Objecting to Objectivism
August 5, 2010 10:48 AM
Please help me respectfully engage with a young relative who has declared a passion for Ayn Rand (we're getting together tomorrow for a friendly conversation on the issue).
I'm not necessarily trying to change his mind-- he is of course free to believe what he wishes, and his thoughts are his own. But I'd like to be able to discuss his interest in Rand (and, I hope, gently persuade him to think critically about her "philosophy") without barraging him with extra reading or links to Bob the Angry Flower. Suggestions welcome.
I'm not necessarily trying to change his mind-- he is of course free to believe what he wishes, and his thoughts are his own. But I'd like to be able to discuss his interest in Rand (and, I hope, gently persuade him to think critically about her "philosophy") without barraging him with extra reading or links to Bob the Angry Flower. Suggestions welcome.
I know a social worker whose top "Like" on her Facebook page is Atlas Shrugged. People are funny.
Funny is where I would start, if I must start, by asking "Was Rand herself a good follower of what she proposed? Did she practice what she preached? What of her greatest acolytes?"
Just a little research will suggest that, no, there's not a great deal of living up to the ideals.
posted by adipocere at 10:55 AM on August 5, 2010
Funny is where I would start, if I must start, by asking "Was Rand herself a good follower of what she proposed? Did she practice what she preached? What of her greatest acolytes?"
Just a little research will suggest that, no, there's not a great deal of living up to the ideals.
posted by adipocere at 10:55 AM on August 5, 2010
I wish there were some way to share the fact that most Objectivists I know drive [and sometimes live in] rusty vans with stupid bumper stickers.
How's that whole selfishness thing workin' out for ya?
posted by Madamina at 10:56 AM on August 5, 2010
How's that whole selfishness thing workin' out for ya?
posted by Madamina at 10:56 AM on August 5, 2010
This thread and this one might be useful. Or this or this.
posted by Jaltcoh at 10:57 AM on August 5, 2010
posted by Jaltcoh at 10:57 AM on August 5, 2010
Most everyone who reads goes through a Rand phase. It's like zits and smoking in the bathroom at recess. Almost everyone grows out of it. I wouldn't worry too much.
posted by kjs3 at 11:00 AM on August 5, 2010
posted by kjs3 at 11:00 AM on August 5, 2010
How old is your young relative? S/he might have no idea that Ayn Rand's books are basically her philosophies in fiction form. I'm not saying that your young relative isn't the brightest kid, but just simply engaging a conversation on her "philosophy" might be an eye opener.
posted by two lights above the sea at 11:01 AM on August 5, 2010
posted by two lights above the sea at 11:01 AM on August 5, 2010
In answer to your specific question, I'd just get them to describe objectivism to you as they see it and then talk about what they say. They don't necessarily subscribe to the whole book. If there's anything in what they say that you want to counter, then do so (but softly).
As an aside, I'd be delighted to have a young relative who showed a strong interest in Rand. Despite what you might think from the internet echo chamber, most young people don't go through a Rand phase, because a lot of them don't read and those that do read don't read 'difficult' things. They'll probably grow out of it, but kudos to them for thinking about this kind of thing.
posted by muteh at 11:03 AM on August 5, 2010
As an aside, I'd be delighted to have a young relative who showed a strong interest in Rand. Despite what you might think from the internet echo chamber, most young people don't go through a Rand phase, because a lot of them don't read and those that do read don't read 'difficult' things. They'll probably grow out of it, but kudos to them for thinking about this kind of thing.
posted by muteh at 11:03 AM on August 5, 2010
Of course you are trying to change his mind - for reasons made clear by your sarcasm quotation marks around "philosophy". Being honest with yourself about the aim of your project would seem to me a necessary first step.
I suggest keeping your statements in the first person - i.e. "I found her description of the 19th century American industrialists as men who never stole from or exploited others to be historically inaccurate."
If he wants an example: At one point in Atlas Shrugged, Dagny acknowledges the moral right of workers to unionize for better wages. The robber-barons busted plenty of heads to combat just that.
posted by Joe Beese at 11:05 AM on August 5, 2010
I suggest keeping your statements in the first person - i.e. "I found her description of the 19th century American industrialists as men who never stole from or exploited others to be historically inaccurate."
If he wants an example: At one point in Atlas Shrugged, Dagny acknowledges the moral right of workers to unionize for better wages. The robber-barons busted plenty of heads to combat just that.
posted by Joe Beese at 11:05 AM on August 5, 2010
Honestly, I would approach this not by focusing on the problems with Objectivism, but by presenting some interesting ideas from other political-philosophical sources that are different from Objectivism, without necessarily explicitly confronting it.
Objectivism is an insular, self-reinforcing, largely unfalsifiable "philosophy"; plus, it's been justly ignored by mainstream philosophers (so there aren't too many popular books refuting it by good thinkers). As a result, I think you'll be better off presenting some view of ethics that isn't Objectivism, rather than trying to pick apart Objectivism's view of ethics.
posted by game warden to the events rhino at 11:09 AM on August 5, 2010
Objectivism is an insular, self-reinforcing, largely unfalsifiable "philosophy"; plus, it's been justly ignored by mainstream philosophers (so there aren't too many popular books refuting it by good thinkers). As a result, I think you'll be better off presenting some view of ethics that isn't Objectivism, rather than trying to pick apart Objectivism's view of ethics.
posted by game warden to the events rhino at 11:09 AM on August 5, 2010
This is a great question. One thing that might help you, if not him, is to recognize that interest in Ayn Rand is extremely common among intellectually-minded young men.
