5 readers online now  |  69 million page views

"Objections to Ayn Rand's Objectivist Ethics"

Reader comment on item: Fund the Palestinians? Bad Idea
in response to reader comment: Man's Life is the standard of value for man

Submitted by Lactantius Jr. (United Kingdom), Dec 30, 2007 at 12:43

To Dr Whaley,

The system of philosophy defined by Ayn Rand deals with much more than ethics, but since you "accept Ayn Rand's Objectivist Ethics," that is what I critique, dealing with her ethical theory known as ‘ethical egoism,' which can be summarised as "selfishness is a virtue," ethical egoism meaning we should always choose to do things which benefit ourselves (aka selfishness).

Rand argued for a very specific sort of selfishness, an enlightened self-interest, which recognises that acting for the good of others sometimes benefits oneself, and although she was in many ways a skilled and an insightful author, her writing being addictive and remarkably compelling, in the final analysis, her worldview in its atheistic rationalism and outspoken anti-Christianity, does not hold water, being built as it is, upon the false premise that there is no God, in truth there is a God, the God who went public around 2,000 years ago, paying us a visit as Jesus Christ, the kid born in a shed at the back of a pub in Bethlehem, the kid whose birth divides human reckoning of time into before He was born, BC, and after He was born, AD.

Before critiquing Rand, I am glad to agree with her contention that "no more ultimate value than life can be conceived for any given organism, when life is defined as the fullness of existence appropriate to one's nature. But not only is life the highest value of any given organism; life is also that alone which makes the concept of values possible" (The Virtue of Selfishness page 16) which comports with the job-description of the God Whose existence she denied, Jesus Who was, and is God, saying "I have come that you might have life, and have it in all its fullness," also saying, "I give them eternal life, and no one shall snatch them from my hands."

For a sympathetic and kindly written assessment of Ayn Rand's philosophy, some of which a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ can affirm, John Piper's "The Ethics of Ayn Rand Appreciation and Critique" is worth a look, and it can be found at:- http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Articles/ByDate/1979/1486_The_Ethics_of_Ayn_Rand/

Piper's The Ethics of Ayn Rand; Critique" summarizing why the follower of the Lord Jesus Christ cannot affirm all of Rand's philosophy, especially why they must part company with her having no place for mercy, and with mercy being at the heart of Christianity, it is at precisely the value placed upon the mercy of God, where Ayn Rand's contempt for mercy would have to be altered. If I am to be true to my highest value—the excellence of God including His mercy—my behaviour will have to reflect it in merciful acts.

Here now, is a brief critique of ‘Objectivist Ethics'

• Moving from the presupposition that we are naturally selfish, to saying we should look out for number one, is a naturalistic fallacy, which in point of fact is an illegitimate move, based on a false diagnosis of the human condition, there is nothing logically compelling in making this move, and so, her prescribed treatment is wrong.

• As a medical doctor, you will maybe have some knowledge of the distribution of Intelligence Quotient (IQ) in the general population in the US. Here in UK, in one textbook of medicine of my acquaintance, it says "that the strictly average IQ of 100, equips its possessor for no more than artisan occupation under strict supervision." Where does this leave the strictly average human being in Ayn Rand's "Objectivist Ethics" scheme of things, not having the necessary intellectual apparatus to use their reason as the measure of all things?

• ‘Objectivist Ethics' are arbitrary. Why should I opt for my own good, rather than the good of others? This "ethic" is not even ‘objective,' rather, it is subjective. What's the reason this view should be preferred?

• What's more, even if pursuing selfish ends is legitimate, is this the only moral virtue? And whilst one's good may be an object to pursue, it needn't be the only one.

• When interests are conflicting, what happens, who, and on what basis, adjudicates?

• Surely, the pursuit of selfish pleasures and objectives, with everybody doing what is right in their own eyes, leads to anarchy?

• If the rules of morality are only rules of human expediency, surely, they will only be obligatory as long as they are expedient?

• When an "Objectivist Ethicist" becomes a dictator, what then? Isn't it morally counter-intuitive to suggest that acting egoistically is legitimate for them?

