Ayn Rand : Novelist and Philosopher: Ethics presentation ©
Susan
Fleck
· Ethics & Politics proscribe as
well as describe
· Ethical code: abstract moral principles
· Literature: concretized model for the
application of these principles in action
o
Present
image of things not as they are, but as they ‘ought to be’ within a
contemporary setting
—she classifies herself as a “Romantic
Realist.” Like 19th century Romantic writers such as Hugo and
Dostoyevsky, she was deeply concerned with the realm of moral values. She
argued that the Romantic Movement celebrated
the individual as an efficacious being of free will; but that it was full of
inner contradictions—it was antimaterialist and emotionalist. The Romantics
were opposed by the Naturalists (Realism), who accepted the premises of
determinism, viewing human beings as puppets of their environment. (Another
dichotomy she rejected)
o
Created characters based on essential
ideas they embodied: Her characters’ attributes are focused more sharply and
consistently than are so with the average person.
o
Presented perspective in stark terms
· Most (those
who read her novels casually) miss complexities and subtleties in her
philosophy
· Controversial, especially her defense of
egoism
· Objectivism : grand revolt against formal
dualism in each of the major branches of philosophy and in each of the
institutions of modern statism
o
By receiving hostile reviews for Atlas Shrugged from both the Left and
the Right poles of the polical spectrum, she knew she had achieved a genuine
philosophical synthesis that was neither Marxist nor religious.
Philosophy’s Main Questions
n
Where am
I? – Metaphysics
n
How do I
know it? – Epistemology
n
What
should I do? – Ethics
n What is good or evil for man—and why? What is Virtue?
n Quest for joy—or escape from suffering?
n Seek happiness—or self-sacrifice?
n
Ethics’
answers determine answers to Politics:
n What is the proper structure for society for human
living?
n How shall man govern or be governed?
n
Does man
need Art? If so, why? – Aesthetics
Ethics: Describes & Prescribes
· Provides a code of values to guide man’s
choices and actions—that determine the purpose and course of his life
· Three basic questions: For what end
should a man live? By what fundamental principle should he act in order
to achieve this end? Who should profit from his actions?
o
Answers
define the ultimate value, the primary virtue, and the particular
beneficiary upheld by and ethical code and reveal its essence
o
Objectivism’s
concise answers: ultimate value is life, primary virtue is rationality,
proper beneficiary is ones self
· Morality is a code of values accepted by choice;
man needs it for one fundamental reason—in order to survive
o
Moral laws are principles that define how to
nourish and sustain human life; they are no more an dno less than this
Rational Egoism : Overview
· If not guided by reason, what should guide
our ethics, in choice of values, actions, pursuits, life’s goals?
· Faith - instinct - intuition - revelation -
feeling - taste - urge - wish - whim ? ? ?
· Many moralists agree: ethics is a subjective subject
· Rational-Selfishness: notion is internal to
concept of egoism:
· Most selfish - pursuing rationally defined
values and interests.
· Most rational when values and interests are
self-motivated
· Objective theory: good is not attribute of
‘things in themselves’
· nor of emotional states
· evaluation of facts by man’s consciousness
· according to rational standard of value
· Good - is aspect of reality in relation to
man—it must be discovered, not invented, by man
· (new slide) Values cannot be separated from
the valuer and valuer’s purpose
· Conventional ethics (Duty / Altruism) fracture relationship between ‘actor and
beneficiary’—
· We must be the beneficiary of our own moral
actions
·
This
principle enables us to survive and flourish
as a human
Metaphysics : Existence Exists
· Nondualistic philosophical framework : no
separate spiritual realm
· Western Religion divorces ideals from life on
earth. It teaches:
· This world (life) is of no consequence, or is
mostly (or nothing but) sorrow
(reward of eternal and happy life—of some kind—in heaven)
· Beauty
is unreachable (true beauty is found in heaven)
· Metaphysical
split between this world and the next, between human existence on earth and
“some kind” of life-after-death
· Nobility emerges from the sacrifice, not achievement of values
· It
fragments living and thinking, and sees Ideals as abstract and detached from
everyday life
·
· Lossky (one
of
· Sobornost’ : Russian concept: suggested the
transcendence of conflict between the individual’s selfish interests and the
common interests of society
· In
practice - this is achieved by individual’s self-subordination
·
Bolsheviks appropriated communal sobornost’ in legitimization of the One
State
Human Nature “is”
·
What kind of being is ? What are his
essential attributes? – no questions mor crucial
·
Through
the ages, thinkers and artists have sought to answer this question: their
conclusions have varied and clashed
·
Aristotle: “rational animal”; Plato and
medievals: other-worldly souls trapped in bodily prison; Shakespeare: aspiring
but foolish mortal, defeated by a “tragic flaw”; Hobbes: mechanistic brute;
Hugo: passionate individualist undercut by inimical universe . . . etc. Rand:
the possibility of Howard Roark and John Galt (heroes of her novels The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged).
