Ayn Rand's philosophy vs Christian perspective, a look

Rand's egoism is way more myopic than she ever realized, and sometimes self-contradictory. I'm not a Christian, but agape is more compatible with human happiness and thriving, in a group and on an individual level, than her "ethics" are.

 

We're a social species. Social species have evolved to be cooperative. Rand either couldn't, or wouldn't, grasp this basic feature of human nature. As for opening "the door for the validity of tribalism," that depends on what you mean.

 

I don't know if she was clinically a sociopath or psychopath, but that does seem to be what she enshrined.

 

Like I alluded to earlier, it was likely a direct reaction against the forced "altruism" of Communism. The Communists had purposefully and intentionally removed all the other values that had previously existed in society, so once someone in that situation removes the Communist ideology, they are left with nothing - there is no real cause for altruism left. I believe that was the situation with Rand.
She was still (although she may not have realized it) embracing the atheism and materialism that had been fully cultivated by Communist ideology. She was now just throwing out the part about forcing people to do stuff. Communist altruism and generosity was very much intertwined with forcing people to do stuff.
So it's very much understandable she was a product of her surrounding circumstance.

 

Our very existence has to do with relationships and the element of 'love' that exists between people and everything around us. If the love that binds us ceases, then the whole world will start to unravel.

A bit of Christian thought here.

 

Ayn Rand was part nut, part psycho, and a horrible writer.

 

I don't know what your argument's culmination will be, however, I think it's important to note that, "Communism," is JUST a NAME, a chosen Title. Equating the ideology or methods of Communist political regimes with the perspectives & practices of those who live communally by choice, is akin to going to a Bare Naked Ladies concert & expecting female nudity.

What makes me think that this may come into play is your repeated references to ALTRUISM; except that you speak of, "forced altruism," which cannot exist, since altruism is an impulse or an inner motivation. It can no more be forced than, can be, love-- though that will not stop anyone from calling something, "love." That does not make it a fact.

I hope my comment will help lead to a common understanding, amongst the conversants, of what is actually meant when using (or misusing) these terms.

 

I'm not sure she had any ethics, other than her own happiness. Rather animal like.

 

True, socialism in general is based on coercion.

 

I know she drew a line between self interest and animal-like happiness. She definitely didn't like the idea of simple animal pleasures guiding ethics, and thought "rational" self interest should prevail instead. That said, she never grasped the social nature of the human race and the interest we naturally have in the wellbeing of our fellows.

 

Are you talking about independent individual interest in the wellbeing of other people, or government-imposed interest in the wellbeing of other people?
Because that is a critical differentiation in the context of discussing Ayn Rand's philosophy here.

 

How is that differentiation, "crucial...in the context of discussing Ayn Rand's philosophy here?" Ayn Rand was not especially concerned with the well-being of others, if they were not bettering themselves by employing her philosophy. The Communist systems which have been designated here as the antagonist, against which Rand's perspective was formed, were AUTHORITARIAN Regimes which, almost by definition, & certainly in the case of the USSR-- which, under Stalin, for example, starved millions of Ukranians to death-- were not overly-concerned, either, with the well being of individuals within, "the masses," or the, "proletariat," if you prefer (despite government propaganda to the contrary). But for Rand, unlike the overall Soviet leadership, control, for the purpose of exploitation, of others was not her end-game goal (as far as I am aware).

 

They are both wrong. Rand goes too far with individualism. Christianity goes too far with pacifism, communal living, and anti-capitalism.

 

I'm curious as to what leads you to believe that Christianity-- and so would it be a misreading of your thoughts to extend that, then, to Christian Society?-- is not only pacifist, anti-capitalist, & communal, but overly so.

 

Rand couldn't even address mankind's social nature. Never could. Taken to its logical conclusion, volunteer firefighters would some of the world's most evil villains in Rand's philosophy. Her philosophy was as psychopathic as it was self-contradictory.

 

Matthew 5:
39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.
40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.
41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.
42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Colossians 3:
22 Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.

Romans 13:
1 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended.
4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.
6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing.

Matthew 6:
19 “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal.
20 But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal.
25 Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothes?
26 Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they?

Luke 12:
33 Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will never fail, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys.

1 Timothy 6:
9 But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction.
10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs.

Acts 4:
32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.
33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all
34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales
35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.

 

My bold: That's one good reason to stop being a christian.

 

You seem to be deflecting from the issue I was asking you about.
You should be cautious about conflating individual altruism with socially-imposed economic altruism.

 

I've said nothing of imposed economic altruism. I'm sorry, but it appears that you are the one doing the conflating here.

 

I think your logic here is being disingenuous. We've already talked about this issue in another thread.
The only other option for these slaves would have been to kill their masters and start a rebellion.
Considering that, I think maybe what the Bible told these slaves to do is not too unreasonable.

 

Rubbish. Bring on the revolution. You had the civil rights movement, remember? I guess this puts you in clear perspective.

 

Well, I asked you about it before and you didn't explain. So you are talking about individual altruism?

 

If the Bible were actually divinely inspired, the other option would have been for it to directly and explicitly condemn slavery.

 

I'm not sure what you need further explanation on. Can you be specific?

 

When you say humans are "communal", what exactly did you mean by that? Can you be more specific?
Were you talking about humans wanting to help other humans, or humans wanting to force other humans to help other humans?

Since we are talking about Ayn Rand, I think that is a fair point to bring up.