What typically happens is that boys, the sort who are generally regarded as nerds and outcasts, mature intellectually to the point where they understand the importance of economic theory. Like all adolescents, they're attracted to certainties and black and white thinking, and when these particular boys learn about the laws of supply and demand they flip out because they think they've learned some hard truths about the world. It probably doesn't help that economics tends also to be challenging to young students, so their ability to easily understand them gives them a sense of intellectual superiority that is hard to resist.
Having discovered the supposed mathematical insights of supply and demand, they then turn to Ayn Rand for the broader views of how these insights impact the social world. Being social outcasts themselves, and feeling superior intellectually to their peers, they thrall at the description of a world where their ideas are superior, where being smart pays off, where having the right clothes or being cool has no meaning. This is very powerful stuff for them, because it gives them hope and provides order in their lives.
Fortunately, for most young men this wears off like all other adolescent fads. They get older, they mature and develop a richer understanding of how the world works, they moderate their anxiety about society and develop better skills in dealing with it. I know I did.
So my advice: listen patiently, know that it's great that he's going on an intellectual adventure and seeking out sources of meaning, and trust that time will sort out the errors of his ways.
posted by gabrielsamoza at 11:13 AM on August 5, 2010
What typically happens is that boys, the sort who are generally regarded as nerds and outcasts, mature intellectually to the point where they understand the importance of economic theory. Like all adolescents, they're attracted to certainties and black and white thinking, and when these particular boys learn about the laws of supply and demand they flip out because they think they've learned some hard truths about the world. It probably doesn't help that economics tends also to be challenging to young students, so their ability to easily understand them gives them a sense of intellectual superiority that is hard to resist.
Having discovered the supposed mathematical insights of supply and demand, they then turn to Ayn Rand for the broader views of how these insights impact the social world. Being social outcasts themselves, and feeling superior intellectually to their peers, they thrall at the description of a world where their ideas are superior, where being smart pays off, where having the right clothes or being cool has no meaning. This is very powerful stuff for them, because it gives them hope and provides order in their lives.
Fortunately, for most young men this wears off like all other adolescent fads. They get older, they mature and develop a richer understanding of how the world works, they moderate their anxiety about society and develop better skills in dealing with it. I know I did.
So my advice: listen patiently, know that it's great that he's going on an intellectual adventure and seeking out sources of meaning, and trust that time will sort out the errors of his ways.
posted by gabrielsamoza at 11:13 AM on August 5, 2010
I would suggest you be very careful in your discussion with your young relative. This may be the relative's first engagement with big ideas, and I think the best thing is to be quite non-judgmental and excited that your relative is excited.
This is not an appropriate occasion to prove how right you are, how much more evolved your social/political views are, or how wrong-headed you find Rand's ideas.
Rather, approach it in the spirit of, "I'm so excited you're interested in political philosophy! Rand is definitely interesting, she has a lot of provocative ideas." Express some reservations, perhaps, but be careful about it.
I get the feeling you are viewing this as an opportunity to steer your relative away from Rand and into your more sophisticated worldview. Resist that temptation. If your relative is smart at all (and if he/she is not, why worry about what passions he develops) he will not need you to eventually see the error of Rand's ideas.
Just be excited he's excited. Take it as an opportunity to congratulate him on his new interest. Otherwise, you could wound your relative with your condescension, and make him less likely to communicate his enthusiasms with other people in the future.
posted by jayder at 11:15 AM on August 5, 2010
This is not an appropriate occasion to prove how right you are, how much more evolved your social/political views are, or how wrong-headed you find Rand's ideas.
Rather, approach it in the spirit of, "I'm so excited you're interested in political philosophy! Rand is definitely interesting, she has a lot of provocative ideas." Express some reservations, perhaps, but be careful about it.
I get the feeling you are viewing this as an opportunity to steer your relative away from Rand and into your more sophisticated worldview. Resist that temptation. If your relative is smart at all (and if he/she is not, why worry about what passions he develops) he will not need you to eventually see the error of Rand's ideas.
Just be excited he's excited. Take it as an opportunity to congratulate him on his new interest. Otherwise, you could wound your relative with your condescension, and make him less likely to communicate his enthusiasms with other people in the future.
posted by jayder at 11:15 AM on August 5, 2010
gabrielsamoza, it happens with girls too. Megan McArdle used to call her blog "Jane Galt." I don't see what good stereotyping is going to do.
posted by Jaltcoh at 11:18 AM on August 5, 2010
posted by Jaltcoh at 11:18 AM on August 5, 2010
Jaltcoh, there is no doubt that some girls are interested in Ayn Rand. Megan McCardle is a good example. But I stand my observation that the vast majority of adolescents who take up an interest in Ayn Rand are boys, as is the young person we are currently discussing.
posted by gabrielsamoza at 11:24 AM on August 5, 2010
posted by gabrielsamoza at 11:24 AM on August 5, 2010
This site may help.
"This FAQ answers a very commonly-asked question; namely what's really wrong with Objectivism. This FAQ will tell you the fundamental cause of the present fragmented state of affairs in the Objectivist movement, and why an attitude of moral condemnation is so prevalent among Objectivists. You will learn why so many sane, intelligent people are turned into dogmatic moralizers who would do credit to the Spanish Inquisition."
Although if this relative is significantly younger than you, I would try to phrase your opposition in the form of some provocative counter hypotheticals, like the Dagny/unions thing mentioned above. Or posit something like the Titantic disaster, where hubris, greed, arrogance and niavety (all classic hallmarks of Randism) combined in brilliant catastrophe.
posted by T.D. Strange at 11:26 AM on August 5, 2010
"This FAQ answers a very commonly-asked question; namely what's really wrong with Objectivism. This FAQ will tell you the fundamental cause of the present fragmented state of affairs in the Objectivist movement, and why an attitude of moral condemnation is so prevalent among Objectivists. You will learn why so many sane, intelligent people are turned into dogmatic moralizers who would do credit to the Spanish Inquisition."