·
It is a
study of man’s metaphysical nature: This view itself does not include
value-judgments, just, what is the nature
· Hierarchically, this is also a precondition to the study of Ethics: Value
judgments—ethical, political, and aesthetic—presuppose an answer to this
question
· study as a center of a system of thought (a philosophical system)—as the link
between its abstract base and its practical culmination
· Conclusions already drawn: relationship of
consciousness to existence; nature of human consciousness (as conceptual and
volitional); about relationship between reason and emotion
· Philosophic view of man is not exhausted by
general metaphysics and epistemology; fresh observations are required—made
within the context of an established philosophic base
·
Living organisms’ actions are self-generated and goal-directed
· Goal not synonymous with purpose, which applies only to goals of conscious beings, who are
aware of and desire the objects they pursue
· Actions initiated by organism for sake of
achieving an end: taking in raw material from environment, using it for
shelter, growth, self-maintenance, and self-repair
· unlike inanimate objects (which may change in
form), they face alternative of life or death
·
·
It is
with this life-and-death distinction that the study of human nature begins
·
Reason as Man’s basic means of survival
· low-level conscious species (jellyfish,
flatworms) appear to have only faculty of sensation
·
Their
guide to action for sustaining their life is the pleasure-pain mechanism built
into their bodies
· Higher levl animals grasp and deal with world
of entities by using faculty of perception
·
Also guided by pleasure-pain, but range of
actions required for survival are wider
·
They have to learn a set of vital skills,
such as hunting, storing food, hiding, nest-building
·
Survive
by instinct, if term means an
unchosen and unerring form of action (within limits of its range); assuming
fortunate, they find ready-made in reality the simple objects their survival
requires
· (New
slide) Man deals with world of entities by using conception: range of action required is widest of all
·
Does not
have instincts. (Urges, e.g. thirst,
hunger, but no instinct how to get proper liquid & food) He is not born
knowing what course of action to take in order to survive at any given moment.
·
Concepts
and their products are not automatic or infallible
·
Cannot
function or survive by guidance of mere sensations or percepts (which are
infallible)
·
His percepts may lead him to a cave, but he
needs process of thought to build simplest shelter, plant and grow food, or
make weapons for hunting and protection
·
The
objects his life requires are not
ready-made –bread, shirts, homes,
hammers, matches, penicillin do not grow like wild berries
·
objects must be produced, created by
using the given materials in reality—and potentialities they possess
(laws of their nature), and
techniques by which they can be reshaped into sustenance for human survival
·
Rhetorical question: would some
ecology-minded people prefer that we revert back to living lives as cave-men?
·
His kind
of consciousness makes possible and necessary a vast new repertoire of vital
skills
·
He has
free will; He cannot pursue and obtain a goal unless he identifies what it is
and how to achieve it
· (repeat
from earlier slide): Morality is a code of values accepted by choice;
man needs it for one fundamental reason—in order to survive
·
Moral laws are principles that define how to
nourish and sustain human life; they are no more an dno less than this
·
Plants and animals pursue values, but not
moral values; they have goals, but not ethics
· Man needs to act long-range—allowing
for, extending into the future
· Many
goals are set that demand action across a significant time span; man must
weight consequences—future consequences—of current actions
· e.g.
college, career choice, marriage (or not), family (or not), buy home, etc.
· A man
is acting short-range if indifferent to the future; he seeks merely immediate
satisfaction of an impulse, without thought for any other ends or results
· cannot
rely safely on random impulse: assess
any potential action’s relationship to protection of his (and others’) life –
e.g., don’t drink and then drive, etc.
· An
impulsive action may lead
accidentally to a beneficial result (impulsively meaning without reference to
reasons, purposes, or effects)
· Life is a continuous whole: Man has to
choose his course, his goals, his values in the context and terms of a lifetime
· Problem: How does he know survival
significance of every action he
takes, and know in relation to timespan of an entire life: What can make such a
cognitive feat possible?
· The same kind of consciousness that makes it
necessary: by the method of unit-reduction; only by the use of concepts
· Out of the complex array of human choices and
actions, he must ask: what are the fundamental choices—the ones which
shape all the others?
· These become the principles of his ethics.
(A principle is a general truth upon which other truths depend.) Once this is
done, he can quickly decide in particular cases, whether or not to tell a lie,
or to fight an advancing dictatorship, etc., by the application of his earlier
formed moral concepts. (and by assessing particular situation in context)
·
(New slide) Reason: Summary:
·
Epistemology:
reason is man’s faculty of knowing reality
·
man is
an organism who survives by means of his knowledge and consequent action
·
Therefore,
reason is man’s basic tool of
survival; this is a fundamental of
human nature—the means of survival
·
Man
needs to act long-range: he needs principles
of morality to guide him
·
Principle of mind-body integration, and
its corollary, the fact that reason is a practical faculty, rests on
observation: Objectivism rejects all forms of the mind-body dichotomy
· Long-standing thinking, from Plato to the
present, that considers activities involved in human survival as mindless,
perceptual-level, or “materialistic”, while extolling reason as a “spiritual”
faculty concerned with “pure” contemplation (of God, of the Beautiful, the
Good, etc.)
·
Before
the Industrial Revolution,
·
The
Scientific and Industrial Revolutions have
blasted this perspective forever: It has demonstrated once and for all for
every aspect of men’s daily life—the tie between science and wealth, innovation
and longevity, knowledge and power, concepts and survival—it has always been
true (if not obvious)—Reason is a
practical attribute
o
Even in seventeenth century, life expectancy
in many Western European areas was still under 25 years
o
as late as 18th century, nine out
of ten working Americans were working full time on production/distribution of
food
§
Now, less than two out of ten: plus
enormously greater quantity and higher quality of food is available
o
non-industrialized, non-scientific countries
today: many more people die from war, starvation, disease
o
The
Fountainhead: from the wheel to the skyscraper,
everything we are and everything we have comes from a single attribute of
man—the function of his reasoning mind
·
Metaphysical truth: man is not a battlefield of contending
dimensions, spiritual and physical:
·
He is an
indivisible entity, an integrated unit
of two attributes: of matter and
consciousness.
·
Consciousness
in his case takes the form of mind, i.e., a conceptual faculty; matter, of a
certain kind of organic structure.
