Objectivism: Unrealistic Outside the Fountainhead
The basic premise of objectivism is that existence exist, which means that an objective reality exist independently of consciousness. This implies that consciousness perceives reality, but does not rely reality. Ayn Rand promoted the deprivation of morality from this view of metaphysics (Andrew Bernstein 56). She believes that man (sic) is a rational animal. Man is the only form of being with the ability to reason. This, to her, implies that it is right for man to think. The good is that which is useful to and promotes life, the life in question must be one's own life. However, one does not have the responsibility to interfere in the rights of others,. It is everyone's personal responsibility
…show more content…
He is a philosophical idea turned into a physical character. For in writing The Fountainhead, Ayn Rand created Roark as the ideal man, according to objectivism. Roark is inherently selfish, entirely ignorant of others, and devoted solely to his own achievement and well-being. We first gained a sense of Howard’s unwavering independence when he was expelled from architecture school on behalf of refusing to build in the expected structure (The Fountainhead 22). Throughout the book he continues to pursue his life without altercations from society. Because he does not submit to society’s expectations he is ridiculed, broke, mocked but also content because he does not seek for material goods or the approval of others. Reason, purpose and self-esteem were the primary values that Roark lived by, by default they are essential for even the survival of a human being. A human being is born with the faculty of reason this is what distinguishes us from animals Andrew Bernstein 56). By nature, for even survival for a human being, it is necessary to develop and cultivate the values and beliefs that Roark held, yet it is problematic to hold them and live by them in a world generally populated by a society where altruism is more favored and followed. People will not treat man or his ideas fairly. When one is recognized, it often is not for one’s full merits; one will be …show more content…
Roark defies this statement because he will never sacrifice himself for the pleasure of others, yet we must admire this of him as Dominique does. Dominique recognizes the greatness in Roark and loves him deeply and passionately, but does not believe he will ultimately be allowed to exist over time (The Fountainhead 465). Dominique perceives that the true evil comes from social interactions, not metaphysical. it is other people who will inevitably defeat any good, in Dominique's perspective. This enables her to form relationships and ensures an inability for her to love. Dominique cares for no one but herself, if all members of any society mirrored Dominique’s actions the community would self destruct. Ayn Rand suggest that acting on behalf of one’s own social interest is considered ideal and even goes as far as heroic. Objectivism states that any reason and motives are virtuous as long as any interaction you have with anybody in society is freely entered into (Andrew Bernstein 13). According to The Fountainhead our entire society is based upon the unchanging principles made up and maintained solely by influential men, exemplified as Ellis Toohey in The Fountainhead. Rand dictates that true happiness can only be found by defying these principals (Doesn't Life Require
In Ayn Rand’s famous, or in some circles, infamous, story Anthem, the differing ideologies of objectivism and collectivism are pit against each other. With objectivism being so tight knit and different from the society in the book, it seems that it would be almost impossible to truly follow in its entirety. However, Anthem, as a whole, doesn’t violate the ideals of Rand’s philosophy of objectivism.
Rand’s expressed the basic values of Objectivism in this magnum opus. Objectivism is a philosophical system created by Ayn Rand and later popularized by her successors. It was first developed in essays and lectures. Rand thinks of Objectivism as “a philosophy for living on earth”. She states in the Atlas Shrugged: “My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.” Ayn Rand divides Objectivism in four parts: Ethics, Metaphysics, Epistemology and Politics.
In conclusion, it is shown that Equality 7-2521 makes his journey from a prisoner of collectivism and extreme social dependence to an exclusive freedom. Ayn Rand portrays a society afraid of change, rebellion, and the idea of any singularity at all. Equality first frees himself from the shackles of his brothers, allowing him to be an individual. Next he discovers that he, as one person, can judge the truth, others change the truth the way they want you to understand it. Finally, the reflection of himself in a stream shows Equality that he is not only mentally, but physically different than what seems to be a shapeless society. Ayn Rand conveys the theme of individualism through the development of Equality's ego, he is able to find the importance of one’s self and help society ameliorate itself for years to come.
Howard Roark’s speech in Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead displays the author's personal philosophy of objectivism. Objectivism is an idea that Ayn Rand had developed and promoted in her works of literature. Objectivism advocated for the rights of individual freedoms such as someone being able to do whatever that person desires with their own creations. In this case, Ayn Rand’s character Howard Roark; who had dynamited his own building . Through Rand’s persuading diction, immense detail, and powerful organization, Ayn Rand takes a stand through a fictional character to promote the idea that an individual should be able to live freely without society or the government scrutinizing him.
Even though there are many arguments against these theories, there are many points that support it. There is no such thing as ethical objectivism because as said in “The argument of Relativity”, every society around the world has different beliefs and ways of acting. Not everyone shares the same opinion. As said in “The Argument of Queerness”, we would not able to understand these objective values because we would need to have some type of power that is not in our ordinary accounts of sensory perception so this means we are incapable of understanding them. We also know that we make decisions not only based on our moral values but on the experiences we have been through time. In the end, I still believe Mackie is correct and there are no objective
Ayn Rand based her novel of the idea of objectivism the idea that reality exists independent of consciousness, and that the proper moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own happiness or rational self. We see this throughout the entire novel and within all of her characters. Ayn Rand had an interesting perception of selfishness and selflessness, along with her view of objectivism. As a reader we are thinking the opposite of what the characters are thinking, and never know what is going to happen next. Roark and Keating gave new meanings to selfishness and selflessness within the world of architecture.