Although if this relative is significantly younger than you, I would try to phrase your opposition in the form of some provocative counter hypotheticals, like the Dagny/unions thing mentioned above. Or posit something like the Titantic disaster, where hubris, greed, arrogance and niavety (all classic hallmarks of Randism) combined in brilliant catastrophe.
posted by T.D. Strange at 11:26 AM on August 5, 2010
Go in assuming the best. For instance, let's assume that your young relative has declared a passion for Ayn Rand as an author. A lot of people (myself included) managed to get through those books just for the pleasure of reading them1, and they may not have any awareness of the backstory or of Objectivism et al.
So then you can just say "Some people really enjoy those books, and some people hate 'em. The only thing you don't want to do is buy into the philosophy she's espousing through the books; there's a lot of baggage there, and much of what she was talking about has been discredited. It's kind of like L. Ron Hubbard -- a lot of people read his books and enjoyed them, without any awareness of Scientology or his connection to it, and if you say 'I really like L. Ron Hubbard', a lot of people assume you support Scientology."
1Everyone has different tastes; I enjoyed L. Ron Hubbard books as a kid, and Ayn Rand books as an adult, even though most people think they're poorly written -- and I know a lot of people who really enjoyed The Da Vinci Code, whereas I couldn't get through the first two pages.
posted by davejay at 11:28 AM on August 5, 2010
So then you can just say "Some people really enjoy those books, and some people hate 'em. The only thing you don't want to do is buy into the philosophy she's espousing through the books; there's a lot of baggage there, and much of what she was talking about has been discredited. It's kind of like L. Ron Hubbard -- a lot of people read his books and enjoyed them, without any awareness of Scientology or his connection to it, and if you say 'I really like L. Ron Hubbard', a lot of people assume you support Scientology."
1Everyone has different tastes; I enjoyed L. Ron Hubbard books as a kid, and Ayn Rand books as an adult, even though most people think they're poorly written -- and I know a lot of people who really enjoyed The Da Vinci Code, whereas I couldn't get through the first two pages.
posted by davejay at 11:28 AM on August 5, 2010
Suggest that if he likes Rand, he pick up Matt Ruff's Sewer, Gas, & Electric, which is a fun sci-fi book that has a hologram of Rand's head as a character (the book also makes fun of her at every turn, and thoroughly demolishes her ideas, but you don't need to mention that upfront).
posted by Ragged Richard at 11:32 AM on August 5, 2010
posted by Ragged Richard at 11:32 AM on August 5, 2010
Get into a discussion of the tragedy of the commons. That should be fun for him to grapple with.
posted by oreofuchi at 11:44 AM on August 5, 2010
posted by oreofuchi at 11:44 AM on August 5, 2010
Has he declared a love for Rand's philosophy? It's entirely possible that he merely thinks she's a great writer (although she isn't, but so?).
posted by shakespeherian at 11:56 AM on August 5, 2010
posted by shakespeherian at 11:56 AM on August 5, 2010
Thank you all for your answers; I was hoping, I think, for some of the "don't panic" variety. Please feel free to offer more. This is a bit emotionally fraught for me, as the young relative in question is my son, and we started our initial conversation about Rand (over FB) with me confessing, in reply to his question, that I'd actually tossed the copy of The Fountainhead he'd left here when he moved out. (Yes, I'll buy him a new one. No, I do not regularly-- if ever-- throw books in the garbage, but I loathe Rand and it seemed appropriate; I had no idea he'd even read it.)
I'll do my best to look at this positively, as part of his own intellectual, um, journey. Seeing that he loved The Fountainhead, I'm wondering if he's reacting to the idea of the figure of the genius/artist and not necessarily the economic/virtues of selfishness suite of ideas...
posted by jokeefe at 12:00 PM on August 5, 2010
I'll do my best to look at this positively, as part of his own intellectual, um, journey. Seeing that he loved The Fountainhead, I'm wondering if he's reacting to the idea of the figure of the genius/artist and not necessarily the economic/virtues of selfishness suite of ideas...
posted by jokeefe at 12:00 PM on August 5, 2010
What's wrong with reading Rand? I'm glad I read Atlas Shrugged (and several other of her books), and the time to do it is when you're young so you have time to slosh through the occasional 300-page nonsensical harangues she sprinkles into her books. If he thinks Randism is a fantastic idea and the solution to all of our problems, he'll grow out of it. If otherwise, good for him for reading books with different views than his own.
I kinda liked AS. Not great literature, but no worse as entertainment than, say DaVinci Code or Harry Potter.
posted by deadweightloss at 12:01 PM on August 5, 2010
I kinda liked AS. Not great literature, but no worse as entertainment than, say DaVinci Code or Harry Potter.
posted by deadweightloss at 12:01 PM on August 5, 2010
Randians have problem coming up with an argument against theft (if you can get away with it). It's possible to make a quasi-Randian argument against it, but it involves appealing to collective self-interest. It's not easy to make such an argument in purely individual terms.
Rand claimed to believe in capitalism, and admired "self-made" businessmen, but expressed contempt for people who live off of their investments without actually working. However, it's the role of investment that makes capitalism capitalism, and distinct from a non-capitalist economy where people have businesses and buy and sell things (but without investment markets).
Obviously, you can agree with things Rand said that you think (at least sort of) make sense. If you went through a Rand phase yourself, or least thought she was interesting, you can talk about that.