·
Each of
these attributes is indispensable to the other and to the total entity. The
mind acquires knowledge and defines goals; the body translates these
conclusions into actions
·
Descartes’ mind-body problem solved! there is
no indestructible, immaterial spirit-mind
·
Reason is an Attribute of the Individual: no
such thing as a collective mind or brain
·
All the
functions of body and spirit (mind) are private: they cannot be shared or transferred
·
Men can
learn from other men: invaluable in struggle for survival; but learning is an
active process
·
Requires independent exercise of learner’s
own mind: mindless recitation of truths reached by others is not cognition
·
Men can
build on what they learn from others—carry that knowledge further: an individual adds
·
When
people work together in collaboration,
each one is contributing individually to that effort
·
Men can
achieve feats by specialization and joint effort that no man can achieve alone
(send man to land on Moon); Each man
must do his own thinking to guide his own part of the work
·
Point is, not that men should be independent or individualistic (role of Ethics to
determine); rather that the
collectivists from Plato to Marx are wrong on the deepest level, wrong metaphysically
·
The
fragment, or cell about which they write does not exist. Only man exists, man
the rational being
·
A
rational being’s tool of survival is—not
should be, but is, an individual process, one that occurs only in a private mind
and brain
·
the above conclusions applies also to the
learning of language. Language is not a “social creation,” nor does it make the
mind a “social product.”
·
Language is a system of concepts, and
concepts are a type of cognition.
·
Every concept must be formed by someone, then understood by others via
rational process, for it to be cognitively useful.
·
e.g., new (usually technological or
scientific) words are incorporated into the body of the total language
(computer)
·
The individual is sovereign: Reason is an attribute of
individual; choice to think or not controls all of man’s other choices and
their products, including emotions and actions
·
Man is
self-created, self-directed, and self-responsible: He is responsible for what
he thinks—responsible for consequences of his actions
·
·
Whether
or not a man is thinking rationally,
each man as an individual is the master of his own destiny.
·
Does not
mean that man is omnipotent or that he is immune to the actions of other men
·
It means man chooses his own ends and the methods of attaining them (or chooses
to default on this responsibility)
·
by his
metaphysical nature, man is not a pawn of forces beyond his control
·
not a
product of conditioned reflexes, id, or instincts
·
not a
puppet controlled by lust, jealousy, anger, or any other “tragic flaw”
·
not an
entity ruled by fate or by any supernatural power
·
(new
slide) Theory of human impotence is
invalid; Determinism in any variant is invalid
·
False theory of reason-emotion dichotomy is
essential to most variants of determinism (e.g. nature-nurture debate)
·
Heredity
school treats emotions as a product of innate (genetic) structures; one’s genes
ultimately determine one’s character and feelings.
o
False:
innately set emotions imply innate concepts & value-judgments—innate ideas
o
False: Biology creates conceptual content in
individual’s consciousness; man is helpless byproduct of matter
·
Environment
school: society molds an individual through his experiences (more complicated theory, but false)
·
Parents
and teachers, etc., create an
individual’s conceptual content; man is helpless byproduct of others’ minds
·
Choice
(volition) is not a mystic ‘free will’ factor
superimposed by a supernatural being upon a deterministic creature
§
There is
no dichotomy between will and nature, or between will and reason. Reason is
will
§
The
power of choice is the power that rules man in regard to both body (action) and
soul (thought).
§
Man is
not only free, he is the product of his freedom—of his intellect
o
Man is
the opposite of the feeble creature imagined by theologians and behaviorists
alike: This applies to every individual with a rational faculty, whatever the
degree of his intelligence:
§
Man qua
man is a hero—if he makes himself into one
·
(new
slide) Summary of metaphysical nature of Man: Man
is an organism of a distinctive kind, living in a universe which has a definite
nature. His life depends on a conceptual cognitive faculty which functions
according to specific rules. This faculty belongs to man the sovereign individual
·
What
then should man do? –the study of Ethics
Human Nature : “ought” from “is”
·
Aristotle:
nature of what a living entity is,
determines what it ought to do
·
For
humans “to be” humans, they must choose
to act rationally
·
Humans can act against their nature: they can
act irrationally
·
If you choose to exist, you can consistently pursue that choice only by
holding life as your ultimate value
·
Thinking
is the distinctive activity of human existence—thinking determines one’s goals
·
Cognitive
activity is translated into creative and
material activity
·
The
productive, creative act of thought aims for the consumption and enjoyment of
spiritual and material needs.
·
“Spirit”
is thought, Spiritual desires is emotion
·
Prime
mover of human action is the ability to think
·
With Objectivism, the Emphasis is on life and living, not death and
dying (“afterlife”)
·
(Life
after Death is an oxymoron)
·
No split
between mind (soul) and body. Metaphysically,
consciousness and thinking requires natural processes of the body.
Epistemology : Rationality
·
Man is
neither evil nor good by nature. He is rational
by nature.
·
Free
will is inherent in our nature. We must choose rationality
Rationality is man’s survival tool. To
the extent that we are to survive and thrive, is to the extent we must use this
tool.
·
Centrality
of reason: REASON has a central role in
Objectivism: epistemological and
normative principle
·
If
reason is how we gain knowledge, it is simultaneously how we survive.
·
We should use our rational faculty if we choose to live
·
Consciousness
includes moments of: perception, volition, focus, reason, abstraction, and
conception.
·
Not
separate faculties but components of integrated totality
·
Expansive
concept of reason : faculty of awareness
·
perceives,
identifies and integrates material provided by senses
·
Not
purely logical faculty; not just faculty of perception
·
(new
slide) Rationality: Humans: volitional, self-conscious, and
conceptual awareness
·
Volition
is the choice “to think or not to think”
·
More
broadly: whether or not to apply
one’s ability to focus
·
Conceptual
consciousness: shapes the terms,
methods, conditions, and goals that our survival requires
·
Abstract
standard of value - our lives as humans – this
is made concrete on the individual
level as each pursues his/her life
·
Each
must choose among actions, values, and goals according to the objective
standards that our lives as humans
require
Epistemology : Role of Emotions
·
Reason
is an engine of active, purposeful thinking
·
Emphasis
on reason does not negate role of emotions or automatized integrations of the
subconscious
·
·
Virtue
of rationality does not mean to rationalize
one’s actions
·
It means the conscious Awareness and articulation of rationally
derived goals
·
Long-term,
therapeutic alteration, if necessary
·
Emotions:
complex product of conceptual
awareness
·
Not
primaries; Not instruments for acquisition of knowledge
·
“Automatic
result” of value judgments previously integrated by subconscious mind
·
“Lightning-like
estimates” of that which furthers man’s values or threatens them: that which is
for him or against him.
