Ayn Rand and Christianity - how do you make them fit together?

[AshG]

I can't personally name a single Christian who has been lead from Christianity by Rand. I can name plenty of Christian's who have been lead astray by left wing philosopher's such as Marx

Taking a break from fighting with my course UI (paper syllabi are so much nicer) to clarify and, hopefully, to positively engage for a moment.

I do not know of anyone personally who has decided they no longer want to participate in Christian community because of Rand's influence or philosophy. I do know, personally, people who have made decisions in church operations in part due to parallels in philosophy, if not directly due to the influence. I have seen fellow partitioners make motions to cut outreach and local missions budgets (where our needs assistance line lived) because having the aid available encourages people to be dependant on it, and wouldn't it be nice to use that money to reupholster the pews for the people who actually attend the services? Rung three, the ethics of self-interest. Rung four, the business of capitalism. Rung five, the aesthetics of romanticism realism.

And, yes - I agree with you that Marxism has done just as much negative within Christendom. Christ is the Liberator, the one who will turn the world upside down and establish a new heaven and new earth. Those of us who follow His teachings have a role, but absolutely not in armed confrontation but through living in community in a way that will draw others to worship and live in the Beloved Community.

If you believe this life is all there is, that what you perceive is all that's worth your time, that your experience is the Pinnacle of your existence, then cool. But that is completely and totally at odds with Christianity.

Also... The Ayn Rand Foundation itself calls altruism evil.

 

[AshG]

When I mention the rungs, I am beginning from the bottom.

 

[Vol8188]

Have you actually been looking into her philosophy or just misrepresentations of her philosophy?

No one can honestly read her and proclaim she sees the goal of life to be the accumulation of wealth.

Nor can anyone read her work and proclaim she believes in “personal truth”.

Or that there’s no reason to investigate things further. She literally proclaims it’s man’s ability to think and reason that sets him apart, and it’s the basis of her philosophy.

You also seem to be completely misunderstanding Rand if you believe she sees “accumulation of wealth” as the primary goal in life.

In The Fountainhead her main character intentionally makes decisions throughout the book that cost him money, because he would rather remain true to himself.

In Atlas Shrugged the main characters leave all their worldly possessions behind to start their own society.

Instead of reading opinions on Rand, you should start with her actual works. Specifically those two

Taking a break from fighting with my course UI (paper syllabi are so much nicer) to clarify and, hopefully, to positively engage for a moment.

I do not know of anyone personally who has decided they no longer want to participate in Christian community because of Rand's influence or philosophy. I do know, personally, people who have made decisions in church operations in part due to parallels in philosophy, if not directly due to the influence. I have seen fellow partitioners make motions to cut outreach and local missions budgets (where our needs assistance line lived) because having the aid available encourages people to be dependant on it, and wouldn't it be nice to use that money to reupholster the pews for the people who actually attend the services? Rung three, the ethics of self-interest. Rung four, the business of capitalism. Rung five, the aesthetics of romanticism realism.

And, yes - I agree with you that Marxism has done just as much negative within Christendom. Christ is the Liberator, the one who will turn the world upside down and establish a new heaven and new earth. Those of us who follow His teachings have a role, but absolutely not in armed confrontation but through living in community in a way that will draw others to worship and live in the Beloved Community.

If you believe this life is all there is, that what you perceive is all that's worth your time, that your experience is the Pinnacle of your existence, then cool. But that is completely and totally at odds with Christianity.

Also... The Ayn Rand Foundation itself calls altruism evil.

You seem to be addressing about 10 different things at once (Marx vs Rand, all there is is what you perceive, personal experiences, etc). We aren't going to get anywhere like that. If we can focus in on one aspect at a time, we are more likely to get somewhere.

I copied two posts of mine objecting to your initial caricature of Rand's views. Could you address one of those?

 

[AM64]

Have you read the scathing letter she sent her niece when she asked for help with a prom dress?

Also, her idea that taxation is theft.

Unless you belong to the Robin Hood theory of management, a lot of taxation is theft. Obviously Ayn Rand did not believe in the Robin Hood theory of management and redistribution of earned income and wealth.

 

[AshG]

You seem to be addressing about 10 different things at once (Marx vs Rand, all there is is what you perceive, personal experiences, etc). We aren't going to get anywhere like that. If we can focus in on one aspect at a time, we are more likely to get somewhere.

I copied two posts of mine objecting to your initial caricature of Rand's views. Could you address one of those?

I responded to what was in the Quote block. That's not 10 different things.

Still battling Canvas and course tech integrations. I didn't realize being a part-time music teacher [sic] would be so time consuming. Right, @Rickyvol77 ?

 

[SamRebel35]

Maybe my brain is failing me in my old age, but I'm almost 100% certain Rand's main character in Atlas spent pages destroying the broad concept of altruism.