Ask questions. What does he like about Rand? What does he think about her thinking?
posted by nangar at 12:03 PM on August 5, 2010
Rand claimed to believe in capitalism, and admired "self-made" businessmen, but expressed contempt for people who live off of their investments without actually working. However, it's the role of investment that makes capitalism capitalism, and distinct from a non-capitalist economy where people have businesses and buy and sell things (but without investment markets).
Obviously, you can agree with things Rand said that you think (at least sort of) make sense. If you went through a Rand phase yourself, or least thought she was interesting, you can talk about that.
Ask questions. What does he like about Rand? What does he think about her thinking?
posted by nangar at 12:03 PM on August 5, 2010
Find things to agree on. Yes, some regulations are needlessly bureaucratic and stifle creativity... but, they seem to help combat sweatshops, tenement fires, etc. yes, self-centeredness has some good points, but look what altruism can do, too. Plus, your young relative is reading, and reading someone who has ideas, so try to talk about other books with ideas, and encourage continued reading. It's easy to like Rand when you have limited perspective on books and on the world.
posted by theora55 at 12:08 PM on August 5, 2010
posted by theora55 at 12:08 PM on August 5, 2010
I always go with a variant of the Winston Churchill joke about prostitution.
Ask him what he would do if his house suddenly burst into flames.
"I'd call 911."
"So, you think some publicly funded, purely altruistic social services are good things. Now we're just negotiating which ones."
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 12:08 PM on August 5, 2010
Ask him what he would do if his house suddenly burst into flames.
"I'd call 911."
"So, you think some publicly funded, purely altruistic social services are good things. Now we're just negotiating which ones."
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 12:08 PM on August 5, 2010
You could give him a book by Orwell.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 12:34 PM on August 5, 2010
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 12:34 PM on August 5, 2010
Oh, the fact that the "relative" is your son and that you threw his book in the trash is very relevant to how to approach this. You might have wanted to include that in your original post.
posted by Jaltcoh at 12:43 PM on August 5, 2010
posted by Jaltcoh at 12:43 PM on August 5, 2010
Jaltcoh-- I wanted to maintain a nominal degree of privacy on the front page of AskMe. I figured that if anyone was interested in the question enough to answer or to read the answers, I could be more forthcoming in the thread.
He wasn't upset that I binned his book-- he'd given me carte blanche to deal with the stuff he'd left behind as I saw fit, after he chose what he wanted to keep-- but it was the starting point of our FB conversation. He said that he found reading Rand "enthralling" and that she blew his mind (his words). I've asked him what he likes about her work, and because he's coming into town today (he lives in a different city about four hours away) he said let's talk about it when he gets here. Hence my question; the last thing I want to do is overreact. Rand's just such a deal breaker for me in other spheres of life, so it's a bit of a challenge for me and a lesson in respecting his intellectual autonomy.
Also, I blame Rush. He was listening to 2112 a lot, and quoting lyrics on his FB status.
posted by jokeefe at 12:57 PM on August 5, 2010
He wasn't upset that I binned his book-- he'd given me carte blanche to deal with the stuff he'd left behind as I saw fit, after he chose what he wanted to keep-- but it was the starting point of our FB conversation. He said that he found reading Rand "enthralling" and that she blew his mind (his words). I've asked him what he likes about her work, and because he's coming into town today (he lives in a different city about four hours away) he said let's talk about it when he gets here. Hence my question; the last thing I want to do is overreact. Rand's just such a deal breaker for me in other spheres of life, so it's a bit of a challenge for me and a lesson in respecting his intellectual autonomy.
Also, I blame Rush. He was listening to 2112 a lot, and quoting lyrics on his FB status.
posted by jokeefe at 12:57 PM on August 5, 2010
As an immature adolescent with low self-esteem reading those books, I glossed over the repugnant parts of her philosophy and picked up the more positive messages in the books--definitely focused more on the genius/artist/superman stuff and less on the selfishness/economics stuff. Messages in the books that I loved: science and engineering are valuable and exciting, creators of all types are awesome and heroic, reason/logic can be used to make sense of the world, we as adults are responsible for our own destinies and the consequences of our behavior, etc. I think the books were also helpful in teaching me that my own desires and needs were as valid and important ("selfishness is good") as those of others. I read her books at a time when I was realizing that the only person who would take care of me was me--so it was helpful to have that reminder. It did not stop me from wanting to help people; I just started thinking of compassion and helping others as a real choice instead of an obligation.
I think if you were to talk to your son about it, you'd want to know what he's getting out of it before barraging him with objections. You might be trying to solve a nonexistent problem. I knew a couple Randian types who thought they were God's gift to mankind BEFORE they got into the books, so of course the books just made them worse. Friends of mine that were compassionate, reasonable human beings before they got into the philosophy just picked up the good stuff, like I did, and ignored the rest. So yes, please don't panic. If your son was a kind, rational person before, he'll enjoy the book and then stop paying attention to them once the real world shows itself to not match the universe of the books.
posted by millions of peaches at 1:01 PM on August 5, 2010
I think if you were to talk to your son about it, you'd want to know what he's getting out of it before barraging him with objections. You might be trying to solve a nonexistent problem. I knew a couple Randian types who thought they were God's gift to mankind BEFORE they got into the books, so of course the books just made them worse. Friends of mine that were compassionate, reasonable human beings before they got into the philosophy just picked up the good stuff, like I did, and ignored the rest. So yes, please don't panic. If your son was a kind, rational person before, he'll enjoy the book and then stop paying attention to them once the real world shows itself to not match the universe of the books.
posted by millions of peaches at 1:01 PM on August 5, 2010
Reading Atlas Shrugged in college was an eye-opening experience, mainly because of what it chose to ignore. There are 3 main, obvious problems with Rand's reasoning that made it ridiculous to me (yes, there are other problems, but these are the ones I recall thinking at the time):
1) Globalization. As long as a country is completely isolated from outside influence and competition, Rand makes great sense. Of course, that's not possible. As soon as you introduce foreign businesses (with foreign government subsidies), Reardon Metal gets creamed.
