The Conflict of Men's Interests - 2

(Originally written July 18, 2006 in Book 3)

The Virtue of Selfishness
Ayn Rand

The Conflict of Men's Interests

By taking something out of context man engages in a powerful psychological tool for evasion. This is called context-dropping. There are two major ways of doing this: 1) Range, 2) Means

A rational man considers his desires in the context of a whole lifetime. He does not sacrifice long-term value for short-term.

A rational man considers the means to an end and never holds a desire or pursues a goal which he cannot achieve by his own effort, directly or indirectly.

Trade facilitates this indirect means of accomplishment.

Rational men do not want or take anything more or less then what they deserve.

Trade value is determined solely by a free-market, not any individual's value system.

In trade, one relies on the rationality of every man.

A rational man never seeks or desires the unearned.

A rational man never lowers his standards to appeal to this irrationality, stupidity or dishonesty of others because it is suicidal.

Since both victory and defeat are possible in every situation, no one victory or defeat can be a tool of judgment.

Responsibility is the form of intellectual responsibility that most people evade. "They evade the responsibility of judging the social world" (Rand, 53). They believe the world is not of their making and thus can only adjust to the controlling world.

A 'metaphysical humility' is believing in interests must be pursued by the means of 'somehow'. It believes that man did not create the world and simply lives here. It is a parasitic point of view. 'Somehow always means somebody'. Men of this mindset shirk responsibility of the means to their ends and dump it on someone else.

Since rational men know that all goals and interests are accomplished through their own effort, effort is essential to the rational man.

The 'humility metaphysics' parasites are the only ones who view every competitor as a threat. Rational men reject this because they know that there is no such thing as living by luck and no such thing as an 'only chance' or single opportunity.

Competition in a free society produces innumerable chances. Effort is needed to pursue these chances.

"He does not regard any concrete, specific goal or value as irreplaceable. He knows that only persons are irreplaceable - only those one loves" (Rand, 55).

Linehan - This is very, very cruel and inhumane. People are irreplaceably, but only the ones you love. Therefore, all other people are simply usable, replaceable spokes in our own wheel. It is also inconsistent because if a value is truly good as a long-term value, then it is irreplaceable.

Love is like all other values, it is a response to be earned.

Romantic love is not a competition. "If two men are in love with the same woman, what she feels for either of them is not determined by what she feels for the other and is not taken away from him. If she chooses one of them the loser could not have had what the winner has earned" (Rand, 55).

Linehan - If it is a truly free society in which love is earned like this then either man can 'earn' this love. This is completely contrary to Rand's theories. If the loser had no chance of having what the winner 'earned' then the winner is determined to win by something other than his own effort. Determinism cannot fit into Rand's theory, yet here it is in black and white.

"Among the emotion-driven, neither love nor any other emotion has any meaning" (Rand, 55).

Linehan - If anything shows the absurdity of Rand's theories, it is this quote.