COLLOQUY

THE QUESTION

RESPONSES

BACKGROUND

I have been raised an adamant Christian. I attend church every Sunday and have done countless service projects for my community. I believe in service. I believe in God. It would seem I would have very little in common with Rand.

I do not accept her philosophy as an inalterable absolute. However, the majority of her conclusions make sense to me.

--There is an absolute truth: our denial of reality makes it no less real.
--Altruism is immoral: This is one of the most misunderstood of Rand's concepts. Altruism is not martyrdom, but suicide. It is unselfishness to the point at which the self--and one's sense of self-worth--disappear. Ask:

If a loved one needed a kidney, would you donate one of yours? That is not altruism...you could survive as well as you had before. A loved one's life adds to your happiness. Therefore, it is not immoral.

Now...what if a stranger asked you for a kidney. Still yes? Still not altruism. You go on.

But wait: What if after giving away one, you were asked for another?
No one would ask for both kidneys.
That is immoral.
No one would offer both kidneys.
That, too, would be immoral.
Because you are sacrificing yourself. You are putting the value of another's life ahead of yours. This is altruism.
Few people live by pure altruism. But many preach it. They do not know what they ask. It is immoral ground.

--One must live for himself: This is an obvious truth, repeated my almost every moral code. Yet, it is argued in the case of objectivism. We live to reach our highest potential--be that "self-actualization", "nirvana", "righteousness", or "inner peace".

And finally. . .
--Life is worth living. How surprising.

We are quick to dismiss ideas with which we find any flaw whatsoever, choosing instead to live in a moral limbo. We accept the opinions of others because we are afraid to think for ourselves. Or we hold steadfast to meaningless dogma, abandoning it when it is convenient, and curse those who hold tight to their values, calling them "stubborn" and "idealistic".

Eclecticism is a dangerous thing. It can rob good wisdom of its essence, and make false assumptions accepted facts. It is, however, the way of the world. Objectivism is part of a truth which NO man (or woman) has yet fully discovered. Its points are grounded and valid, and I personally believe that the philosophy has much to offer to those who allow themselves to see it.

-- Tiffany Washburn, high school student (posted 4/12, 10:18 a.m., E.D.T.)

previous response

next response

STEP 1: Your contact information (required)

Your name:

Your title & institution:

Your phone:

Your e-mail address:

STEP 2: Your comments (required)

STEP 3: Submit!

Check this box if you would like this submission to be considered for publication as a letter to the editor in the printed Chronicle.