2) Rand relies 100% on the goodwill of business owners to not fuck over the public. That didn't work out so well in the U.S., where child labor, black lung, lakes catching on fire, and 24-hour street lamps (due to smog) were only stopped thanks to government action.
3) When Reardon dies, who controls his business? Over and over again, we've seen once-great companies turned to shit once the original creators left. Borders is my favorite example, trashed by know-nothing MBAs as soon as the Borders brothers sold. Rand worships the creators, but following her libertarian logic means extending the same privileges to the controllers, many of whom don't give a shit about the company as long as they can walk away with a fat payoff (Carly Fiorina, anyone?)
As a concept, there's a lot to like. As a guiding principle, it's about as logical and realistic as communism.
posted by coolguymichael at 1:07 PM on August 5, 2010
1) Globalization. As long as a country is completely isolated from outside influence and competition, Rand makes great sense. Of course, that's not possible. As soon as you introduce foreign businesses (with foreign government subsidies), Reardon Metal gets creamed.
2) Rand relies 100% on the goodwill of business owners to not fuck over the public. That didn't work out so well in the U.S., where child labor, black lung, lakes catching on fire, and 24-hour street lamps (due to smog) were only stopped thanks to government action.
3) When Reardon dies, who controls his business? Over and over again, we've seen once-great companies turned to shit once the original creators left. Borders is my favorite example, trashed by know-nothing MBAs as soon as the Borders brothers sold. Rand worships the creators, but following her libertarian logic means extending the same privileges to the controllers, many of whom don't give a shit about the company as long as they can walk away with a fat payoff (Carly Fiorina, anyone?)
As a concept, there's a lot to like. As a guiding principle, it's about as logical and realistic as communism.
posted by coolguymichael at 1:07 PM on August 5, 2010
I'm now embarrassed to admit that I liked Rand when I was a teenager -- I mean, went through all of her books several times, even the philosophical ones and the commentaries on them. I think the thing you should do is go into the conversation with the aim of understanding your son, not persuading him of anything. As several people have pointed out, he could be into her for all sorts of reasons, many not worrying or nefarious at all.
I liked her because I was a too-smart and socially inept teenager, and her books were one of the first things I had ever encountered the rather anti-intellectual rural culture I grew up in saying, unapologetically, that it was okay to be smart and good at what you did. That was basically it. On some level I recognised that her characters were cardboard cutouts and that there were major ethical problems with the philosophy, and as I grew more comfortable with myself those problems became more important to me than the emotional satisfaction I got from finally being told that it was okay to be me. (This is how I interpreted the books at the time; I'm not saying that is what they said).
I think my dad was rather horrified when I got into the books, but all he did was ask me about why I liked them. Then, crucially, he listened to what I said, with the goal of understanding me rather than trying to persuade me to think anything in particular about them. At some point he said to me in a very offhand sort of way, "You know, Rush Limbaugh loves those books" (I hated Limbaugh even then) but that was it. Had he aggressively gone in and tried to get me to think about them in the "right" way I would probably have really resented it and felt like my ideas and intellect were being laughed at, and it would have just entrenched me further. I'm now a dyed-in-the-wool liberal (and always was, even at the heights of my Rand-reading days) with a above-average understanding of Rand and certain aspects of libertarian philosophy.
So... yeah -- don't panic. Just listen to what your son is getting out of them. You might learn something interesting about him.
posted by forza at 1:08 PM on August 5, 2010
I liked her because I was a too-smart and socially inept teenager, and her books were one of the first things I had ever encountered the rather anti-intellectual rural culture I grew up in saying, unapologetically, that it was okay to be smart and good at what you did. That was basically it. On some level I recognised that her characters were cardboard cutouts and that there were major ethical problems with the philosophy, and as I grew more comfortable with myself those problems became more important to me than the emotional satisfaction I got from finally being told that it was okay to be me. (This is how I interpreted the books at the time; I'm not saying that is what they said).
I think my dad was rather horrified when I got into the books, but all he did was ask me about why I liked them. Then, crucially, he listened to what I said, with the goal of understanding me rather than trying to persuade me to think anything in particular about them. At some point he said to me in a very offhand sort of way, "You know, Rush Limbaugh loves those books" (I hated Limbaugh even then) but that was it. Had he aggressively gone in and tried to get me to think about them in the "right" way I would probably have really resented it and felt like my ideas and intellect were being laughed at, and it would have just entrenched me further. I'm now a dyed-in-the-wool liberal (and always was, even at the heights of my Rand-reading days) with a above-average understanding of Rand and certain aspects of libertarian philosophy.
So... yeah -- don't panic. Just listen to what your son is getting out of them. You might learn something interesting about him.
posted by forza at 1:08 PM on August 5, 2010
I googled...I think this is the Bob the Angry Flower comic you were thinking about. I support your decision not to share that just yet, as I feel it completely misrepresents the characters. In the book, several of the high-powered characters do menial jobs for awhile, and do them excellently. See discussion here.
The good messages: better technology and pride of craftsmanship add to happiness.
The bad messages: It's ok let people suffer. also, the weird sex.
There's a lot to talk about. The philosophy itself seemed vague and non-rigorous to me, but so's my personal philosophy at this time.