·
(new
slide) Reject view that reason and
emotion are natural antagonists
·
Those who see emotions as the enemy of
reason, or vice versa, perpetuate a False dichotomy between two aspects of consciousness
·
Religionists
claim other means to knowledge—they have
proclaimed that
·
Revelation,
faith, and ‘mystic feeling’—are ineffable instruments for knowledge of
“truth”
·
and most, explicitly or implicitly have Declared war on reason
·
‘Truly’
humans do not seek to conquer, rule, or direct emotions
·
Rather, they seek to set into motion a
process to bring emotions
and reason into harmony
·
A process of Introspection: Articulate basis of emotions
Epistemology : Evil
·
Rationality
is the fundamentally basic virtue:
Irrationality is the fundamentally basic
vice
· existentially (action): the vice that
represents the destruction of all virtues is the initiation of physical
force against others
·
Since
reason is man’s basic means of survival; that which is proper to the life of a
rational being is the good; that which negates, opposes or destroys it is the
evil.
·
·
By contrast, one who breaches morality is one
who engages in Willful
evasion of the facts of reality
·
‘Evil’
defined negatively, as a revolt
against rationality
·
Evil has
no power without the sanction of good (e.g.
“insanity” as defense for criminal who methodically plans and executes mass
murder of innocents in a theater)
·
Evil
cannot exist on its own; it depends on default of the good (e.g. businessmen who justify their value based on the “good” they do
for society)
·
Evil can
only destroy, it cannot create
·
Evil
requires others to create before it can expropriate values
Rational Egoism : Values
· Many
who begin to study Ethics start with the question: What values ought one to pursue?
· More fundamental: Why are values necessary
for human existence?
· We
will define Value: as “that which one acts to gain and /
or keep”
· Concept brings up two-fold question:
· “of value to whom and for what?”
· Concept presupposes an entity capable of
acting to achieve a goal in the face of an alternative
·
Where no
alternative exists, no goals and values are possible
Life
ìí îë
Value ç è Action
· Each person’s basic alternative: whether to live or die
·
Life -
not means to supernatural realm; means to its own end: Life is an END in ITSELF
·
concept
of ‘value’ is dependent upon and derived from antecedent concept of ‘life’
· To live requires continual action
· Only living things can act; action is
dependent on life
· Only concept of ‘Life’ makes concept of
‘Value’ possible
· Only to a living
entity could something be ‘good or evil’
· Achievement & maintenance of values
requires action
· Motive of action is achievement of values
·
Specific
actions to sustain life depends on type of organism
·
Cannot
consistently engage in self-sacrifice ==> ‘suicide’
Sacrifice is the surrender of a
value—e.g. money, career, loved ones, freedom, for the sake of a lesser value
or non-value; LIFE requires that one gain values, not lose them
Values
and Virtues
·
· We
have traced the relationship between life and value: We now have the Objective ethical standard : man’s own life is an end in itself
·
Moral
principles are means by which humans survive practically on this earth
·
Inseparable
link between the moral and the practical
·
Human :
a being of integrated mind and body
·
Value :
that which one acts to gain and / or keep
·
Virtue :
is the act by which one gains and /
or keeps the value
·
(new
slide) Three cardinal values of
Objectivist ethics
·
Reason, Purpose,
Self-Esteem (Reason is supreme)
·
The
means to and realization of ultimate value - one’s life
·
Three
corresponding virtues
·
Rationality, Productiveness, Pride
·
Rationality, the action that develops,
preserves, and applies the faculty of reason; It means choosing and
validating one’s opinions, one’s decisions, one’s work, one’s love, etc., in
accordance with the requirements of a cognitive process—the requirements of
logic, objectivity, integration—and acting rationally to achieve one’s chosen
goals
·
No point in using one’s mind if knowledge gained is not one’s guide to action
·
stated negatively: this virtue means never
placing any consideration above one’s perception of reality—never attempting to
get away with a contradiction, a mystic fantasy, or an indulgence in
context-dropping
·
Rational self-interest means the ethics of
selfishness, with man’s life as the standard of value defining “self-interest,”
and rationality as the primary virtue defining the method of achieving it.
·
Within the Objectivist framework the term
“rational self-interest” is a redundancy, but one that is necessary in today’s
world: there is not any “self-interest” for man outside the context and
absolute of reason
·
Productiveness is the adjustment of nature to
man; the process of creating material values—goods or services –leads to
purpose
·
material achievement contributes to human
life—making it increasingly secure, prolonged, and/or pleasurable
·
practical benefits are self-evident, too
obvious to be debated
·
Spritual
meaning and necessity, ignored or denied by previous philosophies:
·
Source of today’s wealth—Industiral,
Scientific, Political Revolutions—man’s rights-freedom; “bad philosophy”
ascribes this progress in wealth to biological drives, natural resources, or
physical labor—all of which existed from the beginning of human history
·
Businessman & Industrialist—condemned by
society as “selfish materialists” while producers
of art (movies, music, novels, TV shows) are regarded as idols (no matter how
rich they are!)
·
mind-body dichotomy again: things satisfying
mere material needs are merely practical, or “necessary evil,” while those
attending to the mind( the arts) are much more spiritual in nature, therefore
of higher in value. – false dichotomy;
all proper fields (business, manufacturing, arts, etc.) require rational
integration of mind and body.
