damn . . it's Ann Rand?
Who's your favorite Ann ?
Posted on 07/22/2002 4:31:37 PM PDT by dubyagee
Having heard Atlas Shrugged touted often on Free Republic as one of the greats in literature, I recently undertook reading all 1,000 plus pages of this “objectivist bible.” I was suprised to find that I thoroughly enjoyed this book and while I agree with much that Ayn Rand preaches (and boy, is she preachy) I find the fact that she denies that God exists quite contradictory to her reason. So from a Christian perspective, I have decided to place some of these contradictions before you, in order that I might be abused by your intellectual snobbery (grin)…
IMHO…
First, Rand makes the mistake of lumping all believers in with “looters.” Were this the case, there would be no believers here at FR decrying big government or taking offense at the fact that the government wants our paychecks each month. The “right wing fundamentalist bigots” would not exist. Christians would be considered left wing lunatics. Clearly, there is a mistake in her presumption that all “supernaturalists” are the same. On a personal level, I have never met a Christian who would presume that the government should take care of those who refuse to take care of themselves, but only Christians who might venture to say, “But by the grace of God, go I…”
Secondly, for someone who professes any form of supernaturalism as contrary to reason, Ayn Rand repeatedly refers to the ugly side of man as “evil.” Rand obviously believes that evil does exist. But if man is only truly alive and good when he is true to himself and his virtue, how can evil exist? Where did it come from? How could this good and wonderful being called man, distort and pervert good to the point that it became evil? What is the source of this evil? Religion, Rand might say. But why would this marvelously intelligent creature pervert what he knows to be true for the sake of destroying his species? In the words of Francisco D’Anconia (I love this character, btw), “Contradictions cannot exist.” Good and evil contradict one another. The presence of both in this world is clearly a contradiction. Reason tells me that there must be a source from which each came. My reason tells me that each is trying to destroy the other, knowing that the two cannot exist indefinitely together.
Third, Rand does not believe that men are made up of nothing more than chemical reactions, but that they have a soul. A soul is supernatural in itself. We cannot see it. We cannot prove that it exists, but there are few who believe that it does not exist. If reason overrides all superstition, how can she make the claim that a man is more than what meets the eye? Does this not contradict the very essence of reason?
Finally, imagine Hank Reardon, creator of a vast empire, watching it be torn apart by those he has aided. The helplessness he felt, knowing that nothing he could say or do would convince them of their own smug self-righteousness. In that smug self-righteousness they desire to kill Reardon because he causes them to think, and therefore to see the evil within themselves. Now, if you would humor me for a moment, imagine the execution of a man named Jesus, who comes to this world He created, in a desire to save it from destruction by “looters.” He is, indeed, killed by smug self-righteous men who fear his logic. But instead of going to the ground, never to return in his greatness, he does return. And he acknowledges those who acknowledged him. And he gives gratitude to those who have shown him gratitude. And to those who did neither, he says simply, “I knew you not.” It is often said by those who belittle the intellectual capabilities of Christians, that the bible is full of contradictions and that a loving God would not turn his face from humans simply because they did not believe. But God, above all, would know, as did Ayn Rand, that evil does exist. The difference is that God would know from whence it came. And if he accepted all humans, regardless of their belief or unbelief, wouldn’t he be aiding the looters in his own destruction and the destruction of those who were “right”? Wouldn’t He be denying that He desired gratitude? Wouldn’t he be denying that he deserved gratitude? Wouldn’t that be a contradiction of all Ayn Rand professed to be right? If God exists, isn’t acknowledgement and gratitude the least he deserves in return for his creation?
If a soul can exist, so too, can God. If, for the sake of argument, God does indeed exist, Rand has brought herself down to the level of the evil “looters.” Her greatest contradiction is her refusal to acknowledge the possibility that God does exist, thereby offering him no acknowledgement and no gratitude for that which she worshipped above all…a great Mind. IMHO, Rand errs in her belief that this great mind that man possesses came from nowhere and from nothing because that in itself in contradictory. My reason tells me that greatness must come from that which is greater. Her denial was for the purpose of pursuing her own code of morality, which she perceived to be superior to that of God. She praises man and ignores the possibility of God, thereby corrupting her own belief system of giving gratitude and adulation to that which is greater than her.