(You might want to understand what your relative believes before trying to change his beliefs. There's a pretty big range where his Rand-influenced beliefs might fall. How much of Atlas Shrugged have you read? If none, you might check out Anthem, which is free online and expresses the same ideas in a short story.)
posted by sninctown at 1:11 PM on August 5, 2010
The good messages: better technology and pride of craftsmanship add to happiness.
The bad messages: It's ok let people suffer. also, the weird sex.
There's a lot to talk about. The philosophy itself seemed vague and non-rigorous to me, but so's my personal philosophy at this time.
(You might want to understand what your relative believes before trying to change his beliefs. There's a pretty big range where his Rand-influenced beliefs might fall. How much of Atlas Shrugged have you read? If none, you might check out Anthem, which is free online and expresses the same ideas in a short story.)
posted by sninctown at 1:11 PM on August 5, 2010
I know you asked for conversational suggestions rather than extra reading recommendations. But I'd recommend that he read the biography "Ayn Rand and the World She Made," by Anne Heller. Heller is not an Objectivist or Rand disciple, but has a lot of respect for Rand's basic views, tempered with a healthy skepticism for the extremes Rand takes them too. She also shows pretty starkly the contrast between Rand's ideal of the heroic individual's life vs. her actual life as lived. This is fair game, because Rand described her own life as a post-script to her novels, and claimed to live strictly according to their principles. I think she tried to do this, but the messiness of real life intruded, as it will. Ditto the contrast between her insistence on individualism vs. the cultish collectivism of the Objectivist movement that formed around her.
And if you have time or inclination to read it yourself, I'd also take conversational cues from Heller's approach. Rand is so polarizing that people who aren't her ditto-heads tend to dismiss her completely and treat her as a figure of ridicule. That approach never works with Randians or with any young person whose beliefs are important to them. This is clearly not what you're looking to do, and Heller's serious-but-skeptical treatment provides a good alternative.
posted by anonymice at 1:26 PM on August 5, 2010
And if you have time or inclination to read it yourself, I'd also take conversational cues from Heller's approach. Rand is so polarizing that people who aren't her ditto-heads tend to dismiss her completely and treat her as a figure of ridicule. That approach never works with Randians or with any young person whose beliefs are important to them. This is clearly not what you're looking to do, and Heller's serious-but-skeptical treatment provides a good alternative.
posted by anonymice at 1:26 PM on August 5, 2010
I read the Rand's complete works when I was college-aged (although working professionally full time and not in school).
I would say that The Fountainhead leaves a distinctly different lasting effect than Atlas Shrugged. It wasn't until I got through Atlas Shrugged that i really got at the philosophical part of Rand's work. After reading The Fountainhead I didn't see what all the fuss was about (I was an unrecognized genius at the time, so naturally the parts about the artist/genius were the more meaningful ones at the time).
When I got into Atlas Shrugged It was obvious to me that Rand's logic was sound, but her premises false.
I would echo the comments about asking what, in particular he found "enthralling" and "mind blowing". Also, young people can be, at times, prone to hyperbole. What else has blown his mind lately? The answer might be "a hot dog" or "bicycling": his like of Rand may not be as intense as the words suggest.
Has he come into contact with "wrong ideas that appeal to him"* before? Perhaps you can share how you've dealt with them in the past and gone about identifying what's true, false, and doesn't matter, as long as the effect is positive.
* Thanks to They Might Be Giants, Whistling in the Dark for this phrase
posted by desl at 1:30 PM on August 5, 2010
I would say that The Fountainhead leaves a distinctly different lasting effect than Atlas Shrugged. It wasn't until I got through Atlas Shrugged that i really got at the philosophical part of Rand's work. After reading The Fountainhead I didn't see what all the fuss was about (I was an unrecognized genius at the time, so naturally the parts about the artist/genius were the more meaningful ones at the time).
When I got into Atlas Shrugged It was obvious to me that Rand's logic was sound, but her premises false.
I would echo the comments about asking what, in particular he found "enthralling" and "mind blowing". Also, young people can be, at times, prone to hyperbole. What else has blown his mind lately? The answer might be "a hot dog" or "bicycling": his like of Rand may not be as intense as the words suggest.
Has he come into contact with "wrong ideas that appeal to him"* before? Perhaps you can share how you've dealt with them in the past and gone about identifying what's true, false, and doesn't matter, as long as the effect is positive.
* Thanks to They Might Be Giants, Whistling in the Dark for this phrase
posted by desl at 1:30 PM on August 5, 2010
Also, you might want to discuss Rand's life in the Russian Revolution. I'm sure there's something in there about the pendulum swinging all the way out, before it comes back.
posted by desl at 1:31 PM on August 5, 2010
posted by desl at 1:31 PM on August 5, 2010
Trying to "change his mind" is probably going to be unproductive, so speaking as one of the token conservatives around here, here's some other reading that may appeal to your son, while being less "ivory tower" than Rand:
* John Locke: "Two Treatises of Government" - Locke is basically the father of modern liberalism, and has a lot of thoughts that will appeal to those who like Rand.
* Algernon Sidney: "Discourses Concerning Government" - Sidney predated Locke and his ideas influenced Locke. This is a tough one to read, but no more tedious than some of Rand's writings.
* Winston Churchill: "History of the English Speaking Peoples" - why did England end up how it is, and why did the US split, and what were the effects (up to about WWII). The single-volume edition is fine.
The point of these is to give him some idea of the history that got us where we are.
If he's a hard-core objectivist, Lysander Spooner's No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority will definitely appeal. And it's extreme enough that it'll bring most people back from the brink.
Don't panic. Even Objectivists can grow up to be fine human beings. Even if they listen to 2112.
posted by DaveP at 1:48 PM on August 5, 2010
* John Locke: "Two Treatises of Government" - Locke is basically the father of modern liberalism, and has a lot of thoughts that will appeal to those who like Rand.