·
Pride as Moral Ambitiousness—the commitment
to achieve one’s own moral perfection (don’t confuse with arrogance)
·
Moral perfection is an unbreached rationality—not the degree of your intelligence, but the
full use of your mind; not the extent of your knowledge, but the acceptance of
reason as an absolute
·
“Flaws” does not mean errors of knowledge,
which involve no evasion; it means breaches of morality, which do involve
evasion
·
Aristotle calls pride “the crown of the
virtues” and notes that it presupposes all the others; Rand describes pride as
“the sum of all virtues” – one has built right moral principles into one’s soul
by repeated rational action—one makes them “second nature,” an automatic way of
functioning
·
Pride leads to self-esteem expressed as: I am
right and I am good; I can achieve the best and I deserve the best I can
achieve; I am IableI to live and I am worthy
of living
·
Man needs a moral code and the awareness that he is conforming to it: Self-esteem or its
absence is an individual’s verdict in this fundamental issue
·
1st John 2, 15-17: Do not love the
world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the
Father is not in him. For everything in
the world-the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the pride of
what he has and does -comes not from the Father but from the world. The world
and its desires pass away, but the man who does the will of God lives forever.
·
Pride is worst of the seven deadly
sins (early Church Fathers): the Capital Virtue to combat pride is Humility
·
Augustine of Hippo wrote that it is “the
commencement of sin because it was this that overthrew the devil, from whom
arose the origin of sin.”
·
Aquinas called it “the first sin, the source
of all other sins, and the worst sin.”
·
per the ethos
of Classical Antiquity:
·
Virtues
analyzed separately, but form indissoluble whole
·
Each
component nourishes, and is nourished by the others
·
Reasoned
action ==> successful production (novel, music, item, term paper, etc.)
==> attainment of rational purpose ==> sense of accomplishment ==>
sense of self-efficacy ==> pride => continuing policy of rationality and
productive work. (Organic Unity)
Epistemology : Subsidiary Virtues
·
Virtues
which are Derivatives of rationality: Each
of these virtues is a reality-oriented means to a rational end
·
·
Independent man accepts responsibility of
implementing his conclusions in practice—he must pay his own way; he must be
self-reliant in the mental world and
in the physical world
·
saying: no one is independent because we all
rely on others (for food, for roads, etc.); or “he didn’t create that business”
because he had good teacher and government-provided infrastructure” –did you
pay for your bread? did you pay your taxes?
·
To
·
Integrity: never sacrificing one’s rationally derived judgments to the wishes or
opinions of others
·
Integrity is loyalty in action to one’s
convictions and values (those one has derived rationally, logically); It is the
principle of being principled; the
policy of practicing what one preaches no matter what emotional or social
pressure to do otherwise
·
Often, breaches in integrity occur with the
help of some rationalization, and some form of evasion; a person “blinds” himself
to what he already knows and pretends is not true
·
However, if one finds some idea he holds is
wrong, he needs to change his views
·
Honesty: never faking reality in any manner
·
never pretending that facts are other than
they are
·
The honest man may commet many errors, but he
does not indulge in illusions
·
Intellectualy, honesty means developing an
active mind—constantly expanding one’s knowledge and correcting any
contradictions in thoughts and ideas
·
Why shouldn’t a man execute a well-planned
swindle to enjoy advantages of money without working for it? (Classic ethics
textbook question) (see page 8 – Peikoff outline)
·
Socrates: Virtue is one; to cheat on any of its aspects is to cheat on all;
·
Justice: recognizing and evaluating people based on objective criteria
·
If a man is good—rational, honest,
productive, etc., then one can expect to gain values in associating and dealing
with him; if he is evil—irrational, dishonest, parasitical—one can expect loss
in associating with him
·
judging is a rational process of seeking out
and cherishing the virtuous traits one needs in others, while being alert to
their opposites
·
Opposite from policy of “judge not that ye be
not judged”; rather, “judge and be prepared to be judged”
·
No neutrality: to abstain from condemning a torturers
or murderers, is to become an accessory to the torture and murder of their
victims—only the good can lose by default of justice and only the evil can
profit
·
Action: granting to each man that which he
deserves (just deserts); “an eye for an eye” is the truth symbolized by scale
in hands of statue of justice: one weight is the cause, the behaviour, the
other, the effet—payment appropriate to it
·
Conventional view: justice is primarily for punishing the wicked; Objectivism reverses the priority—justice
consists first in acknowledging the
good—then rewarding, defending, speaking out, championing publicly men of
value, etc.
·
It is important to vote certain politicians
out of office; it is more important
to cherish and install an opposite kind of leadership
·
Each
constitute an objective relation
between the faculty of consciousness and reality—each is an aspect of
rationality.
·
Each is contextual
·
Practicing
honesty, independence, and integrity requires existential conditions which make
the practices efficacious
·
No
virtue to being honest with kidnapper who has your child
·
and there is little possibility of being
independent in a social system that makes the exercise of one’s rationality
ineffectual. (e.g. totalitarian states, Taliban women)
Efficacy : Toward Self-Actualization
·
A quick review to this point:
·
At the core of Objectivism: belief in actualization of human
potentialities
·
Efficacy:
is the conviction that one is Capable;
that one has the Power of producing
desired effects in one’s actions
·
Consistent
ability to translate thought into action leads to sense of control over one’s
life which is essential to living
·
Whereas Nietzsche preached about a “will
to power” : Objectivism aims to affirm a “will to efficacy”
·
·
(working
backwards, hierarchically) To live ==> act efficaciously ==> choices
==> define code of values ==> know own natures and nature of world around
one’s self.