• Ethical egoism presumes a universal relevance, with the egoist surely presuming a desire to see others accepting and embracing their viewpoint and acting on it. Surely, not having this presumption is a deficient view of morality. However, wanting ethical egoism universalising is surely excluded, since this would then oppose the ethical egoists own selfish ends, that is, the ethical egoist surely wouldn't want their ethic universalising?

• Can an ethical egoist be trusted when giving moral advice to others? Having their own selfish interest uppermost, surely excludes their being trusted, since the advice they give will be in their own selfish interest, rather than the interest of the one seeking the advice. How do you reconcile this with your practice as a doctor of medicine Dr Whaley?

• Do you agree with Rand Dr Whaley, that "reason is mans only absolute?" if so, is your faith commitment to this belief absolute? Is it reasonable to believe that man's reason is the only absolute? Can you demonstrate that this is so?

There we have it, what a comparison/contrast there is between Ayn Rand's ‘Objectivist Ethics' which declares ones own life and happiness to be the ultimate good, and God's Grace (God's Riches At Christ's Expense) demonstrated in Him sending Christ Jesus into the world to give us rightstanding with Himself. Amazing Grace indeed, giving us something we don't deserve (contrasted with mercy which is not being given what we deserve), we're not worth it, we don't deserve it, we can't earn it, it's a free gift from the God of amazing grace, do you want it Dr Whaley? and the marvellous nine-flavoured fruit it produces, which is, love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

In point of fact, the greatest human need isn't happiness, but forgiveness, and it's freely available to those who will ask for it, what a gift it is, what a Saviour He is, it's your call Dr Whaley.

With kind regards and best wishes

Lactantius Jr.


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submit a comment on this item