The infamous author Ayn Rand dedicated her life wholly to the study and furthering of her political dogma, Objectivism, the uniting theme throughout all of her published literary works. One of the most obtrusive examples is her novella Anthem, which is set in a futuristic yet inept dystopia that is entirely founded on principles of collectivism. Page by page Rand’s sentiments become glaringly obvious, subsequently causing the reader to question her motivation behind this story, their own agreement with her egocentric philosophy, how Christianity aligns with every aspect of it, and if, overall, it was adeptly written.
An action is morally good if and only if it promotes my personal happiness and it is morally wrong if and only if that action hinders my personal happiness.
One being the fact that this book is a collection of her essay and speeches. But the main one is how this book discusses her own Philosophy. She first explains the importance of philosophy and how it used in the real world unknowingly today, but she then says the philosophy most people follow today, Altruism, as irrational. “Altruism is the rationalization for the mass slaughter in Soviet Russia – for the legalized looting in the welfare state – for the power-lust of politicians seeking to serve the common good” (Rand 27) Altruism is basically the thought of having selfless actions and to serve others. This completely contradicts Ayn Rand’s philosophy of living, Objectivism. This is where the book becomes different form other books and even the entire world. Many people and religions are taught to help others. This follows Altruism in the fact that we are serving others and being selfless. Objectivism has many different layers to it but one of the most important parts to it is the concept that man should be self-serving. That we should be selfish and live for ourselves only under the condition that it doesn’t harm others. This is extremely different from everything we are taught since we were
Ayn Rand's classic story of one man's desire to become an individual in a nameless society presents a compelling refutation of collectivism in all forms. The hero, labeled "Equality 7-2521" by the State, chooses to challenge conventional authority as he learns the joys of experimentation and discovery, the ecstasy of human love, the challenge and fairness of liberty, and the happiness of self-interest. Equality 7-2521 writes three unique phrases in his journal: 1. "My happiness needs no higher aim to vindicate it. My happiness is not the means to an end. It is the end.", 2. "We know that we are evil, but there is no will in us and no power to resist it.", 3. "The word 'We' . . . must never be placed first within man's soul.". These phrases will be discussed individually in the remainder of this essay.
Equality, the protagonist of Anthem, has the understanding that all of his actions must benefit the common good, and that any decisions based on individual motivations are unnecessary or even evil -- stating that “We strive to be like all our brother men, for all men must be alike” (19). Equality and his fellow “brothers” are all considered entirely equal, to the extent at which their personal desires and sense of individuality are silenced. The rulers attempt to justify this suppression by fantasizing ideas of unity and by crafting the vision of a powerful and indivisible society, for instance providing quotes or pledges, such as “We are all in one and one in all. There are no men but only the great WE, one, indivisible and forever,” (19). The ideal collectivist society, in this case the one portrayed in Anthem, is one where no man is above the other in their contributions or motivations -- however in “The Soul of a Collectivist,” collectivism is recognized as damaging to one’s ability to self govern, giving it a more negative connotation. When the antagonist in The Fountainhead gives his speech on collectivism in the soul, he writes of the effect loss of intrinsic motivation can have on an individual, saying “Man realizes that he’s incapable of what he’s accepted as the noblest virtue -- and it gives him a sense of guilt, of sin, of his own basic unworthiness. Since the supreme ideal is beyond his grasp he gives up eventually all ideals, all aspiration, all sense of his personal value. He feels himself obliged to preach what he can’t practice.” An altruist or collectivist society seems desirable, such as when the society in Anthem was introduced. When collectivism is studied further, however, the idea becomes
I can defend the overall definition of happiness from the Ayn Rand Lexicon. In my opinion a happy life is on based on morality and values as the writers
We might not have the same opinions, paths, and ways of living; but we all, millions of people around the world, share the same purpose of life: Being able to say “I am having a good life!” What we mean by “good life” is living in pure happiness and having a wonderful peace of mind. The difference between us is that each one of us chooses a different way in his pursuit of happiness. Some find it in stability with a big house, a family, and a good paying job. Some find it in adventure and wildness, travel, and taking risks. While others don’t really have specific criteria or an organized plan, they just believe that happiness comes with living each day as if it was the last, with no worries about the rest. Personally, I find it in trying to be the best version of myself, in staying true to my principles, and in the same time in being able to make my own decisions; which reminds me of what George Loewenstein said “Just because we figure out that X makes people happy and they're choosing Y, we don't want to impose X on them.”
Morality as a whole tries to create a distinction between right and wrong, good and bad. Making decisions should arguably always be aimed towards good. Under the philosophical doctrine of Utilitarianism, philosophers like Bentham and Mill recognize that human kind should make their lives useful and good through bringing about happiness or pleasure. The idea of the “Greatest Happiness Principle was introduced by Bentham, who was a Utilitarian predecessor to Mill. According to Mill, human lives should abide by the “Greatest Happiness Principle.” This principle states that actions are good as they tend to promote happiness; and bad as they promote the reverse of happiness, therefore humans should make a conscious choice of action that will lead
The same applies to ‘beneficial’ which could be interpreted to mean; pleasant, healthy, productive, useful, life-enhancing. How to define good in a moral sense has puzzled philosophers for thousands of years, but there has been two main approaches; a teleological and deontological approach. The teleological approach states that the moral action is the one that aims to fulfil the purpose of the agent. However, the teleological approach can assess how moral an action is on how well it achieves particular ends. Whereas the deontological approach believes that true morality is derived from a set of duties which exist in their own