·
No on
can escape from this need to act, choose, value and know
· Individual ‘chooses’ philosophy by his mind or by chance
·
Rational
conviction and articulated understanding - or -
·
on basis
of raw emotion and a tacit sense of life
·
In
·
(new
slide) Political institutions,
family, school, workplace, etc. -
·
Reinforce
or thwart development of efficacious mind
·
The kinds of social practices that affect
human efficacy are a reflection of the culture within which people develop and
thrive
·
Thwarting: are dysfunctional familes,
dysfunctional schools, dysfunctional companies, dysfunctional countries
·
Productive
work: consciously chosen pursuit of a career,
· in any line of rational endeavor, great or
modest, on any level of ability
·
Degree
of ability; Scale of work is not ethically relevant
·
Fullest
and most purposeful use of mind: (MLK?): A mind is a terrible thing to waste.
Self-Esteem
·
Exalted
egoism is right to have one’s own theoretical values and apply them to
practical reality
For
·
Attack
on ‘selfishness’ is simultaneously
attack on integrity of one’s self-esteem
·
·
Free of religious imperatives and categorical
altruistic duties
·
A proud
man holds himself as his own highest value
·
A
conceited man judges by comparative standard
·
places himself in positions of superiority
relative to others
·
Self-esteem
is “I can.” Pride is “I have.” It is
more than a mere conviction that we are worthy, but . . .
·
Certainty
that mind is competent and he is worthy of happiness
·
Earned
by consistently applying thought to action
·
Experienced
through praxis: source and product of efficacy
·
(new
slide) To be the beneficiary of our
achievements, we must also feel that we deserve
these benefits
·
By
living consciously (foucused and rational), purposefully, and by practicing
self-acceptance, self-responsibility, self-assertiveness, and personal
integrity, we achieve a generalized feeling of self-worth
· all necessary for our practical competence in mastery of technical and other skills
(writing, speaking, managing, etc.)
Trader Principle (Justice)
·
Realizing
our goals and reaping benefits of efforts - we acquire the values necessary to
survival and flourishing
·
Does not require the sacrifice of others to
the self - or - of the self to others
·
Objectivism sees No inherent conflict of interest among people
who earn the values of their
existence
·
and who deal with one another by trading
value for value (Objectivist “Golden Rule”)
· Individual has the right to demand
payment for values he creates
·
Free,
voluntary, uncoerced trade is the only rational and moral principle for all
human relationships
·
Personal or
social; private or public; spiritual or material
·
Trader
principle recognizes neither masters nor slaves in human relations
·
Acknowledges
no polarization between individual and the
society in which that individual lives
·
if
that society is genuinely human
·
The
greater the self-esteem, the more likelhood there is for social relationships marked by mutual respect,
kindness, and generosity
·
Key
principle for Objectivist political theory
Opposite of Trader Principle
· Christian approach: Sermon on Mount (Matthew
5 &6):
· turn the other cheek; if forced to go
a mile, go two miles; give to others what they ask of you; Love your enemies—do
good to them that hate you; [God is the avenger of evil]; Take no thought for
your life—what you shall eat, drink, or
clothes—God will take care of you if you seek Him first; which of you by taking thought can add one cubit to his
stature?
· Social Altruism: “Social Justice” “Fairness
Doctrine”
· Values and rights are product of society—to which the individual owes
service
· Certain men, such as the needy, become
“deserving” of receiving food, housing, health care, income, etc., simply
because they lack and wish for them—as payment for no achievement, in exchange
for nothing; concept of deserve is corrupted and virtue of justice
simply swept aside—replaced with “Social Justice”
· policy:
expropriating from creators in order to reward the noncreators
The Initiation of Force as Evil
· Evil is antithesis of virtue of
rationality—so, of every other virtue
· one
can be evil, yet refrain from physical force (e.g., destroy by psychological
means); indirect use of force—gain property by fraud or ID theft
Two basic methods by which one can deal with
a dispute:
persuasion or coercion: Morality ends where a gun begins
· A rational mind can not work under
compulsion: a gun is not an argument
· Galileo:
ordering one to accept conclusion (or recant) = believe contradiction
· Victim-only one recourse (if escape not
possible): cease thinking rationally
o
Why science, art, invention, etc., fail to
arise and/or flourish in dictatorship
· “Hand over your wallet” forces man to act against
his judgment (justice)
· Applies when one must act contrary to
judgment under gov’t agency threats
Brute
rejects, and attacks in his victims’ every aspect of moral life
· acts to nullify independence—he becomes
second-hander (conquest of men); prevents men from remaining loyal to rational
principles—without principle; unjust—he throws out concept of “desert”
· Productiveness: Dictatorships & welfare
states—replace creators with men who believe what counts is not brainpower, but
firepower & pull; Altruism requires initiation of physical force (gov’t
agencies), and rejects retaliation
Force
and mind are opposites, so force and value are opposites
Love and Happiness
· “We hold these truths to be self-evident . .
. men .. equal
· . . . Rights . . . Life,
· essence and correct order of Objectivist Ethics (but natural
rights)
·
Love is
the most selfish emotion there is
·
If
someone claims to love you unselfishly or
unconditionally - run
·
Implies
“you do not mean anything to me personally”
·
Happiness
emerges from integrated achievement of one’s
values
·
not a
fleeting pleasure or momentary feeling
·
Achievement of any human value requires the
use of the mind; its destruction requires the opposite
·
To become rational and self-confident takes a
sustained effort of thought and will
·
To turn oneself into a stuporous puppet takes
only, say, some snorts of cocaine
·
To build a happy marriage, one must identify
each partner’s values, cooperate, communicate
·
To wreck one’s marriage, one need merely take
it for granted; give one’s partner no thought at all
·
To sculpt the David, one needs the genius of Michelangelo; to smash it, only some
rampaging barbarians
·
To create the United States required the
intellect and the painstaking debates of the Founding Fathers
·
to run it into the ground, only a crew of
anti-intellectuals known as politicians
·
Happiness
is the purpose of ethics; but it is
not the standard
· One’s own life is the standard;
·
Emotion of
happiness is a complex, integrated derivative
·
Cannot
serve as ultimate standard: not an end in itself: One must choose values by reference not to a psychical state, but to an
external fact: the requirements of man’s life—in
order to achieve the state of enjoying
one’s life
·
One cannot achieve happiness if one is
stopped from exercising the ability to achieve values—e.g. if caught in a
brutal dictatorship, or if suffering from a terminal illness, or (at least
during grieving process) if one loses an irreplaceable person essential to
one’s very existence as a valuer, say, a beloved spouse, parent, or child.
