| Revision as of 07:50, 7 March 2009 editSkomorokh (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers59,990 edits →External links: removing paywalled article and trivial reports; fail to meet WP:EL as they are not uniquely useful resources← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 03:16, 11 February 2020 edit undoXqbot (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,319,932 editsm Bot: Fixing double redirect to ObjectivismTag: Redirect target changed |
| (53 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{main|Objectivism (Ayn Rand)}} |
|
#REDIRECT ] |
|
]'s philosophy of ] has received criticism from academic philosophers and other intellectuals, distinct from criticisms of Rand herself and of the ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Redirect category shell|1= |
|
==Background== |
|
|
|
{{Redirect from merge}} |
|
Rand's ideas have largely been ignored or harshly criticized by academics. Rand's work was described as "fiercely anti-academic" by journalist Scott McLemee.<ref name=McLemee>{{cite web | last = McLemee | first = Scott | url = http://linguafranca.mirror.theinfo.org/9909/rand.html | title = The Heirs Of Ayn Rand: Has Objectivism Gone Subjective? | date = September 1999 | accessdate = 2007-07-20}}</ref> In the words of David Sidorsky, professor of ] and ] at ], Objectivism is "more of an ideological movement than a well-grounded philosophy".<ref>{{cite news | last = Harvey | first = Benjamin | url = http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050515/NEWS/505150346/1014 | title = Ayn Rand at 100: An 'ism' struts its stuff |publisher = Rutland Herald | date = 2005-05-15 | accessdate = 2007-07-20}}</ref> |
|
|
|
{{Redirect from subtopic}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{Redirect unprintworthy}} |
|
==The problem of universals== |
|
|
|
}} |
|
Rand's claim{{context needed}}<!-- What was Rand's claim? --> to have solved the ] has been disputed by critics. Scott Ryan asserts that Rand has misapprehended the problem; that the genuine problem of universals is an ] issue regarding whether attributes are identically present in diverse contexts. Ryan claims there are exactly two answers: ], which posits that some universals do exist, and ], which claims they do not. Ryan says that no third way is possible, and that Rand's discussion of concept-formation, which she proposed as her solution in her '']'' (1979),<ref>{{cite book | last = Rand | first = Ayn | title = Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, Expanded 2nd Edition | year = 1990 | isbn = 0-452-01030-6 }}</ref> does not address this question.<ref>Ryan, Scott. ''Objectivism and the Corruption of Rationality", Writers Club Press (2003), ISBN 0-595-26733-5</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Theoretical content== |
|
|
Objectivism holds that reality exists independent from consciousness; that individual persons are in contact with this reality through sensory perception; that human beings can gain objective knowledge from perception through the process of concept formation; that the proper ] purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own ] or "rational self-interest"; that the only social system consistent with this morality is ], embodied in pure, consensual '']'' ]; and that the role of art in human life is to transform man's widest metaphysical ideas, by selective reproduction of reality, into a physical form — a work of art — that one can comprehend and respond to.<ref name=Peikoff-OPAR>{{cite book | last = Peikoff | first = Leonard | title = Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand | publisher = Meridian | year = 1993 | isbn = 978-0452011014 }}</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
Academic philosophers have generally dismissed Rand's ideas, and '']'' in particular, as ], preachy, and unoriginal,<ref name="Boidverts5minutes">{{Citation |
|
|
| last = Tisdale |
|
|
| first = Sara Dabney |
|
|
| title = A Celebration of Self |
|
|
| newspaper = U.S. News & World Report |
|
|
| pages = p. 72 |
|
|
| year = 2007 |
|
|
| date = August 13 2007 |
|
|
| url = http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070805/13atlas.htm}}.</ref> and they have marginalized her philosophy.<ref>{{Citation |
|
|
| last = Karlin |
|
|
| first = Rick |
|
|
| title = Ayn Rand Followers Push on Objectivists Reflect the Philosophy Found in 'The Fountainhead' |
|
|
| newspaper = The Times Union (Albany, NY) |
|
|
| pages = p. C1 |
|
|
| year = 1994 |
|
|
| date = August 26 1994 |
|
|
| url = }}</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