<< Previous Comment      Next Comment >>

Reader comments (66) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
show me da money hunny [420 words]GabrielleJun 15, 2008 06:51132192
Money can't by me Peace. [94 words]Graham R-BMar 2, 2008 13:02121552
This Article Hooked me. [217 words]YnnatchkahDec 30, 2007 02:15117107
Mr. Joel Bainerman's article [536 words]YnnatchkahDec 29, 2007 21:59117100
Abbas showing the real face of Islam too soon [77 words]YnnatchkahDec 28, 2007 01:19117031
Is foreign aid bad for Israel, too? [80 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
SusanDec 27, 2007 13:40116986
Foreign Aid Bad For Israel ? [184 words]clarence paul puckettDec 31, 2007 00:31116986
Arafat's two-headed snake in action [162 words]DrRJPDec 26, 2007 09:32116932
I expect to see this from the Euros and the Canadians who think that they will be saved but from the US... [152 words]James BurkeDec 23, 2007 13:09116832
End the Jizya [57 words]Peter HerzDec 23, 2007 09:22116826
the title of the article [38 words]snakesavageDec 23, 2007 00:50116823
Now it is all clear [351 words]Yuval Brandstetter MDDec 22, 2007 16:58116815
Disabled Arabs? [72 words]infidelDec 22, 2007 04:36116800
Fund the Palestinians? Bad Idea [50 words]S.C.PandaDec 22, 2007 02:20116795
Cash for peace and less global warming [181 words]PDMDec 21, 2007 13:34116757
Jihad, the pastime of the well-off [97 words]Alan in KansasDec 21, 2007 07:04116740
Corruption [126 words]Edward HalperDec 21, 2007 00:29116723
no end to terror in sight [126 words]Phil GreendDec 20, 2007 23:26116720
Read Steven Stotsky's article, "Will Massive Infusions of Aid Rescue the Palestinian Economy?" [434 words]DrRJPDec 20, 2007 17:37116702
Funding SNAFU [124 words]IKDec 20, 2007 14:17116690
Peres Coming around? [65 words]Archimedes2Dec 20, 2007 13:59116687
Unsupportable Conclusion [310 words]Sheldon TyberDec 20, 2007 13:35116686
The Superposition of Graphs is the most simple X-Ray. [297 words]YnnatchkahDec 20, 2007 13:29116685
False Analysis [259 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
BaselDec 20, 2007 13:26116684
Hitting The Nail On The Head [33 words]Seamus MacNemiDec 20, 2007 13:25116683
Bread or Bullets [34 words]SemperfiDec 20, 2007 11:03116678
Eyeless in Jerusalem & Washington [140 words]Rena CohenDec 20, 2007 09:49116669
Let's Put a Cork in This Money Bottle. [328 words]maura collinsDec 20, 2007 09:09116665
Israel Giving The Arabs The Rope to Hang Them [21 words]Dan FriedmanDec 20, 2007 06:43116657
ABBAS NOT SERIOUS [64 words]Reporting IslaamDec 20, 2007 05:01116649
Funding the palis [795 words]Paul la DemainDec 20, 2007 03:23116646
Hi [226 words]Frank ShipleyDec 20, 2007 03:02116645
Excessive funding is not aid but a bribe [106 words]Nelson D'SilvaDec 20, 2007 00:42116637
The word that is missing from Pipes' sound comments is.... [58 words]Jascha KesslerDec 19, 2007 23:03116625
Fund the Palestinians? Bad Idea.. [588 words]Kim SegarDec 19, 2007 21:07116614
Pipes Should Be Our Negotiator [31 words]John GlueckDec 19, 2007 21:07116613
Millions in Aid Monthly for Murder [75 words]Susan DDec 19, 2007 20:06116605
Gangland [230 words]MarciDec 19, 2007 19:35116603
Funding the Palestinians [46 words]David GueirosDec 19, 2007 19:30116601
Interesting Statistics [87 words]William H GreeneDec 19, 2007 19:19116600
Not in my name [59 words]Peter, ScotlandDec 19, 2007 18:10116552
Why ? [81 words]AnnaDec 19, 2007 19:44116552
Insane [50 words]PeterDec 29, 2007 21:51116552
Important article: Pipes is exploring a critical area which should be more openly discussed [355 words]rickDec 19, 2007 18:04116551
Fund the Palestinians? [24 words]DebraDec 26, 2007 13:46116551
US Funding Terrorism [88 words]LindaKDec 19, 2007 17:58116550
Helping Palestinians [82 words]Janusz KowalikDec 19, 2007 17:49116549
Take the money and run [137 words]Rebecca MouldsDec 19, 2007 20:52116549
What is done with the money - that is what counts [120 words]David W. LincolnDec 19, 2007 17:40116548
Bush and State Dept. and EU Rewarding Evil and Terror [211 words]clarence paul puckettDec 24, 2007 00:41116548
Washing the salt [118 words]David W. LincolnDec 28, 2007 20:15116548
Response to my article ? [267 words]clarence paul puckettDec 31, 2007 01:22116548
The correct sequence [183 words]David W. LincolnDec 31, 2007 22:34116548
Arabs in the early church [260 words]clarence paul puckettJan 2, 2008 00:06116548
its not the part. its the culture [206 words]Yuval Brandstetter MDDec 23, 2007 16:51116547
Voluntary financial aid to killers is evil. Western Governments taking their citizens money by force to aid these killers is evil to the nth! [9 words]Ralph C Whaley MDDec 19, 2007 17:40116546
Insanity [184 words]Mary ConnorDec 19, 2007 23:11116546
"why is it evil Dr Whaley?" [252 words]Lactantius Jr.Dec 24, 2007 08:42116546
Barghuti+Dahlan+Qurea are already trying to get their hands on this money [28 words]AlanDec 26, 2007 06:22116546
Man's Life is the standard of value for man [138 words]Ralph C Whaley MDDec 27, 2007 22:42116546
"Objections to Ayn Rand's Objectivist Ethics" [1089 words]Lactantius Jr.Dec 30, 2007 12:43116546
Assertions versus reasoning [124 words]DavidJan 27, 2013 08:22116546

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to "Objections to Ayn Rand's Objectivist Ethics" by Lactantius Jr.

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List


eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)