* Algernon Sidney: "Discourses Concerning Government" - Sidney predated Locke and his ideas influenced Locke. This is a tough one to read, but no more tedious than some of Rand's writings.
* Winston Churchill: "History of the English Speaking Peoples" - why did England end up how it is, and why did the US split, and what were the effects (up to about WWII). The single-volume edition is fine.
The point of these is to give him some idea of the history that got us where we are.
If he's a hard-core objectivist, Lysander Spooner's No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority will definitely appeal. And it's extreme enough that it'll bring most people back from the brink.
Don't panic. Even Objectivists can grow up to be fine human beings. Even if they listen to 2112.
posted by DaveP at 1:48 PM on August 5, 2010
Buy him a copy of Hollingdale's translation of Thus Spoke Zarathustra. If he's going to explore ideas like these, he might as well go straight to the primary source, especially since Nietzsche's work is both much more influential and much more well-thought-out. There's a comment here (written by an expert on the subject, no less) which does a great job of underlining the comparative laziness in Rand's thought.
If he takes to Nietzsche, you've got a chance to get him interested in entire spectrums of history and philosophy; Ayn Rand, not so much.
posted by vorfeed at 1:52 PM on August 5, 2010
If he takes to Nietzsche, you've got a chance to get him interested in entire spectrums of history and philosophy; Ayn Rand, not so much.
posted by vorfeed at 1:52 PM on August 5, 2010
Try suggesting that they read The Jungle, by Upton Sinclair. Ask how they can reconcile the two very different images of young post-industrial revolution America.
posted by chrisamiller at 1:53 PM on August 5, 2010
posted by chrisamiller at 1:53 PM on August 5, 2010
Look, you've got a 15-year old son who likes ideas.
Congratulations.
File this under "Adolescent Experimentation," and take pride in the fact that you've got an intelligent child.
As for the content of the ideas, well, he'll likely grow out out of them soon enough.
Let college, wider experience, and his own analysis crack the egg for him-- trying to change his mind would probably only make him want to hold onto the Obligatory Teenage Rand Phase longer than he otherwise would.
posted by darth_tedious at 2:29 PM on August 5, 2010
Congratulations.
File this under "Adolescent Experimentation," and take pride in the fact that you've got an intelligent child.
As for the content of the ideas, well, he'll likely grow out out of them soon enough.
Let college, wider experience, and his own analysis crack the egg for him-- trying to change his mind would probably only make him want to hold onto the Obligatory Teenage Rand Phase longer than he otherwise would.
posted by darth_tedious at 2:29 PM on August 5, 2010
Explain that some people say things, but that true ideas must be backed up by facts. Then ask the 15 year old to provide the facts that support Rand's view. You'll find the facts to be assumptions. Its a novel.
posted by Ironmouth at 2:33 PM on August 5, 2010
posted by Ironmouth at 2:33 PM on August 5, 2010
He's actually in his early twenties. Heh.
Thank you again everyone-- I feel much better equipped for this conversation after reading the responses here. And I'm actually hoping that we'll have a chance to really talk to each other about how we see the world, which can only be a good thing. Who knows, I might learn something.
posted by jokeefe at 2:45 PM on August 5, 2010
Thank you again everyone-- I feel much better equipped for this conversation after reading the responses here. And I'm actually hoping that we'll have a chance to really talk to each other about how we see the world, which can only be a good thing. Who knows, I might learn something.
posted by jokeefe at 2:45 PM on August 5, 2010
I agree with everyone that the best way to approach the conversation is to listen to what your son has to say first, and then in your responses avoid telling him explicitly that he's wrong, but instead maybe ask questions that encourage him to explore the implications of his ideas (e.g. "Yeah, I can see how X might make sense, but how would it work in Y hypothetical scenario?"), or else in a respectful way express your own beliefs, aiming more for contrast than outright contradiction.
If you want yet another reading suggestion, if your son enjoys sci fi you could read and then recommend to him Nancy Kress's "Beggars in Spain," which does a pretty good job of exploring some of the conflicts and consequences of an Objectivist world without ever calling it by name. Again, it would be important to not say "This book shows why you're wrong," but instead, "I thought this book had another interesting perspective on some of the issues Rand raises in her novels."
posted by unsub at 5:18 PM on August 5, 2010
If you want yet another reading suggestion, if your son enjoys sci fi you could read and then recommend to him Nancy Kress's "Beggars in Spain," which does a pretty good job of exploring some of the conflicts and consequences of an Objectivist world without ever calling it by name. Again, it would be important to not say "This book shows why you're wrong," but instead, "I thought this book had another interesting perspective on some of the issues Rand raises in her novels."
posted by unsub at 5:18 PM on August 5, 2010
When I read the Fountainhead as a teen, my take away was simply "good architecture can effect people" and "cheap, poorly thought out architecture makes people miserable." - Don't Panic.
posted by dipolemoment at 5:34 PM on August 5, 2010
posted by dipolemoment at 5:34 PM on August 5, 2010
I find The Fountainhead pretty entertaining (man, Dominique is a FREAK, like dayum, girl!), but mostly in the sense that I admire Howard for being an odd duck and continuing to plug along at his art even when his fortunes go up and down, everyone hates him, etc. He found his preferred crowd and stuck with them. That's pretty cool for artist types. So maybe that's what he likes?
On the other hand, though, I find the whole objectivist thing to be pretty impractical, and I rolled my eyes when Howard blew up the building. Way to be an adult there, Howard.
posted by jenfullmoon at 6:02 PM on August 5, 2010
On the other hand, though, I find the whole objectivist thing to be pretty impractical, and I rolled my eyes when Howard blew up the building. Way to be an adult there, Howard.
posted by jenfullmoon at 6:02 PM on August 5, 2010
...no one suggested you buy him a copy of Bioshock?
