What Are We Living For? Ayn Rand, Objectivism, and Anthem

Why Form a Philosophy? “The unexamined life is not worth living.” Socrates The goal is to make sense of a world that doesn’t always make sense Philosophical study helps us resist becoming complaisant by forcing us to take a longer look at the reasons behind the things we do. Life’s more worthwhile when you understand it!

Rand’s Philosophy Rand named her belief system Objectivism, and described it as a “philosophy for living on earth” vs. a philosophy that serves largely for intellectual exercise Whereas many philosophers believe that multiple answers exist to large philosophical questions – or that, in some cases, there is no objectively truthful response – Rand argues that even abstract questions have concrete answers Therefore, Rand’s philosophy is less a system of questions and more a system of answers The degree to which you buy into her system depends not on whether you find her questions intriguing , but on whether you find her answers believable

Her Argument for Philosophy In order to live, man must act – we can’t wait passively for life to happen to us In order to act, he must make choices – we can’t always be the acted-upon In order to make choices, he must define a code of values – our choices need to be consistent because they’re made in the interest of living a consistent life In order to define a code of values, he must know what he is and where he is This means knowing himself – his thought processes, his nature, etc. – and the nature of the world and universe surrounding him People cannot escape from this need; the only variable is whether the philosophy guiding them will be chosen by their minds or by chance.

Objectivism 101 The nature of reality: Objectivism holds that things are what they are, independent of anyone’s knowledge or wishes. Objectivism rejects both the view that reality is some supernatural realm inaccessible to reason or that everyone has his own subjective reality. Knowledge: Objectivism holds that reason is man’s only means of knowledge and tool of survival and that certainty is attainable. Objectivism thus rejects both the view that there is some non-rational means of knowledge (e.g., faith or intuition), and the view that knowledge is impossible and truth is relative to the individual or culture.

Objectivism 101 Human nature: Objectivism holds that individuals have free will, are autonomous and independent: by using reason, they can determine their own beliefs and values and thus control their own lives (“Man is a being of self-made soul”). Objectivism rejects the view that an individual’s thoughts and actions are the inevitable result of factors (e.g., heredity or environment) beyond his control.

Objectivism 101 Ethical standards: Objectivism holds that ethics is objective and factual; the standard of moral value is that which furthers the survival of man as a rational being. Objectivism rejects the view that ethics is a matter of opinion, that right and wrong are determined by social convention, ethnicity, personal preference or religious commandment.

Objectivism 101 Morality: Objectivism holds that every individual is an end in himself—which means that each individual should be selfish, should live by his own mind and for his own happiness, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. Objectivism rejects the view that an individual’s moral worth is determined by his altruistic service to society, the needy, the nation or some deity.

Objectivism 101 Politics: Objectivism holds that capitalism is the only moral social system and that the only proper purpose of government is the protection of an individual’s right to this life, liberty, property and pursuit of happiness. Objectivism rejects the collectivist view that government exists to further the “common good,” the will of the majority or any particular group (e.g., the working class); and, unlike libertarianism, it rejects the view that government is evil by nature.

Objectivism and Anthem Does the society in Anthem reflect these beliefs? It does, but in opposition to them We have a monolithic and collectivist government – one that’s uniquely filtered through Rand’s perspective on collectivism – that shuns dissent and independence The society rests on the belief that individual needs are entirely useless – that we can best serve ourselves by serving others, even to the exclusion of our own self-interest Self-interest, in turn, is banished As it turns out, scientific investigation and the pursuit of knowledge qualify as self-interest!

Anthem’s Society Rand has carefully crafted a society that violates each of the beliefs she defines as Objectivist principles The society does not worship a divinity, but it does worship a concept (unity) to the exclusion of realistic analysis Rand’s main problem with faith is her belief that it blinds people to reason and truth The truth (as she presents it) is that Equality 7- 2521 is so clearly superior to the rest of his peers that any sort of judgment that fails to recognize this represents a crime

The Characters and Society International is an artist Equality is a scientist or scholar (and, according to Rand, a genius) Neither is an ideal street-sweeper, obviously (if such people exist) Rand implies that Union is one Rand stacks the deck by placing the novel’s two thinking characters in the same position as Union 5- 3992 This implies that the society’s structure of “job placement” is so blind to people’s individual abilities that it sees Union and Equality as equally capable (a conclusion Rand’s Objectivist beliefs cannot support)

Pragmatism v. Blindness However, there’s also the argument that the society’s leadership is merely behaving pragmatically It sees Equality and International as dangerous to its rule’s stability because it believes them to be capable of sowing dissent and individuality Contrast this with the harmony of a collective agreement In this case, the leadership isn’t blind Indeed, it’s very aware of the perceived threat Equality poses It simply chooses to act in a way that defies the very reality it recognizes That’s what angers Rand – the leadership’s decision to act in defiance of truth and reason in order to compromise freedom

Freedom! Another aspect of the collectivist society that offends Rand is its hostile attitude towards free thought Equality struggles to think for himself Society has given Equality purpose, but it has tried to rob him of his self-awareness and his ability to reason Equality represents Rand’s argument that the freedom to think can be threatened, even compromised – but never fully eliminated Thought is instinctive While morals are largely dedicated to regulating instinctive reactions, they cannot eliminate the instinct When Equality chooses not to ignore his instincts, Rand posits that he seizes his freedom back from the collective that has compromised him until then