The way I remember it is that Gault destroys altruism as a codified societal standard (not necessarily as a concept for an individual to voluntarily practice). Nobody has a claim on your life. Not God, not your neighbors, and certainly not beaurocrats. The destruction of one's self interest for the benefit of someone else isn't moral in and of itself and shouldn't be required or even requested of anyone.

Edit: found this from the big long speech

“You have heard no concepts of morality but the mystical or the social. You have been taught that morality is a code of behavior imposed on you by whim, the whim of a supernatural power or the whim of society, to serve God’s purpose or your neighbor’s welfare, to please an authority beyond the grave or else next door—but not to serve your life or pleasure. Your pleasure, you have been taught, is to be found in immorality, your interests would best be served by evil, and any moral code must be designed not for you, but against you, not to further your life, but to drain it."

 

[AM64]

That doesn't make them knowing (or unknowing) followers of Rand. Ayn Rand is a branch of right wing thinking that is probably more liberal on social issues (especially since Rand lived a rather liberal lifestyle in her personal relationships) and more conservative on fiscal matters. Keep in mind that Rand was essentially a White Russian that had escaped the tyranny of the Bolsheviks in the late 1920s or early 1930s, so she has a firm grasp of the dangers of collectivism and it heavily influenced her work and thoughts for the rest of her life.

To more fully understand Ayn Rand you have to read We the Living. It's been a lot of years, but I believe she said that was as close to an autobiography as she would write. Obviously her early exposure to communism greatly affected her beliefs.

 

[AM64]

I got neices and nephews who were taught by their mom to ask for handouts from family members who they thought "had it". They would not offer to lift a finger in return. They would not contact you for any other reason. They would use their money as they saw fit on material things.

On one occasion one neice told me during a stern discussion she only contacts me to ask for stuff otherwise she has no interest in talking to me. She's now in her late 20's, college dropout, 3 kids, 3 baby daddies, and probably still living in some delusion about life and still has no self awareness.

Another neice, I would pick up from college and drive 3 hours back and forth when she wanted to go home. One day she tells her mother, uncle always trying to give me advice but I don't want to hear it.

Her mother shared it with me because she is like minded. Her daughter only wanted the ride. She didn't want advice.

Some people think you just owe them something for nothing. They grow up thinking they can just take, take, take or if you have more then they look at you as their meal ticket. They have no idea about how life really works. It creates a victim. People who have fragile egos and get upset with others success unless they can use it to their advantage. Disparage one in favor of the other.

Sometimes those conversations don't come easy. Unless Rand speaks on the background of the interpersonal relationship between her and her neice then we don't know all the conflict involved in this particular letter. I've never heard of this particular writting to her neice until now.

You have people bely helping them understand responsibility, self reliance, humility, respect but sometimes that happens through hard lessons.

Unless you have experience in understanding then you are often befuddled by things that appear to be common sense to others.

Two things that baffle me - usually made by the young and impressionable - there are others, of course.

Why pay an excessive amount for a dress (or similar) to be used once, or why pay for a lavish wedding that's going to set back chances of success?

Why pay through the nose for an education that is unlikely to ever pay for itself?

 

[AM64]

Maybe my brain is failing me in my old age, but I'm almost 100% certain Rand's main character in Atlas spent pages destroying the broad concept of altruism.

My take away was that she destroyed the idea of giving to those who produced nothing and only took, but that Gault and others were more than willing to provide a place where those who would produce could do so. Perhaps my version of "altruism" is different, but I see no fault in supporting someone who will and walking away from someone who won't.

 

[n_huffhines]

This guy claims that when she was bashing altruism, what she meant was something semantically different from how we use the word.

Ayn Rand’s misunderstood position on altruism – Daily News

 

[SamRebel35]

This guy claims that when she was bashing altruism, what she meant was something semantically different from how we use the word.

Ayn Rand’s misunderstood position on altruism – Daily News

Well, when you read this guy's article and compare it to Gault's speech (reasonably understood as a synopsis of Rand’s worldview) I think he's right. If by altruism you mean serving others, Gault does not impeach that notion. He impeaches the notion of a moral code where only self sacrifice is moral and pursuit of rational self interest is immoral.

 

[Vol8188]

Well, when you read this guy's article and compare it to Gault's speech (reasonably understood as a synopsis of Rand’s worldview) I think he's right. If by altruism you mean serving others, Gault does not impeach that notion. He impeaches the notion of a moral code where only self sacrifice is moral and pursuit of rational self interest is immoral.

That’s always how I saw it too. That she’s not objecting to altruism. Merely she’s objecting to altruism as your standard for morality.

 

[AM64]

This guy claims that when she was bashing altruism, what she meant was something semantically different from how we use the word.