·
(new
slide) Love and Happiness: other
views
·
Hedonism
views pleasure and happiness as moral standards
·
evil is
that which gives pain and / or unhappiness
·
Traditional
egoism view: the ‘good’ is pleasure / happiness
·
Amounts to, in effect, “do whatever you feel like doing” (subjectivism)
·
Pleasure is an effect. Its cause is the
gaining of a value (meal, necklace, promotion); this does not mean that
happiness follows from the gaining of any
ends, rational or otherwise.
·
One can pursue irrational values and thereby
gain pleasure (of a sort) from the process of harming himself; One’s emotional
barometer becomes inverted: pleasure becomes a siren urging self-destruction
(life of crime, drugs, idleness, gambling, power lust, being accepted—any form of being out of focus
·
Happiness cannot be achieved through a course
of self-destruction or any anti-value course
·
Happiness is not some pleasures that serve
merely to lessen anxiety (especially anxiety as inevitable result of leading a life by blanking out reality
·
Traditional
egoism assumes sacrificing others to the self
·
The
other side of collectivist coin: live through others
·
Division
into masters and slaves
·
A person who is expectant, and who counts on
receiving the unearned, may be said to be practicing altruism “passively”—in
the transactional sense, as the receiver,
not the giver of material or spiritual benefits
· Intrinsic religious view: Happiness is
whatever is promised in the after-life; this life is one primarily
of suffering (and/or “testing”)
· Enjoyment/pleasure is suspect:
animalistic, unspiritual, often immoral
· a
probable sign of selfishness (ethical dereliction), ambition, “materialism”
· One’s moral destiny is opposite happiness:
duty, loss, sacrifice
·
Intrinsic
morality presents “package-deal”:
either/or (another dichotomy)
·
Sacrifice
of self to others (altruism) ==> benevolence
·
Sacrifice
others to the self (“egoism”) ==> brutishness
·
Ayn Rand
tried to ‘neutralize’ term “selfishness”
· She
tried to bring the term into a non-dualistic context; to alter its conventional
meaning. To avoid such terms entirely, she would have had to invent new
terms/concepts—at the risk of becoming incomprehensible
Altruism’s Criterion
·
Concern
for the welfare of others. Selflessness
·
Moral
standard of altruism says that
Action taken for the benefit of others is good
·
Action
taken for the self is ‘evil’
·
If evil
is inherent in humans, outside the
province of choice
·
Result
is sense of guilt and inadequacy
·
beneficiary of the action is criterion of moral value
·
Where mystical concepts, such as Original
Sin, were being undermined by Reason--In spite of post-Renaissance world : Western Civilization internalized a lethal contradiction
·
Reason
given domain over the material world
·
Faith
was recognized as master of the spiritual sphere
·
Immanuel
Kant (born 1724) : argued that action is not moral if is
performed based on personal “inclination” and not out of Duty.
·
The West attempted to sustain a culture of reason
on an altruistic and neo-mystic philosophical foundation
·
Also, in
·
Its goal was not benevolence or the relief of
suffering; its purpose was to prey on people’s sense of guilt and inadequacy
·
Altruism’s fundamental premises:
·
Man has
no right to exist for his own sake
·
Sacrifice
is his highest moral duty, virtue and value
·
deontology: Duty
· Study of moral necessity, duty, or obligation
· Kant: moral obligation rests solely
upon duty, without requiring any reference to the practical consequences
that dutiful actions may happen have
·
· Reality does confront man with a great many
“musts”—but all of them are conditional.
· The formula of realistic necessity is: “you
must, if—” and the “if” stands for man’s choice: “—if you want to achieve a
certain goal.”
· You must eat, if you want to survive. You
must work, if you want to eat. You must think, if you want to work. You must
look at reality, if you want to think—if you want to know what to do—if you
want to know what goals to choose—if you want to know how to achieve them
· Causality replaces Duty in Objectivism in the form of the memorable Spanish proverb “God said: Take what you
want and pay for it.”
· Morality,
too, is a must—if; it is the price of
the choice to live
There are Three basic forms of Altruism
(three slides)
·
Intrinsic Altruism: Mystic theory of ethics
·
The Judeo-Christian heritage is explicitly
based on the premise that the Standard
of value of man’s ethics is set beyond the grave
·
Laws, or
requirements for living on earth come
from another, supernatural dimension.
Revealed by God, or something like
Kant’s noumenal self in form of categorical imperatives; and it is man’s Duty
to obey them.
Common belief: Without God, there can be no morality
·
Ethics
impossible to practice; unsuited for life on earth
By its very nature, Duty ethics detaches
virtues from values, it offers man no guidance in the job of living—daily decisions men must make in regard to
goals—work, love, friendship, freedom, happiness
·
Duty advocates not only ignore the
fundamental duty that real life demands—a continual course of
rational, selfish action—they seek to overturn it
·
It dooms man to an unendurable dichotomy:
virtue versus pleasure; one’s character versus one’s welfare; the moral versus
the practical; ethics versus survival
·
The Good now is associated with psychological
conflict or pain
·
Man must
take the blame for it and atone for his guilt. By positing an inherent human evil outside the provice of choice,
·
Dark
Ages are existential monument to this
theory
·
Social theory of ethics
·
Substitutes
“society” for God
·
Claims
its chief concern is life on earth
·
But it
is not the life of man, as individuals
·
It is
for the life of a disembodied entity, the
collective
·
In
relation to every individual, this
consists of everybody but
himself
·
Individual’s
duty is to be the selfless, voiceless, rightless slave
·
of any need, claim or demand asserted by
“others”
·
Nazi
Germany and Soviet Russia are this
theory’s monuments
·
Subjectivist “theory” of ethics
·
Not
strictly a theory : Negation of ethics
·
In a
fluid, plastic, indeterminate
universe . .