The last thing that I am doing when I choose to believe in God is abandoning my reason. I am not practicing “Morality of Death” because before I believed in God I still believed in doing what is right. The bible does not contradict this; the bible simply makes it clear that men consistently choose that which is wrong over that which is right. Has history not proven this? Good and evil exist on this earth, of that no one can deny. Good and evil are contradictions in themselves, yet they both exist. Therefore, contradictions do exist. Although, according to my beliefs, one day they will cease to exist. But they will not cease before Atlas(God) shrugs(wink).
It's easier not to think.
Haven't read the Fountainhead, but from Atlas I gathered she believed the world would be a Utopia if only everyone believed the way that she did. Wasn't the little nook in the Rockies a Utopia of some sort...
Yes, but Stalin and Mao and Pol Pot (what a name...) were obvious looters. The fact that their self-interest was power over others is a distinction that cannot be ignored. Gandhi and Mother Theresa were different in that they helped others in their own self interest without taking from others, other than the charity of other good people that is. The profit from their self-interest was the powerful feeling of doing good for others. I have felt this through working for my local Lions Club.
Somebody said that the God area was where Rand swung and missed, and I agree with that. People who have never done charity work are really missing out on the way you feel after doing it. Erecting fences and dugouts for the kids' little league fields, spending days flipping burgers in the Lions food trailer at the local fair, dressing up like an elf to take pictures of kids with Santa and putting them into greeting cards at Wal-Mart, all for no pay was an incredibly rewarding experience, and it is a pity that Rand didnt realize this. I think if she had lived longer, she might have softened up, kind of the way that Malcom X did later in life...JFK
The very points that you pull out are why I would suggest it as reading for anyone.
You're right, because morality isn't derived from reason. Christianity posits that there is a God who wants us to live as selflessly as possible, and that true and total selflessness (living for the good of others) is what is good. Logic itself can be used for anything you want (any desire you have).
Yes, I see where you are going...I was hoping to avoid that..(grin)
I would welcome a few suggestions on books from your end.
I think that her point is that Utopia can only exist for people only within their own lives, only if they are allowed to make it so. The little nook in the Rockies was an example of a place where that was allowed to happen for each on his/her own terms, not the terms laid out by some do-gooder looter socialist types. Actually, I think that Galt's Gulch was a Utopia, only in the sense that its existance outside of the regular world proved that Utopia is not possible...JFK
I personally prefer "The Road to Serfdom" by FA Hayek, or even better "Knowledge and Decisions" by Thomas Sowell. Both of these books make the academic points better than Atlas shrugged, but they aren't nearly as entertaining a read.
I loved both of them, and "knowledge and Decisions" changed my life and work more than anything I've ever read, but there is simply no competing with a good story for entertainment value, no matter how heavy handed it may be.
But, if you feel good by doing it, how can it be self sacrifice?
That's the way I reconcile the charity work I do.
Self sacrifice is doing things that you hate because you are told it is for the "greater good."
I agree with you here!
And obviously no knowledge of the self-sacrifice it takes to have children.
damn . . it's Ann Rand?
Who's your favorite Ann ?
What is "good?"
Hank
Straight up good advice. Some FReepers get their panties in a wad because of Rand's general disdain for religion and charity, and use that as an excuse to ignore everything that she has to say on that premise. Just because an Arby's Bacon Chicken Club has tomatoes on it, doesnt mean I will stop eating them. I just pick 'em off and chow down...JFK
you left off this part of the quote, it changes the meaning completely, what does it mean to have evil desires? what is the cost of a)having them, and b) acting on them? If a person ponders these further questions and then still chooses to act out their evil desires then they are irrational, but the study of them, which I would wager most "evil-doers" do not do (ponder, study their own desires), she is claiming to be the highest virtue. This is what Christians do through prayer, and others through other forms of meditation.
Yes, and the replies still relatively civil. 8 * )
You're wrong. Stalin and Mao were quite rational and logical and clear-headed (much more than most people) and considered themselves overwhelming successes. It just didn't matter to them that they wiped out tens of millinos of people; it made rational sense for them to do such to reach their goals. That we consider wiping out so many people evil comes from somewhere else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.