The Virtue of Selfishness - Introduction

(Originally written June 25, 2006 in Book 3)

The Virtue of Selfishness
Ayn Rand

"Ethics is not a mystic fantasy - nor a social convention - nor a dispensable subjective luxury... Ethics is an objective necessity of man's survival - not by the grace of the supernatural nor of your neighbors nor of your whims, but by the grace of reality and nature of life" - Opening Words

Hmmm, after reading this I have a feeling that I will be furious with the contents of this book. First of all the very thought of ethical egoism offends me to the core. The Title of this book drew me to it because it offends me so deeply. However, I pledge to all, God and to myself that I will go in open minded and learn regardless of my presuppositions.

The book defines 'rational selfishness' as the "values required for human survival - not the values produced by the desires, the feelings, the whims, or the needs of irrational brutes, who have never outgrown the primordial practice of human sacrifices".

Linehan - How does one outgrow the primordial practice of human sacrifice?

Introduction

Rand chooses the word 'selfishness' "for the reason that makes you afraid of it" (Rand, vii).

The word 'selfishness's popular usage has arrested moral development of mankind. Popular usage of selfishness equals evil, but the meaning of selfishness is "concern with one's own interests" (Rand, vii).

The definition of selfishness does not pertain to moral evaluation, or to whether or not a man's interests are good or evil. Ethics serves to evaluate morality and discern whether interests are good or evil. (Linehan - this may be too lofty of a goal for ethics).

Altruistic ethics has created the image of the brute. It has also forced humanity to accept two inhuman tenets:

1) Any concern with one's own interests is evil, regardless of what these interests might be.
2) The brute's activities are in fact to one's own interest (which altruism enjoins man to renounce for the sake of his neighbors.

Altruism is responsible for moral corruption (see Atlas Shrugged)

Altruism lumps the questions "What are values" and "Who should be the beneficiary of values" together. Altruism offers no answer to the first question except that the answer to the second question leaving man no definition of values and thus, providing no moral guidance.

Altruism declares that "any action taken for the benefit of others is good, and any action taken for one's own benefit is evil"

She continues "thus the beneficiary of an action is the only criterion of moral value - and sol long as that beneficiary is anybody other than oneself, anything goes" (Rand, viii).

Since Rand's view of altruism is a system of ethics with no specific values if anyone benefits from an altruistic action is good. She attributes 'the appalling immorality', 'chronic injustice', 'grotesque double standards' 'insoluble conflicts' and 'contradictions' that have characterized human relationships throughout history to altruistic ethics.

The beneficiary criterion of altruistic morality does man much harm:
1) First, he learns morality is his enemy
2) Forces people to serve others grudgingly, which produces resentment, not pleasure in relationships
3) robs him of achieving moral significance other than when he forces himself to sacrifice for others
4) It provides no moral guidance

Altruistic ethics produce men that are cynical and guilt-ridden. They are cynical because they neither practice nor accept the altruist morality and guilt ridden because they dare not reject it.

Rand suggest that in order to save mankind we must rebel against 'so devastating an evil' as altruism. To redeem both man and morality, it is the concept of selfishness that one must redeem.

The first step of this rebellion is to "assert man's right to a moral existence", that is, we must recognize that man has a need of a guiding moral code.

"Man must be the beneficiary of his own moral actions" (Rand, ix)

Objectivist ethics is not a license to do whatever one pleases, nor is it guided by irrational emotions, feelings, urges, wishes or whims.

Linehan - is man capable of separating himself from his irrational qualities effectively and often enough to be Rand's definition of an objectivist? Where is the proof of it?

Objectivist ethics are not Nietzschean egoists values.

Objectivist ethics does not make the claim that whatever a man chooses is moral if he chooses it.

Man's self-interest is not determined by blind desires. It must be discovered and achieved by the guidance of rational principles.

"The attack on selfishness is an attack on man's self-esteem; to surrender one is to surrender the other" (Rand, x).

"It is impossible for me to engage in philosophical correspondence. If you have any questions to ask me please address them to ... I shall be glad to hear from you, since questions have always interested me; questions, not debates - I have given those up long ago" (Rand, x-xi).

Linehan - This last quote has nothing to do with philosophy, but I would like to take a moment to address it. I believe that philosophical correspondence and debates are essential to the quest for knowledge, which all men undertake in some form or another. To deny readers or even one's self of this privilege and responsibility is to fall into a state of intellectual stagnation. If I publish books and become a professor at a major university I vow to always be engaged in correspondence and debates. It saddens me to read this. If feel as if she has placed the emphasis on the questions and not the questioners, a thing I find reprehensible. But, then again she has also placed her own self-interest (theorizing) over the interests of her readers. Despite the detestableness of this I will grant her credit for being consistent with her morally void value system.

In reading the introduction I feel as if she has confused altruism with asceticism (for the sake of being ascetic) and combined the negative aspects of them to create a self-loathing do-gooder as the example of any altruistic individual. Misrepresentation and witticism and shock seems to be the modus operandi of Ayn Rand.