subtle communist influences in their films Chait writes about this: "The guidelines, which clearly summarize Rand's worldview, included such cate... half of ersial document but, along with Rand's controversial personality and other points of view, would be ripe for discarding. So Rand is in the peculiar position of having different views on how to live life than others who on the surface don't seem very controversial and yet are completely shunned by the mainstream philosophical community. Did the fact that she was a woman with something to say in the 20th century work against her? It certainly seems so, as I firmly believe that if she had been a man the backlash would not have been as severe or even existent. I could hardly use the Encyclopedia of Philosophy since there is absolutely nothing referring to Rand in the entire work! Ultimately Rand is a fascinating figure with interesting ideas embraced by many loyal followers who have, for better or worse, at least for now, relegated to the fringes of academic thought..