From: gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,talk.philosophy.misc,rec.arts.books
Subject: The Enduring Rand (was: Re: Theory?)
Date: 6 Nov 92 17:50:24 GMT
Organization: mydog in exile

Peter Nelson (I think):
>  ...
>   Having read Rand's political and ethical writings, I have found 
>   nothing of sufficient intellectual rigor to form the basis of 
>   anything relevant to the discussion.  Her work is incredibly flawed
>   and empty for someone who has attracted so much attention.  (Although
>   it should be noted that the attention she attracts is among "middle-
>   brows", sophomore philosophy students and the like; she has little
>   following among serious philsophers or political thinkers.) ...

First of all, let's dispense with the notion, implicit in so
much that I see written here, that one philsophical text can
be determined in some objective or absolute way to be better
or truer than another.  For instance, Peter asserts that
Rand's work is bad because no academic philosophers take it 
seriously.  But that is not because there is something
inherently wrong with Rand's work, it's because it doesn't
serve their needs.

This is because Rand's philosophy is, as noted,
fundamentally middlebrow.  That is, it is more rationalized 
than vulgar philosophy, which is almost always characterized 
by simple assertions, and yet it requires almost no effort to
understand beyond the initial reading.  It is ideally
attuned, then, to persons whose formal intellectual training
is at about a high-school or college freshman level, and who
are not really interested in abstract thought.  The academic,
on the other hand, needs heavier stuff both for aesthetic
reasons and also because, to maintain the respect of her
profession, she must prove she can manipulate and
interpret difficult texts and complex ideas.

Now, middlebrowness itself would not explain the enduring
popularity of Rand's writing; every year, hundreds, if not
thousands, of resolutely middlebrow texts appear, telling
their readers what to think and how to get through life,
to be soon replaced by more of their kind.  Few of them,
however, deal as well with guilt as Rand's.

The function which Rand's philosophy admirably serves is
the extrusion of guilt.  I say this because of the prominent
place given to the idea that selfishness is a good thing.
Most people would not think in these terms because they
would already regard selfishness as a necessary thing.  But
many parents teach their children rather impractical ideas,
including the idea that selfishness is evil, others
(especially the parents, or a favored sibling) come first, 
and so forth.  There may also be some kind of biological 
programing towards altruism.  In any case, guilt about 
selfishness obviously is an important problem for many
people.

In order to extrude guilt, Rand sets up a logical engine
which can operate only in a solid, mechanical universe with
well-defined components.  Hence, Objectivism.  Once the
premises (the worldview) are set up, the engine can be run
and the guilt can be extruded -- can be shown to be not only
irrelevant, but evil.  Thus, Rand's philosophy actually
accomplishes something useful, which is more than can be
said about a great many philosophers.  The fact that it is
not of the highest quality from an academic or aesthetic 
point of view is unimportant.  The only thing I really see
"wrong" with it -- from my point of view -- is that the
deterministic performance of the logical engine, along 
with the strong emotional need for it, produce a kind of
totalitarianism in many of its adherents.  For instance,
this article may well draw _angry_ rebuttals because it will
seem insufficiently reverent.

On the whole, I think philosophies should be judged on how
well they serve those who consume them, as judged by the
consumer.  Not everyone can metabolize Wittgenstein or 
Heidegger, nor should they.
-- 

 )*(    Gordon Fitch    )*(    gcf@panix.com    )*(
( 1238 Blg. Grn. Sta.,  NY NY 10274 * 718.273.5556 )
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.libertarian