Ayn Rand and the Object of Objectivism

We had a great conversation before Large Group at FIU South this week.  Frank, Simon, David, Mariella...these are some of the smartest, sharpest students around.

Somehow, we ended up talking about Ayn Rand, a Russian-American novelist/philosopher.  It brought back memories.

When we were at Duke, Matthew joked that - if there were no God - we should all be objectivists. 

The duty-free life sounds appealing when you've got a lot of promise and a lot of responsibility.  Rational self-interest sounds appealing when you haven't made any confidence-breaking mistakes in life.  A community of the excellent sounds appealing when you consider yourself among the Excellent.

A lot's changed since that conversation at Duke.

I like my responsibilities.  Husband.  Father.  So much joy.

I've made some mistakes.  Confidence and heart-breaking mistakes.

I've met the Excellent.  I like the Excellent.  I'm not one of them.

The object of Objectivism is a life full of freedom, opportunity and social comfort.  This is what Ayn Rand offers.  Ironically, this is also what God offers.

Would it be fair to say that Ayn Rand is the object of Objectivism?

2 comments:

  1. hrmm, this is very interesting. my old staff and i talked about this a few times. at first, mainly it was that i thought ayn rand was straight up crazy and that he thought she was almost right. and i could never get my head around the 'almost right' part, so i reread we the living (if you haven't read that one, it's basically the same as the fountainhead and atlas shrugged but shorter and in soviet russia but definitely worth reading, one of my favorite books). and it just so happened that i was rereading the four loves at the same time. here's the quote that pulled it all together for me (cs lewis): "This judgment that the object is very good, this attention (almost homage) offered to it as a kind of debt, this wish that it should be and should continue being what it is even if we were never to enjoy it, can go out not only to things but to persons. When it is offered to a woman, we call it admiration; when to a man, hero-worship; when to God, worship simply." it's exactly what happens with leo (the person the main character in we the living loves)--it's hero-worship, giving worship to something because it is inherently good and deserves our worship. the same with her other books. and so it sets up really neat parallels for conversations about the things God created being good because he created them (a mountain or a sunset maybe?) or that he himself is good and ought to be worshiped simply for that reason.

    but it appears you guys already got there =p. it's interesting thinking about how, like you said, if there were no God, we should all be objectivists. this makes so much sense--we try to be little gods anyway, so it would just be recognizing it and calling it worth worshiping (or admiring, honoring, however).

    anyway, oh goodness, this post got me so excited. i would love to have a conversation with you about this sometime, hear your thoughts about ayn rand and all that. and as for ayn rand being the object of objectivism, you should write more!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nice post about Objectivism as Objectivism being Ayn Rand's philosophy of reason, egoism, capitalism. Read more - https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/

    ReplyDelete