Ayn Rand, Objectivism, Capitalism, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness

Then, as I've already said, your belief in it isn't based on reason, it's simply faith.

 

Saying so doesn't make it so, any more than Rand saying so makes anything so. Reality is objective, and reason is how one grasps it.

Doubt it? Do 150 mph in Atlanta during rush hour with eyes closed, trusting your faith in the goodness of God to guide you through; we will pick up your pieces later. And if you survive, have you jailed or committed.

Oh, no, no, no, you say. Well, that's you, using reason. Doesn't say much for faith, does it?

 

Aren't you basing an entire society by rushing around with your eyes clothes, trusting your faith in R--d (PBUH) to guide you through? You've rejected both experience and experimentation, so you've basically rejected both science and reason. That's called faith buddy.

 

Ok?

 

Thank you.

 

No problem. And now you can go faithfully on your merry way. Best premises.

 

Well I do enjoy a good epistemological victory.

 

LOL

 

That is not what Supply and Demand states. The law of supply and demand states: Price reflects choices, all choices, irrational or otherwise.

As Miss Rand points out here:
Ayn Rand: “In a free market, all prices, wages, and profits are determined—not by the arbitrary whim of the rich or of the poor, not by anyone’s “greed” or by anyone’s need—but by the law of supply and demand.“
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/free_market.html

 

Anyone defending Rand can be ignored.

 

Randian Self-Interest Egoism is really an anti-ethical theory. “Interest egoism,” means “Everyone always acts so as to promote his own self-interest either immediately or long run, to the exclusion of everyone else.”

The first modern schools of ethical theory were moral sentiment theories (not "emotionalism") based on human "sympathy" and "empathy" which is the opposite of self-interest egoism of which there are other versions. Randian Interest Egoism is a version of “Want Egoism” or “Wantism” that states “X wants Y; therefore, Y is right.” An ethical theory only based on self-interest is no ethical theory at all, but uses the language of ethics such as "happiness," "rational," "good," "life," "prosperous" and other tautologous names for their definition of immoral selfishness.

And then out of thin air the interest egoist proclaim a universal a priori prescription--even a Duty! (Categorical Imperative)-- saying, "Everyone should seek their self-interest." If a person really believed in “self-interest egoism” they wouldn’t tell anyone since others acting in their self-interest is just more uncontrolled social competition against one’s own self-interest.

 

Everyone seeks their self-interest. Self-interest does not mean "selfish," however.

For example, a parent spending a large sum of money to get a college degree for their child is done in self-interest. The parent wanted to do it. It pleased the parent to give to provide an education for his child.

If my family needed financial help, I would give it to them. Again, self-interest. I would want to do that.

If my good friend needed help to get out of a bind, I would help them. Self-interest. I wanted to help my friend.

If I give money to a panhandler on the street corner, it is done out of self-interest. I wanted to and it made me feel good.

When I donate to a charity, I do so out of self-interest. (and so do you)

Rand was correct in much of her philosophy. Her detractors miss the above points. Self-interest is not "selfishness."

One problem in our society is that too many people want to force others to act against their own-self-interest and for someone else's self-interest.

 

I am glad that A. Rand when she died was on SS and medicare.

 

If self interested people are nnot selfish are the genuine selfish acting in the interest of others ?

What a philosophy this is! No matter how self iinterested a randian is they are not selfish. Only the people who help others but not motivsted by self interests are selfish people



I am not happy as to the implications of her philosophy. Truth is, most people act in there own self interests and most of that is motivated by selfidhness . And yyour self interests does not always benefit others as your examples did.

 

You are missing the point. Of course they don't. Each and every one of us does a plethora of self-interested acts each day. That includes things that are actually selfish, and things that are "selfless."

When a person does something for others, they are actually doing it for their own gain. Maybe it makes you feel good inside that you were "unselfish." But you gained the good feeling as a reward. Maybe you feel sorry that some panhandler looks hungry, so you give him money. And you eased your sorrow and felt good about helping. Superficially, we can say there are "selfless" acts. But when you dig deeper, the giver did what he did for his own gain - perhaps it isn't a material gain, but a mental gain.

