I just finished reading Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead. As a piece of fiction, I found it very entertaining and compelling; as a work of philosophy, I found it intriguing. For those who haven't read it, she expounds her philosophy of objectivism through her characters, who are pretty weird at times, but she makes her point well enough.One of the main points of objectivism is that your ethics are supposed to be governed by rational self-interest. She is explicitly against altruism, that is, the sacrifice of self for others, but she equally does not subscribe to the converse, sacrifice of others for self. People should aspire to their highest potential, irrespective of others, and neither live for others nor expect others to live for them.
Seems a bit selfish and heartless, doesn't it?
I'm not so sure she's so far off the truth. My friend MG told me a vort he heard in the name of Rav Shimon Shkop. (I can't verify the quote; if anyone can give a source for this, I'd be most grateful.) He was asked, if Hashem wants us to do chesed with others, why did He make us naturally so selfish?Rav Shkop answered that the selfishness that G-d gave man is part of the gift of being able to do chesed. If you have a normal, single person, he looks out for his own interests. He gets married, and now he also looks out for his wife's interests. he has children, and he now looks out for his children's interests. All the time he is being selfish - but he views his wife and children as an extension of himself. If a person works on his ahavas Yisroel, he will grow his concept of self until he sees all of Klal Yisroel as extensions of himself, and he will look out for their interests as he looks out for his own.
In other words, Judaism does not preach negation or sacrifice of the self; rather a person must develop a healthy sense of ego that encompasses the well being of others.
Ayn Rand almost got there, but in her vehemence against collectivism/dependence, she stopped short at libertarianism/independence and missed the final step: interdependence. (Stephen Covey fans, that's for you.) Interestingly, none of her characters ever have children. Nor did she. I guess that's what happens when you can't grow your ego past yourself.
EDIT: Thanks to MG, who saw this post and sent me links to Rav Schwab's magnum opus, Shaarei Yosher. The part about developing your ego to encompass others is in the introduction, pages 1 and 2.
7 comments:
Sigh. I'm sorry I didn't have you in the classroom years ago, when I taught Ayn Rand's literature. Her economic policies are compelling but her personal behavior was repulsive.
On another note, I know dati'im devoted to AR's objectivism. One is a kiruv rabbi who horribly mistreated his divorced wife. Stole all her savings (we're not talking a mere few dollars, here) by rationalizing she had worked to put him through law school etc. Convinced his oldest son to hate selfish mom for wanting her cash, house, clothes, car, etc. back. The guy ruined many lives (ex-wife, in-laws, siblings of the favored son) with buttheaded behavior (John Galt et al taught him best). But being a lawyer, he got away with the crime, including the witholding of a get (he demanded ransom). Maybe he'll meet Rav Shimon Shkop in olam haba and get what he deserves. The poor wife never did. Her successor, a widow, disgusted many who knew her. The remarriage kept ex-wifey financially disabled and quite disheartened about Judaism. That anyone sleeps well at night knowing that others suffer horribly because of them, and in the name of Torah no less, is beyond my patience or sympathy.
Yocheved Golani http://www.linkedin.com/in/yochevedgolaniink
http://twitter.com/yochevedgolani and
http://itsmycrisisandillcryifineedto.blogspot.com/
Interesting post. R Shkop's vort is great. I've also hear that Ayn Rand would not have been a "talmud" of Hillel, based on "If I am not for myself, who is for me?"
Looking beyond yourself is the first sign of greatness.
Read the Hakdama to Shaarei Yosher, RSS's magnum opus, and you will find the base of what your friend told you there, if I recall it correctly. You might be surprised (or not surprised) that it is your friends "take" on RSS's vort. But the yesod is there I believe
Yep, Shaarei Yosher it is. I've updated the original posting with links.
I think Ann Rand has a lot of good ideas and she is a breath of fresh air when it comes to modern so called philosophy which is really as she noticed a lot of nonsense. However I would be a bit wary. She is not really all that philosophically rigorous. She did not really understand Kant. If she is not accepted in the academic world it is for more reason than just stam bias. I think she could have used a good chavruta to challenge her once in awhile.
That's not me thus certain she's thus far over fact. My friend Milligrams explained the vort he observed inside brand regarding Rav Shimon Shkop seo. (I am unable to verify the actual offer; if anyone may give a source for this, I'd personally always be many grateful.) They was asked, if Hashem would like all of us to do chesed with other people, why do They make all of us normally so egocentric?
Rav Shkop answered the self-centeredness that G-d offered man is an element in the reward for being able to perform chesed. In case you have an ordinary, solitary individual, they looks away with regard to his very own pursuits. He will get hitched, and after this younger crowd appears away with regard to his wife's pursuits Cheap Runescape Gold. she has young children, and the man now appears out regarding his or her kids pursuits. Constantly he could be being egotistical -- nevertheless they landscapes his or her partner and children just as one expansion associated with himself. If a person creates their ahavas Yisroel, he'll almost certainly increase their idea of personal till this individual sees every one of Klal Buy Runescape Gold Yisroel because extensions involving themselves, and that he will be away because of their pursuits because he appears away regarding his or her own.
Actually, Rav Shimon's introduction also says, "וכן ראוי להתבונן על כל מתנות שמים מטל שמים ומשמני הארץ שהם נתונים לכלל ישראל כולו, והתחלקותם להיחידים הוא רק בתור גזברות, על מנת שיחלקם לנצרכים, לכל אחד כחלק הראוי לו, וליטול לעצמו כפי חלקו הראוי לו."
My translation (from here):
"Therefore it is appropriate to think about all the gifts of heaven 'from the dew of the heavens and the fat of the land' (Genesis 27:28) that they are given to the Jewish people as a whole. Their allotment to individuals is only in their role as caretakers until they divide it to those who need it, to each according to what is worthy for him, and to take for himself what is worthy for himself."
Far from Objectivism, doesn't that last line sound downright Communist" Compare to Luis Blanc (1851), borrowed by Karl Marx "Critique of the Gotha Program" (1875): "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."
I think Rav Shimon's position is actually a true Hegelian synthesis of Objectivism and Communism; something which is both and yet (as should be obvious in this case) neither.
(In either case, it may be useful to link to my bilingual copy rather than the original in Hebrewbooks.org.)
Post a Comment