·
this enables one to preach that there are no objective principles of action—that reality
gives him a blank check on values
·
“Good”
and “evil” - up for choice (e.g., each
“culture” has its own standards of right and wrong—it is OK that Taliban “men”
subjugate their women and allow them virtually no freedoms—who are we to judge?—there are no objective
standards whereby to judge)
·
Present
state of culture worldwide- monument
to this theory
Altruism: Typical Ethics Questions
·
By the kinds of questions many ask, when they
approach the subject of ethics, the psychological
results of altruism is demonstrated. A
typical question often asked is - - -
·
“Should
one risk one’s life to help a man who is -
·
drowning;
or trapped in a fire; etc. . .”
·
Consider the Psychological Implications if one accepts ethics of
altruism (in proportion to degree of acceptance)
·
Lack of
self-esteem: first concern - not live own life - but how to sacrifice it
·
Lack of
respect for others: regards mankind as beggars crying for help
·
Nightmare
view of existence: men trapped in ‘malevolent universe’
·
disasters
are the primary concern
·
Lethargic
indifference to ethics
·
questions
– are about situations not likely to
encounter, or very rarely
·
and which bear no relation to actual problems of one’s own day-to-day life
·
and, thus, leaves one without any moral principles whatsoever for living long-range one’s own individual
life
·
Elevating
the issue of helping others as primary
destroys the concept of authentic
benevolence and good will among men
Social Altruism: Main Ethical Question
· What will be done about the poor or the
handicapped in a free society?
o
Implicit
premise in this question: Men are “their brothers’ keepers” and that the misfortune of some is a
mortgage on others
o
He does
not ask: “Should anything be done?”
but: “What will be done?”—as if all that remains is a discussion of
the means to implement specific programs
· Nature does not guarantee automatic security,
success, and survival
o
Only the dictatorial presumptuousness and moral
cannibalism of altruist-collectivist code that enables man to suppose that he can somehow guarantee such security
to some men at the expense of others
o
He
accepts the premise that individual lives belong to society, and that he, as member of that society, has the
right to dispose of them—to set their goals or to plan the distribution of their efforts
· Only individual men have the right to decide
when, or how, or even whether they
wish to help others
o
Society,
as an organized political system, has no rights in the matter at all
The Social-altruist is forever proposing Schemes
“for the good of mankind”
·
. . or
of “society,” the “public,” or “future generations”
·
anything
except actual, individual human beings
·
Hence the recklessness with which men
propose, discuss, and accept “humanitarian” projects which are to be imposed by
political means—by force—on an unlimited number of people.
·
The hallmark of such mentalitites is the Advocacy of grand scale ‘desirable’ public goal
·
without
regard to context, costs or means
·
out of context, the goal can usually be shown
to be desireable
·
the means are to be human lives
·
With Objectivism, the Choice is never ‘do for myself’ opposed to
‘doing for others’
·
doing
for others is often doing for
yourself
·
many
professions chosen with these values
·
firemen,
policemen, doctors, nurses, teachers, statesmen, etc.
·
Objectivism’s
point: do not sacrifice yourself for
others
Altruism: Examples of desirable goals
·
Take
care of needs of elderly, sick, disabled
- Medicare, Medicaid, Foodstamps,
Disability & unemployment insurance, etc.
The current
·
Clean up
the slums. - Effect on next income bracket?
·
Liberate
artists from financial problems - so free to create
·
Which
artists? Chosen by whom?
·
Explore
and conquer space
·
Not a
value to Soviet serfs dying of epidemics, etc.
·
Not to an
American overworked to send child to college
·
If,
according to collectivist caricature, the greedy
indulge in material luxury on premise “price no object” . . .
·
then,
social progress is achieved under collectivized planning on premise “human
lives no object.”
Benevolent Universe Premise
·
This
premise is essential to Objectivist world view
· Happiness is not only possible, it is the normal condition of man
·
Benevolence is not a synonym for kindness:
Universe has no desires; it simply is
· Man must care about and adapt to it, not the other way around
· Has noting to do with “optimism” if that
means Leibniz’s idea “all is for the best”
· Not a Pollyanna attitude—that there is always a chance for success
·
If man
does adapt rationally, Universe provides favorable circumstances for human life
· If one recognizes and adheres to reality,
then he can achieve his rational values in reality
· For the moral man, failures, though possible,
are an exception to the rule of success
· The state of consciousness to work for and expect is happiness
· One does not expect disaster until one has
specific reason to do so; If one occurs,
one is free to deal with it (natural disaster) or fight it (aggressor nations)
·
The “malevolent universe” premise—or “tragic
sense of life”—states that successes, though possible, are an exception; that
the normal rule of human life is
failure and misery
·
Rand: Happiness is a state of
noncontradictory joy—a joy without penalty or guilt, a joy that does not clash
with any of your values and does not work for your own destruction, not the joy
of escaping from your mind, but of using your mind’s fullest power, not the joy
of faking reality, but of achieving values that are real, not the joy of a
drunkard, but of a producer.
Bibliography
1. Sciabara, Chris Matthew. Ayn
Rand : The Russian Radical. The
2. Bernstein, Andrew. “Rational Egoism in TheFountainhead.” Taped
lecture. Second Renaissance Books.
3. Rand, Ayn. The Virtue of Selfishness : A New
Concept of Egoism. The New
American Library, Inc.
4. Berliner, Michael. Letters ofAyn Rand. Penguin Books.
·
Rand / Kant Diagrams by