A Wonderful Revision/Parody of Ayn Rand's "masterpiece"(*snicker*)
This Revision/Parody of Atlas Shrugged caught my Eye.....
"Damn it, Dagny! I need the government to get out of the way and let me do my job!"
She sat across the desk from him. She appeared casual but confident, a slim body with rounded shoulders like an exquisitely engineered truss. How he hated his debased need for her, he who loathed self-sacrifice but would give up everything he valued to get in her pants ... Did she know?
"I heard the thugs in Washington were trying to take your Rearden metal at the point of a gun," she said. "Don't let them, Hank. With your advanced alloy and my high-tech railroad, we'll revitalize our country's failing infrastructure and make big, virtuous profits."
"Oh, no, I got out of that suckers' game. I now run my own hedge-fund firm, Rearden Capital Management."
"What?"
He stood and adjusted his suit jacket so that his body didn't betray his shameful weakness. He walked toward her and sat informally on the edge of her desk. "Why make a product when you can make dollars? Right this second, I'm earning millions in interest off money I don't even have."
Read the rest of this parody at:
http://mcsweeneys.net/...
Ayn Rand. the author of "Atlas Shrugged" which is parodied above, developed a pseudo-philosophy which is embraced by many "Free Market Conservatives" and Libertarians. I will venture a short examination of its principles below:
The basic principles of Objectivism can be summarized as follows:
Metaphysics
"Reality, the external world, exists independent of man's consciousness, independent of any observer's knowledge, beliefs, feelings, desires or fears. This means that A is A, that facts are facts, that things are what they are—and that the task of man's consciousness is to perceive reality, not to create or invent it."
This point I accept. (Perhaps more so than Rand herself.)
Epistemology
"Man's reason is fully competent to know the facts of reality."
This assertion is unproven...."Fully Competent" seems more like wishful thinking than an a priori statement.
" Reason, the conceptual faculty, is the faculty that identifies and integrates the material provided by man's senses."
I would say rather, that reason is the most reliable such faculty.
Reason is man's only means of acquiring knowledge. Thus Objectivism rejects mysticism (any acceptance of faith or feeling as a means of knowledge), and it rejects skepticism (the claim that certainty or knowledge is impossible).
False: Direct Sensation is another means of acquiring knowledge. ( Example: A cast Iron Skillet sits on a steel table. Reason alone cannot tell you whether the skillet is hot or cold....that knowledge is ONLY acquired by reliance upon sensory input.) Knowledge may also be acquired by Inspiration (although it would be wise to Test that knowledge by the application of Reason!)
Human Nature
Man is a rational being. Reason, as man's only means of knowledge, is his basic means of survival. But the exercise of reason depends on each individual's choice. "Man is a being of volitional consciousness." "That which you call your soul or spirit is your consciousness, and that which you call 'free will' is your mind's freedom to think or not, the only will you have, your only freedom. This is the choice that controls all the choices you make and determines your life and character."Thus Objectivism rejects any form of determinism, the belief that man is a victim of forces beyond his control (such as God, fate, upbringing, genes, or economic conditions).
Since this point is contingent on Rand's Epistemology, at this point I would merely note that it is a bit of a stretch to consider man a "rational being". I've known too many Irrational people to swallow that one....
Ethics
"Reason is man's only proper judge of values and his only proper guide to action. The proper standard of ethics is: man's survival qua man—i.e., that which is required by man's nature for his survival as a rational being (not his momentary physical survival as a mindless brute). Rationality is man's basic virtue, and his three fundamental values are: reason, purpose, self-esteem. Man—every man—is an end in himself, not a means to the ends of others; he must live for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself; he must work for his rational self-interest, with the achievement of his own happiness as the highest moral purpose of his life." Thus Objectivism rejects any form of altruism—the claim that morality consists in living for others or for society.
Here is where Objectivism begins to shatter. If one accepts the Objectivist Metaphysical and Epistemological principles, How can Objectivist Ethics be derived by reliance upon the wholy subjective Point of View of "Self Interest"? Should it not derive the concepts/values of "Good" and "Bad" by reliance upon Reason and Reality alone? I would think such a derivation CAN be made, although Rand, apparently never attempted it. Instead, she left us with Moral Relativism.
That such a derivation Can be Made can be demonstrated easily by a simple thought experiment:
I have an apple. It has the intrinsic value of existence. In addition it has several subjective values: 1. It serves to continue the existence of Apple Trees; 2. It has nutritional value for other forms of existing entities. THUS I can eat the apple or give it away, but unless there IS an apple, I can do neither. If I don't like apples, it's subjective value may be small, but if it does not exist it has NO value. So, existence is the first, most basic "Good", and Non-existence the most basic "Bad".
While I grant that it may be difficult to derive a truly Objective Ethical system from reliance on Reason, that is no excuse for Rand's failure to attempt it.