Read on Twitter
What Ayn Rand gives people is a surrogate for good boundaries.
People who donât take themselves seriously and have poor boundaries find Ayn Rand, and are like âomg itâs legitimate for me to do what I want instead of what other people wantâ
(Plus other nice values like: Think about stuff! Be truth-seeking! Trade is good! Haters gonâ hate!)
(Plus other nice values like: Think about stuff! Be truth-seeking! Trade is good! Haters gonâ hate!)
But selfishness is confused qua surrogate for good boundaries.
It still takes for granted âus vs themâ; it just comes down on the other side.
(Albeit the far more functional side, sure.)
It still takes for granted âus vs themâ; it just comes down on the other side.
(Albeit the far more functional side, sure.)
Rand would say selfishness isnât adversarial, and rational selfishness means everyone can get what they want.
âThere are no conflicts of interest among rational men.â
But this misses things and gets you stuck in a few ways â
âThere are no conflicts of interest among rational men.â
But this misses things and gets you stuck in a few ways â
â First, itâs good to have boundaries whether or not they are ârationallyâ defensible.
Thatâs because you donât have full immediate explicit access to your mind. Most of your knowledge is inexplicit.
Rand accounts for not explaining preferences to others, but not oneself.
Thatâs because you donât have full immediate explicit access to your mind. Most of your knowledge is inexplicit.
Rand accounts for not explaining preferences to others, but not oneself.
(This is one reason itâs better to think of life as being about pursuing your problems/interests, rather than about finding whatâs True or Rational, or about getting rid of all your errors. All is but a woven web of guesses, and we donât know what we know.)
It would be better to say: âThere are no conflicts of interest.â
Apparent conflicts are due to either or both of the parties misinterpreting the facts of the situation. (Including abstract facts, like morality.)
There are never conflicts between facts.
Apparent conflicts are due to either or both of the parties misinterpreting the facts of the situation. (Including abstract facts, like morality.)
There are never conflicts between facts.
So when Rand insists you disregard your âwhimsâ, she is taking her opponentâs view and running with it.
This kind of âselfishnessâ demands a partial abnegation of the self.
This kind of âselfishnessâ demands a partial abnegation of the self.
There is an alternative: to take it *all* into account â explicit and inexplicit.
This is false:
âDesires (or feelings or emotions or wishes or whims) are not tools of cognition; they are not a valid standard of value, nor a valid criterion of manâs interests.â
â Ayn Rand, VoS
This is false:
âDesires (or feelings or emotions or wishes or whims) are not tools of cognition; they are not a valid standard of value, nor a valid criterion of manâs interests.â
â Ayn Rand, VoS
⊠It is the same as saying âthoughts are not valid tools of cognition [etc]â.
Both explicit thoughts and inexplicit emotions are cognitive/computational processes that are trying to model and understand reality.
Inexplicit stuff is esp. important for boundaries/self-interest.
Both explicit thoughts and inexplicit emotions are cognitive/computational processes that are trying to model and understand reality.
Inexplicit stuff is esp. important for boundaries/self-interest.
Secondly, if selfishness is so non-adversarial, whatâs with all the slurs?
second-hander, moocher, looter, leech, parasite, whim-worshipper, evader, mystic, witch doctor, Kantian
second-hander, moocher, looter, leech, parasite, whim-worshipper, evader, mystic, witch doctor, Kantian
Someone with good boundaries doesnât insult his friends with poor boundaries as âsecond-handersâ.
Thatâs not even the problem they have. They may explicitly endorse the virtue of selfishness, but still find themselves self-abnegating (e.g. abnegating their wise whims).
Thatâs not even the problem they have. They may explicitly endorse the virtue of selfishness, but still find themselves self-abnegating (e.g. abnegating their wise whims).
(Roark is actually good in this respect. He mostly just does his own thing, until he picks up some bad ideas from Dominique. Chill with the destruction, guys. Go rage-write or hang out with friends, srsly.)
Thirdly, the slogan divides people up into ârational menâ and the presumably irrational women.
⊠Jk. But itâs still talking about people rather than ideas. It has an âus vs themâ quality.
⊠Jk. But itâs still talking about people rather than ideas. It has an âus vs themâ quality.
Morality isnât about a particular person, like âIâ.
Ayn Rand emphasises âIâ because there are indeed a lot of pessimistic self-sacrificial memes out there.
But itâs still framing her worldview in terms of other people.
Morality isnât about you or me, itâs about both+everyone.
Ayn Rand emphasises âIâ because there are indeed a lot of pessimistic self-sacrificial memes out there.
But itâs still framing her worldview in terms of other people.
Morality isnât about you or me, itâs about both+everyone.
âIâ isnât even a single consistent thing!
Thatâs why she says âwell, be selfishâbut not if itâs just your whimsâ.
She has to find a way to pretend people are consistent, or have a single meaningful thing thatâs âIâ, which can be separated (and elevated) from other people. https://twitter.com/reasonisfun/status/965911330774573056
Thatâs why she says âwell, be selfishâbut not if itâs just your whimsâ.
She has to find a way to pretend people are consistent, or have a single meaningful thing thatâs âIâ, which can be separated (and elevated) from other people. https://twitter.com/reasonisfun/status/965911330774573056
âThere are no conflictsâ: https://twitter.com/reasonisfun/status/1157240260176334849
âMorality isnât about a particular personâ: https://twitter.com/reasonisfun/status/1264634633985146883
Boundaries are preferences that you defend: https://twitter.com/reasonisfun/status/1204382845013282821
Inexplicit boundaries and whims are valid: https://twitter.com/reasonisfun/status/1264634636237406209
Desires model reality: https://twitter.com/reasonisfun/status/1264634637386735616