A notable exception to the general lack of attention paid to Objectivism in academic philosophy is the essay "On the Randian Argument" by ] philosopher ], which appears in his collection, '']'' (1997).<ref>Nozick, Robert, "On the Randian Argument," in ''Socratic Puzzles'', Harvard University Press, 1997, pp. 249-264</ref> Nozick is sympathetic to Rand's political conclusions, but does not think her arguments justify them. In particular, his essay criticizes her foundational argument in ethics — laid out most explicitly in her book '']'' — which claims that one's own life is, for each individual, the ultimate value because it makes all other values possible.<ref>{{cite book | title="The Virtue of Selfishness: A New Concept of Egoism" | last=Rand | first=Ayn |coauthors=] | year=1964 | publisher=New American Library | city=New York}}</ref> Nozick states that to make this argument sound one needs to explain why someone could not rationally prefer dying and thus having no values. Thus, he argues, her attempt to defend the morality of selfishness is essentially an instance of ]. Nozick also argues that Rand's solution to ]'s famous ] is unsatisfactory. |
|
|
|
|
|
Raymond Boisvert, a philosophy professor at ], has opined that Rand's theories are out of sync with the complex interrelationships and interconnected systems of modern life.<ref name="Boidverts5minutes"/> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Cultism== |
|
|
],<ref name=rothbard>{{cite web | title="The Sociology of the Ayn Rand cult." |last=Rothbard |first=Murray |authorlink=Murray Rothbard | url=http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard23.html | accessdate=2006-03-31|work=] |date=1972}}</ref> Jeff Walker,<ref name="walker">Walker, Jeff (1999). ''The Ayn Rand Cult''. Chicago: Open Court. ISBN 0-8126-9390-6</ref> and ] <ref name=shermer>{{cite journal | last=Shermer| first=Michael| autorlink=Michael Shermer| title="The Unlikeliest Cult in History"|url=http://www.2think.org/02_2_she.shtml| accessdate=2006-03-30 |journal=Skeptic |volume=2|issue=2 |year=1993 |pages=74–81}}</ref><ref name="Hudgins">{{cite journal|last=Hudgins |first=Ed |title="Out of Step: TNI's Interview with Michael Shermer"|url=http://www.objectivistcenter.com/ct-1852–M_Shermer.aspx |journal=]| volume=10 | issue= 1–2 |year=2007}}</ref> have argued that Objectivism's claim "that there are objective truths and realities, particularly in the moral realm dealing with values"<ref name="Hudgins" /> contributes to manifestations of ] that they found within the ], including slavish adherence to unprovable doctrine and extreme adulation of the founder. In his 1972 article "Sociology of the Ayn Rand Cult", ] intellectual Rothbard wrote that "the guiding spirit of the Randian movement was not individual liberty … but rather personal power for Ayn Rand and her leading disciples."<Ref name=rothbard/> Shermer specifically cited the philosophical content of Objectivism as bearing responsibility for what he saw as cult-like behavior: |
|
|
{{bquote|As long as it is understood that morality is a human construction influenced by human cultures, one can become more tolerant of other human belief systems, and thus other humans. But as soon as a group sets itself up to be the final moral arbiter of other people's actions, especially when its members believe they have discovered absolute standards of right and wrong, it is the beginning of the end of tolerance and thus, reason and rationality. It is this characteristic more than any other that makes a cult, a religion, a nation, or any other group, dangerous to individual freedom. This was (and is) the biggest flaw in Ayn Rand's Objectivism, the unlikeliest cult in history.|||Shermer, Michael|"The Unlikeliest Cult in History", ''Skeptic'' vol. 2, no. 2, 1993, pp. 74-81.}} |
|
|
|
|
|
In response to one fan who had offered her cult-like allegiance, Rand declared, "A blind follower is precisely what my philosophy condemns and what I reject. Objectivism is not a mystic cult".<ref>Rand, Ayn ''Letters'', p. 592 Letter dated ], ], Plume (1997), ISBN 0–452–27404–4, as cited in {{cite web|title="Ayn Rand Biographical FAQ: Did Rand organize a cult?"|url=http://www.noblesoul.com/orc/bio/biofaq.html#Q3.3|accessdate=2006-06-25}}</ref> Rand's close associate, Mary Ann Sures, remarked: |
|
|
