From: dcosley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Daniel R Cosley)
Subject: Re: Objectivism and "good" emotionalism?
Summary: emotions reflect your values which are rationally determined
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 15:11:15 GMT

In article <lewchuk.726712307@therien> lewchuk@cs.UAlberta.CA (Michael Lewchuk)
 writes:

>Consider that the (rational) admittance that you can have another fulfilling
>relationship with someone else (which I can't really contest at this moment)
>is equivalent to saying "I am unnecessarily risking my life since by the law
>of selfishness I can replace this person with someone else, and have a 100%
>chance of surviving and being happy with someone else".  In my opinion this
>argument is quite objective, rational, and correct.  I'm sure even Ayn would
>have a big problem taking a whack at it without claiming personal irrational
>action (sentimentality) is an inherent personal good.
>
It's not guaranteed that you can be happy with someone else.  In fact, if you
value *this particular relationship* enough, you may decide you really wouldn't
be happy with anyone else, knowing that you had given this person up.

>about is how many people could easily rationalize letting their wives die,
>but do not do so because they accept that irrational action (self-sacrifice)
>is of greater value than rational action sometimes.  That is, personal
>preferences are not determined rationally, and sometimes what "feels right"
>and what people act upon are irrational whims which seem to be more "right"
>than rational thought, at least for humans.

You're missing my point -- if you place a particular value on another person, 
value enough that you would rather take the chance of dying to save that person 
than stay alive and start with another, then it is rational to risk your life.  
It depends on how much you value that particular person.

>Benefits of risking myself to save my wife:  one wife which I could probably
>replace by remarriage.
>
>Benefits of risking myself to save an unknown person:  probably gratitude
>on that person's part, at least in some sense, provided the person is not
>trying to commit suicide in a very strange fashion (in which case you could
>probably earn his gratitude by drowning him).

>Thus, the second case is more preferable to the first.  Or where is my logic
>off?  Remember, we are talking rational objective selfishness here, not
>irrational selfishness.

You are using a straw definition of rational objective selfishness here, which 
ignores the information in my last message about the subject.  Your "benefits 
of risking myself to save my wife" is woefully incomplete (she probably will 
feel gratitude, also, as well as all the other feelings that one has for that
which one loves/values).  Don't forget the costs, too: Costs of not risking
yourself to save your wife include a lack of integrity and moral courage, loss
of your wife, etc.

Your argument requires that any one person or relationship is replaceable with 
an equivalent, and that a rational person will have equal value for such a 
replacement.  This is not the case.  Rationally, one can attach so much value 
to a person or relationship that it is very high in one's ranking of values.  
It is rational to achieve one's high values even at the expense of some lower 
ones.  This is one of the costs of the business of life.  Please reread my last
message before you respond because this information is better-explained there.

>Probably.  But any guesses as to what a rational self-interested society
>would be like and why it wouldn't degenerate into a bunch of selfish,
>self-preoccupied people acting rationally to preserve their own skins at the
>expense of everyone else?  To put it simply, why should people value each
>other in a rational, self-interested world?

Because part of rational self-interest includes the knowledge that in order to
have one's own rights respected, one must respect the rights of others.
-- 
Dan  ***  dcosley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
*******************************************
Disclaimer: Due to budget constraints, The Ohio State University cannot afford 
to express official university opinions on Usenet.