Ayn Rand’s misunderstood position on altruism – Daily News

So is the airline warning about putting on your mask first in case of depressurization selfishness? If you pass out, you can't help your neighbor, so could it alternately be seen as altruistic? Perhaps the person in the next seat is too young, old, sleeping, or simply not dexterous enough. There's too much gray to make most concepts black and white.

 

[BreatheUT]

Two things that baffle me - usually made by the young and impressionable - there are others, of course.

Why pay an excessive amount for a dress (or similar) to be used once, or why pay for a lavish wedding that's going to set back chances of success?

Why pay through the nose for an education that is unlikely to ever pay for itself?

A couple of things which are interesting. 1) those material things they chose to spend money on often were pageant dresses. 2) I think it's ok to pay "through the nose" on education in some cases. I don't think I'm where I am without it. I made some careless decisions though. Discussed often by Ras of note.

I digress and we can get back to the Rand discussion.

 

[AshG]

That’s always how I saw it too. That she’s not objecting to altruism. Merely she’s objecting to altruism as your standard for morality.

I've gone back and re-read John Galt's speech, several resources at the Ayn Rand Foundation website, and a few other essays and talks on the subject. It appears that Rand's disdain for altruism is a disdain for Comte's ideology of Positivism from which altruism blossoms. I honestly don't find much comfort in his doctrines either, even if they do have a longer lasting societal impact beyond one's short life.

But for Rand's definition of appropriate altruism - do only for those you feel deserve it, to the least extent possible, and with self preservation always at the front of mind - I still find it wholly incompatible with the Christian ethos. As a Christian, I no longer live for myself. The idea of becoming a Christ follower is quite literally death to self and rebirth into a greater collective with self will sacrificed for a far greater good.

 

[Vol8188]

I've gone back and re-read John Galt's speech, several resources at the Ayn Rand Foundation website, and a few other essays and talks on the subject. It appears that Rand's disdain for altruism is a disdain for Comte's ideology of Positivism from which altruism blossoms. I honestly don't find much comfort in his doctrines either, even if they do have a longer lasting societal impact beyond one's short life.

But for Rand's definition of appropriate altruism - do only for those you feel deserve it, to the least extent possible, and with self preservation always at the front of mind - I still find it wholly incompatible with the Christian ethos. As a Christian, I no longer live for myself. The idea of becoming a Christ follower is quite literally death to self and rebirth into a greater collective with self will sacrificed for a far greater good.

Are you ever going to address the misrepresentations of Rand’s views that you began this thread with?

 

[AshG]

Are you ever going to address the misrepresentations of Rand’s views that you began this thread with?

Your perspective of misrepresentation. Again, Objectivism. If you are truly an objectivist, then you must accept that those are a possible reality.

 

[Vol8188]

Your perspective of misrepresentation. Again, Objectivism. If you are truly an objectivist, then you must accept that those are a possible reality.

You seem to have confused objectivism. Objectivism is about an "objective" reality. You seem to think it's about "personal truth" or a personal reality. It's a matter of objective fact that you misrepresented her ideology in several ways. It is possible I am missing something regarding those, so feel free to point out anything I am missing but if not you are wrong on the following claims:

• What you see is all there is, no reason to look deeper or further
• Your personal truth is all there is
• Accumulation of wealth through work is the primary goal of life

I've previously stated multiple times what specifically you are incorrect regarding, but I can restate if you wish. But you need to stop hiding here and either defend your claims or accept that you were incorrect

 

[Vol8188]

As he continues to talk about "personal truth" and other "possible realities" I'm starting to think he has confused the term "objective" with the term "subjective"

 

[AshG]

I've edited the opening post. Please tell me how it also fails to meet your standards.

 

[Vol8188]

I've edited the opening post, sirrah. Please tell me how it also fails to meet your standards.

It's an improvement. You know you could have simply stated 24 hours ago that you misrepresented Rand (I'll assume unintentionally) and saved us both a lot time.

 

[AshG]

It's an improvement. You know you could have simply stated 24 hours ago that you misrepresented Rand (I'll assume unintentionally) and saved us both a lot time.

That may be true. But it's still wholly incompatible with following Christ.

 

[Vol8188]

That may be true. But it's still wholly incompatible with following Christ.

Being honest about your misunderstandings and not wasting 24 hours running from the truth? I don't see that incompatible.

 

[AshG]

Being honest about your misunderstandings and not wasting 24 hours running from the truth? I don't see that incompatible.

You're worse than me at not knowing when to shut up.

 

[Vol8188]

You're worse than me at not knowing when to shut up.

The difference is, I'm honest and I don't hide nor cower. You spent 24 hours evading the fact that you were wrong. You also spent a substantial amount of time pretending you did not have me in mind when you started while never answering who you had in mind.

Would you like to finally answer that one? Who did you have in mind when you started this thread?