{{bquote|Some critics have tried to turn her certainty into a desire on her part to be an authority in the bad sense, and they accuse her of being dogmatic, of demanding unquestioning agreement and blind loyalty. They have tried, but none successfully, to make her into the leader of a cult, and followers of her philosophy into cultists who accept without thinking everything she says. This is a most unjust accusation; it’s really perverse. Unquestioning agreement is precisely what Ayn Rand did not want. She wanted you to think and act independently, not to accept conclusions because she said so, but because you reached them by using your mind in an independent and firsthand manner. She was adamant about it: your conclusions should result from your observations of reality and your thinking, not hers. Now, she could help you along in that process, and, as we all know, she did. But she never wanted you to substitute her mind for yours.|||Mary Ann Sures|''Facets of Ayn Rand: Ayn Rand's Certainty''<ref>{{cite web|last=Sures|first=Mary Ann|url=http://www.facetsofaynrand.com/book/chap1-ayn_rand_certainty.html|title="Facets of Ayn Rand: Ayn Rand's Certainty"|accessdate=2008-03-28}}</ref>}} |
|
|
|
|
|
==Psychological criticism== |
|
|
Psychologists ] and ] have argued that adherence to Objectivism can result in hazardous psychological effects.<ref>Ellis, Albert. ''Is Objectivism a Religion?'' Lyle Stuart, New York 1968.</ref><ref name=branden>{{cite journal |last=Branden |first=Nathaniel |title=The Benefits and Hazards of the Philosophy of Ayn Rand |url=http://rous.redbarn.org/objectivism/Writing/NathanielBranden/BenefitsAndHazards.html | accessdate=2008-04-08 |journal=Journal of Humanistic Psychology |volume=24 |issue=4 |pages=39-64}}</ref> Branden cited in particular the "destructive ]" of Rand and her followers, which he had encouraged as a former member of Rand's inner circle, but which he now claims "subtly encourages repression, self-alienation, and guilt."<ref name=branden/> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Denial of indigenous land rights== |
|
|
{{undue|section}} |
|
|
Objectivism has been criticized for its denial of indigenous land rights, particularly in reference to American natives.<ref>“Ayn Rand and the Sioux - Tonto Revisited: Another Look at Hanta Yo”, by Ward Churchill, ''Lakota Eyapaha'', Vol. 4, No. 2, June 1980</ref> When ] addressed ] cadets in 1974 and was asked about the dispossession and genocide of ] which occurred en route to forming the United States, she replied: |
|
|
{{Cquote2|They didn't have any rights to the land, and there was no reason for anyone to grant them rights which they had not conceived and were not using. What was it that they were fighting for, when they opposed white men on this continent? For their wish to continue a primitive existence, their 'right' to keep part of the earth untouched, unused and not even as property, but just keep everybody out so that you will live practically like an animal, or a few caves above it. Any white person who brings the element of civilization has the right to take over this continent.<ref>''Endgame: Resistance'', by Derrick Jensen, Seven Stories Press, 2006, ISBN 158322730X, pg 220</ref>}} |
|
|
|
|
|
Again on ] of 1992, Michael Berliner of the ] hailed the ], describing the indigenous culture as “a way of life dominated by ], ], and ].”<ref>''Blackfoot Physics: A Journey Into The Native American Universe'', by F. David Peat, Weiser, 2005, ISBN 1578633710, pg 310</ref> ], Berliner claimed, brought “], ], ], ], ambition, and productive achievement” to a people who were based in “], ], and ]”, and to a land that was “sparsely inhabited, unused, and underdeveloped.”<ref>Blackfoot Physics: A Journey Into The Native American Universe, by F. David Peat, Weiser, 2005, ISBN 1578633710, pg 310</ref> In response, Robert McGhee, an archaeologist with the Canadian Museum of Civilization, disputed Mr. Berliner's contentions by stating that "The ] and its concept of democracy may owe much, to the political concepts of the ] and other Native peoples." <ref>"Time to put the Facts Ahead of the Myths About Columbus", by Robert McGhee, ''Ottawa Citizen'', October 14 1992</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
==References== |
|
|
{{Reflist|2}} |
|
|
|
|
|
==Further reading== |
|
|
* ''Ayn Rand Contra Human Nature'', by Greg S. Nyquist, AuthorHouse, 2001, ISBN 0595196330 |
|
|
* ''Is Objectivism A Religion?'', by Albert Ellis, L. Stuart, 1968, ASIN B0006BV6Y2 |
|
|
* ''Objectivism and the Corruption of Rationality: A Critique of Ayn Rand's Epistemology'', by Scott Ryan, AuthorHouse, 2003, ISBN 0595267335 |
|
|
* ''Reconsidering Ayn Rand'', by Michael B. Yang, Enclair Publishing, 2000, ISBN 1579212557 |
|
|
* ''The Ayn Rand Cult'', by Jeff Walker, Open Court, 1998, ISBN 0812693906 |
|
|
* ''With Charity Toward None: An Analysis of Ayn Rand's Philosophy'', by William F. O'Neill, Littlefield Adams, 1977, ISBN 0822601796 |
|
|
|
|
|
==External links== |
|
|
* - Greg Nyquist's Criticisms of Objectivism |
|
|
* Critiques of Libertarianism: |
|
|
* ''National Review'' : , by Whittaker Chambers, December 28 1957 |
|
|
* — Index of essays critical of Objectivism |
|
|
|
|
|
{{Ayn Rand|state=autocollapse}} |
|
|
|
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|