This outlook, he contends, adheres too closely to Hobbesian radical individualism. Among other problems, the most worrisome may be the moral subjectivism accepted by classical and neoclassical economists to bolster their case. Without an objective grounding, the utilitarian project to defend capitalism dissolves into a framework we have agreed to try but from which we can step away at any time. Arbitrary rules rather than objectively determined principles arising from the nature of what it means to be human offer us no stability and no defense against the collectivists and statists. Properly understood, to be rational is to be in mental focus, i.e., to be aware of and to integrate all relevant and available evidence bearing upon a particular situation.
Rational action stems from a calculation of costs and benefits.
Costs and benefits are subjective. A person acts in a way which he believes is the best course to follow. He also demonstrates the superiority of classical individualism and capitalism to multiculturalism, radical feminism, animal rights, and statist environmentalism in addressing current social problems. In order to live meaningful, inspired lives, we need not accept any external, collectivist vision to which we must subordinate ourselves. I can only concur.