Stumble it!An Objectivism … what, exactly?
posted in Politics by themaiden |I haven’t read much of Ayn Rand, though I’ve been told on the rare occasion that I sometimes say things that sound like her. I’m not sure if that is true. I do know of elements of her philosophy that I can agree to, at least on a prima facia basis. And frankly, she looks like– literally, looks like– someone I would have liked. I know, silly. Sounds like I should read Rand. Why haven’t I? Well… Rand seems to have generated a following that is– How should I say this?– a wee bit dogmatic.
Objectivists means people who support Ayn Rand and do not deal with her detractors.
Funny, I thought that Objectivist meant believing in the basic principles laid out by Rand and named Objectivism. To wit, something like the belief “that there is a mind-independent reality; that individuals are in contact with this reality through sensory perception; that humans gain objective knowledge from perception by measurement and form valid concepts by measurement omission; that the proper moral purpose of one’s life is the pursuit of one’s own happiness or “rational self-interest;” that the only social system consistent with this morality is full respect for individual human rights, embodied in pure, consensual laissez-faire capitalism; and that the role of art in human life is to transform abstract knowledge, by selective reproduction of reality, into a physical form - a work of art - that one can comprehend and respond to with the whole of one’s consciousness.”
Or if you prefer:
Objectivism celebrates the power of man’s mind, defending reason and science against every form of irrationalism. It provides an intellectual foundation for objective standards of truth and value.
Upholding the use of reason to transform nature and create wealth, Objectivism honors the businessman and the banker, no less than the philosopher and artist, as creators and as benefactors of mankind.
Ayn Rand was a champion of individual rights, which protect the sovereignty of the individual as an end in himself; and of capitalism, which is the only social system that allows people to live together peaceably, by voluntary trade, as independent equals.
Of course, maybe I’m wrong, and ‘not dealing with detractors’ is what ‘Objectivism’ really means.
But as important to Rand’s hold on the public imagination is the great gulf between her fictional heroes and the often tawdry, disheartening details of her own biography, especially the cult-like obedience she demanded of her inner circle. In the gap between Rand’s soaring ideals and her lived reality, we see in particularly strong relief both the creative power of individual desire and its vast capacity for intolerance and delusion. In a world in which more people have more control over their lives than ever before, that’s something to always be pondering.
From another source:
On that I was soon to be set straight. I won’t go into the details as Nathaniel Brandon has written extensively on that period of time, but it soon became apparent to me that Ayn Rand had a dictatorial streak a mile long. Apparently, one was not to sacrifice one’s own thoughts and integrity to anyone–except her. To be part of her inner circle meant unquestioning obedience or face expulsion.
This post is not meant to be a critique of Objectivism. If it were, it would be a very unfair one. As stated by Dr. Sanity, the source just cited, “you must judge an idea separate from the person who conceives it or promotes it.” This post isn’t even a general criticism of Rand’s followers. That too would be unfair. I’m not even sure whether the ‘definition’ I cited at the beginning is actually intended as a definition of ‘Objectivism’ as it seems to read. It may just be an ill worded description of what is allowed on the ‘Objectivism Carnival’, though categorically refusing to admit ‘detractors’ is sad in itself and a philosophy, or a person, who takes that line is de facto of questionable worth. Still, it may, barely, be defensible as a carnival criteria.
The post isn’t intended as a criticism of anyone in any real sense. It is just something I’ve noted with some sadness about some of Rand’s legacy and the result is that her works have been pushed down my reading list for years.
Popularity: 3%