It's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to mix philosophy with a kick-ass video game.
posted by chairface at 7:02 PM on August 5, 2010
It's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to mix philosophy with a kick-ass video game.
posted by chairface at 7:02 PM on August 5, 2010
One fascinating and often overlooked detail about Rand's philosophy is that it's strikingly similar to that of Nikolai Chernyshevsky, a Russian radical who also believed in a "virtue of selfishness" ideal he called "rational egoism". Chernyshevsky's economic politics, however, were the opposite of Rand's (indeed, his writing was a great influence on none other than Vladimir Lenin)- he was a socialist who thought that his "rational egoism" would lead to a harmonious world of egalitarianism and cooperation, his reasoning basically being that it was in everyone's best interests to live in an egalitarian socialist world, therefore a truly rational pursuit of one's one self-interest meant working to bring that world about.
So, I might suggest bringing up the similarity to Chernyshevsky, not as a "gotcha" (I agree with others who have suggested a non-judgemental approach as the best one to take here), but as an interesting historical detail- and I would guess that what he thinks of Chernyshevsky's philosophy will probably say a lot about what specifically it is in Rand that appeals to him.
And on that note, IMO the best literary refutations of Randian philosophy you'll find are Dostoevsky's "Notes from Underground" and "Crime and Punishment"- of course they predate Rand, but both, in addition to being literature of the first rank, are a devastatingly effective attack on Chernyshevsky's philosophy, and thus end up working equally well as a critique of Randian ideals. (And from a different angle, I'd also second the recommendation of Nietzsche as representing a much richer, better thought out version of the same philosophical current, or at any rate a similar one.)
posted by a louis wain cat at 7:11 PM on August 5, 2010
So, I might suggest bringing up the similarity to Chernyshevsky, not as a "gotcha" (I agree with others who have suggested a non-judgemental approach as the best one to take here), but as an interesting historical detail- and I would guess that what he thinks of Chernyshevsky's philosophy will probably say a lot about what specifically it is in Rand that appeals to him.
And on that note, IMO the best literary refutations of Randian philosophy you'll find are Dostoevsky's "Notes from Underground" and "Crime and Punishment"- of course they predate Rand, but both, in addition to being literature of the first rank, are a devastatingly effective attack on Chernyshevsky's philosophy, and thus end up working equally well as a critique of Randian ideals. (And from a different angle, I'd also second the recommendation of Nietzsche as representing a much richer, better thought out version of the same philosophical current, or at any rate a similar one.)
posted by a louis wain cat at 7:11 PM on August 5, 2010
Michael Young's The Rise of the Meritocracy is a powerful antidote to classist thinking like Rand's. It's a satire which is a quiet diatribe against inequality.
If your son wants to read fiction by someone who really studied and thought seriously about society (Young was a sociologist), he should read it.
posted by jb at 7:54 PM on August 5, 2010
If your son wants to read fiction by someone who really studied and thought seriously about society (Young was a sociologist), he should read it.
posted by jb at 7:54 PM on August 5, 2010
Update-- we have had the conversation! Nice and low key, and due to the thoughtful answers here I was able to just listen and hear what he has to say, without getting all caught up in trying to convince him of the error of this ways or acting like his interest in Rand was a personal affront. Thanks, AskMetafilter!
And the upshot? It was wholly anticlimactic. He thinks it's an interesting story, though Howard Roark is just too unbelievable a character. He's not too impressed or interested in her political/economic ideas, though he thinks she is able to make a decent argument for them. Then was talked about his new camera and he showed me some photographs that he'd taken recently, and all was well.
posted by jokeefe at 10:35 PM on August 5, 2010
And the upshot? It was wholly anticlimactic. He thinks it's an interesting story, though Howard Roark is just too unbelievable a character. He's not too impressed or interested in her political/economic ideas, though he thinks she is able to make a decent argument for them. Then was talked about his new camera and he showed me some photographs that he'd taken recently, and all was well.
posted by jokeefe at 10:35 PM on August 5, 2010
Also, I blame Rush. He was listening to 2112 a lot, and quoting lyrics on his FB status.
Hi, hardcore Rush fan here. I would suggest maybe using this as a topic of conversation. IMO, Neil Peart did a great job of distilling the good out of objectivism, while leaving aside the bad. Especially when you take his body of work as a whole, I think he's a deep thinker who also cares about humanity. You get into his later stuff (Time Stand Still, Mystic Rhythms, etc.) and he's moved far beyond the whole selfishness-as-a-virtue thing, and he's more concerned with connecting with other people and experiencing new things.
So I would talk about Rush more than Rand. Certainly shouldn't be hard to steer the conversation that way, if he's a fan.
posted by jbickers at 8:37 AM on August 6, 2010
Hi, hardcore Rush fan here. I would suggest maybe using this as a topic of conversation. IMO, Neil Peart did a great job of distilling the good out of objectivism, while leaving aside the bad. Especially when you take his body of work as a whole, I think he's a deep thinker who also cares about humanity. You get into his later stuff (Time Stand Still, Mystic Rhythms, etc.) and he's moved far beyond the whole selfishness-as-a-virtue thing, and he's more concerned with connecting with other people and experiencing new things.
So I would talk about Rush more than Rand. Certainly shouldn't be hard to steer the conversation that way, if he's a fan.
posted by jbickers at 8:37 AM on August 6, 2010
« Older Testing leads to failure, and failure leads to... | Does Las Vegas have any reputable camera dealers? Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by zoomorphic at 10:53 AM on August 5, 2010