Point is, their are very few selfless acts. Perhaps there are none. So to think that self-interest is the same thing as selfish is a very naïve understanding of what makes people do the things they do. Rands "self-interest" is not the equivalent of "selfish."

 

roo babe is missing the point. Self interest does not serve the community.

 

That was in her own self interest!

 

Very good response...the classical responses!

( S * ~S) is a contradiction.
The denial of a tautology is a contradiction. (S ≡ ~S).

"I want X, therefore X is good." Even your intuition knows this is false. "At the graduation party I want to snort meth; therefore, meth is good."

This is not even an ethical act. You introduced "need" as a new axiom, or criteria because "self-interest" is inadequate to justify any act. What is the criterion of
"need?" And, if another's need is not in my self-interest, then I would not help my friend so there is no sense of ethical duty which make your actions the equivalent to coin tossing chance: in other words, your decision is not only unethical, it is not even moral.

Yes, self-interest is inadequate as an ethical system, so you must now switch to hedonistic utilitarianism which actually is an improvement over Ayn Rand.

Or human being are an intrinsic value and should never be used as an means, but only as ends in themselves. Wantism lacks this intrinsic value switch makes it arbitrary
Wantism. My real or imagined hypocrisy has nothing to do with the validity of your ethical principle.

Circular argument. You are assuming your conclusion as a premise for your conclusion.

Argumentum ad Hominem

But what if it is in their own self-interest for use-of-force against others? Under Randianism use-of-force against others would be a good! Lying and deception is a type of use-of-force, and would also be a good. See the problem?

 

There is always the danger, or even need, of the use of force against others in any socio-economic system.

Did Rand actually state that use-of-force in self-interest was proper?

 

Well, that is a very weak response.

The answer to your question is no, because there is no need to state it since sentence one is true. So you just presented yet another reason that Randian Libertarianism is contradictory.

Every Socio-economic system must use Force against some one’s self-interest. This principle does not need to be Actually stated. Randism is a Socio-economic system of ethical behavior. Therefore, Randism is a socio-economic system that uses Force:

__ = spacing
* = and
⊃ = if, then
~= not
(∀x) = for all variable x
(∃x) = there exists at least one x

1. (∀x)(Sx ⊃ Fx) > ~Ax

2. (∀x)(Sx >⊃ Fx)

3. (∃x)( Rx * Sx) /:: Therefore; (∃x)( Sx * Rx * Fx)

4. Ra * Sa __3, EI.

5. Sa * Ra __4, Comm

6. Sa __5, Simp.

7. Sa ⊃ Fa __2, UI.

8. Fa __6,7, Modus Ponens

9. Ra __4, Simp.

10. (Sa * Ra * Fa) __6, 8, 9, Conj.

11. (∃x)( Sx * Rx * Fx) __10, E.G.

 

So the way you figure it, the Stalins of the world are not motivated by self-interest. Right?

 

Everyone is motivated by self-interest. In everything they do.

 

So Stalin's self-interest wasn't selfish. Right?

 

(∀z)[Dz ⊃ (∀x)Mx]
If anything z is done, then all x is Motivated by self-interest.

or

(∀x)Mx
Every act is motivated by self-interest.

~(∃x)~Mx
No act is done that is not motivated by self-interest.

(∃x)Mx
There is an act motivated by self-interest

~(∀x)~Mx
Nothing is done that isn't motivated by self-interest.

(∀x)~Mx
All acts are not motivated by self-interest.

~(∃x)Mx
There is no act that is motivated by self-interest.

(∃x)~M
There is some act that is not motivated by self-interest.

~(∀x)Mx
No act is motivated by self-interest.

 

Try refuting what? I have no idea what she is talking about.

And, Ayn Rand, hmmmm --- isn't she the gal who said that government benefits were an immoral distribution of wealth, but wound up having to accept social security, in her later years?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ayn-rand-social-security/

I'll pass.

"I had to flog myself to read Atlas Shrugged" --- William F Buckley