Simone - Atlas

Ayn Rand and the Political Aspects of Ethics

Simone A. Gardiner

William Allan Kritsonis, PhD

Ph.D. Student in Educational Leadership

Professor and Faculty Mentor

College of Education

Prairie View A & M University

Prairie View A & M University

Member of the Texas A & M University System

PhD Program in Educational Leadership

Visiting Lecturer (2005) Oxford Round Table University of Oxford, Oxford England Distinguished Alumnus (2004) Central Washington University College of Education and Professional Studies

ABSTRACT

Ayn Rand was a major intellectual giant in the discipline of philosophy. During the 1930’s her thoughts and perception revolutionize the way we think and act out our moral conduct. Her philosophy is presented in the Aristotelian tradition withemphasis on metaphysical, naturalism, empirical reasoning in epistemology and self realization of our ethical values. 1

This paper will explore the following six philosophical thoughts: 1. Ethical Theory 2.Reason and Ethics 3. Objectivist Ethics 4.Ethics at work 5. Ethics of Emergency 6.Collectivized Ethics and 6. Aristotle view on Ethics.

Introduction We are living in a world that is tightly woven into a web of moral disaster. There are some persons in our society who have no regards for their ethical and moral standards. For example, would it be ethical to hire your friend who has the lowest score on a pre - interview test? If your friend’s child has failed her midterm test would you give her a passing grade? When is it a good time for one to behave in an ethical manner? According to Ayn Rand’s perception of ethics, it can be rationalize as one’s self interest that is based on her view points to liberate the virtues of ethics. Purpose of the Article The purpose of this article is to discuss ethics and how it relatesto Ayn Rand philosophical view. Ethics can be seen as moral principles as it encompasses one’s value which relates to human conduct. The focus will be to reveal the different aspects of how individuals view ethics in the past and in the present. In order to address these issues the following topics will be explored: a. b. c. d. e. f.

Ethical Theory Reason and Ethics Objectivist Ethics Ethics at Work Ethics of Emergencies Collectivized Ethics g. Aristotle views on Ethics

Ethical Theory 2

Ethics is a code of values that rationally guide one’s choices and his/her actions. It is an objective, metaphysical necessity for a man’s survival. For example, proper ethics gives practical guidance to help people think and direct their lives. It also aids one to define and attain his/her values, goals, and happiness. Everyone needs ethics because it is a virtue for survival. The telos of ethics is ones’ own survival and happiness. The realm of ethics includes those matters that are potentially under a man’s control. A man’s uncoerced volition is necessary to have an objective theory of morality. In essence, when an individual discovers ethics hypercritically it can be only through a volitional process of reason. Ayn Rand's (1964) book entitled The Virtue of Selfishness matches an equally provocative thesis about ethics. Ethics has always been seen has self interest and praising acts that are selfless in intent and calling amoral or immoral acts that are motivated by self interest. Rand's ethic of self interest can be viewed as an integral to her advocacy of classical liberalism. Rand’s ethics identifies the good and bad according to the rational standard of value of an individual. Her “Objectivist Ethics” focuses on what is, in reality, good or best for each unique individual human being (Rand, 1964). Such an ethics is rational, objective, and personal. Accordingly, a man’s goal should be to become the best possible person in the context of who and what he is and of what is possible for him. Rand further postulates that objective and contextual knowledge, including ethical knowledge, can be obtained through rational means. For example, a person requires conceptual knowledge in the form of abstractions to guide his/her actions. Concepts come into play when one acts; therefore, one needs to acquire knowledge of external reality and self-knowledge in order to discover and choose his values, goals, and actions. It seems true enough to say that many ethical issues could be better served and settled if only people handled them more reasonably. Too often ignorance, carelessness, and thoughtlessness affect our moral choices, and if anything were to be the prime combatant of such negative influences it would be reasonable.

Reason and Ethics Reason is man’s only proper judge of values and his only method to guide him to make a mental judgment. Fundamentally, we live our lives as humans and our capacity for reason is what enables us to survive and flourish. We were not born knowing what is good for us; that is learned. On the other hand, we are born knowing how to achieve what is good or bad for us as an individual. There is still an issue of primacy; namely, is reason and should reason be the ultimate judge of moral actions? Many would surely say that it ought to be, but too frequently it is not. Emotion and desire overtake the moral agent in far too many cases where calm reason would have been more appropriate. Rand (1964), advocates rational self interest: one's interests are not whatever one happens to feel like; rather it is by reason that one identifies what is to one's interest and what is not. By the use of reason one takes into account all of the factors they can identify such as the consequences of potential courses of action, and adopts principled policies of action. 3

Independence and integrity are also core virtues for Rand's account of self interest. Given that one must think and act by one's own efforts, being committed to the policy of independent action is a virtue. Given that one must both identify what is to one's interests and act to achieve them, a policy of being committed to acting on the basis of one's beliefs is the virtue of integrity. According to Rand (1964), policy of believing one thing and doing another is of course the vice of hypocrisy and self-destruction.

Objectivist Ethics The Objectivist ethics is a subset of the Objectivist philosophy formulated by Ayn Rand (1964). Rand, 1964, p. 33) defined "ethics" as "a code of values to guide man's choices and actions that determine the purpose and the course of life." She refers to the Objectivist ethics in particular as "selfishness," as reflected in the title of her primary book on ethics, “The Virtue of Selfishness”. However, she did not use the term in a negative connotations that it usually has, but to refer to a form of rational egoism. “Objectivism” is a philosophy developed by Ayn Rand (1964) in the 20th century that encompasses positions on metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, politics, and aesthetics. The Objectivist ethics proudly advocates and upholds rational selfishness which means the values required for man’s survival qua man (Rand, 1964, p. 34). “Objectivism” maintains that human beings cannot act automatically to further their own survival. For man, the conceptual faculty is his tool for any form of survival. The Objectivist ethics holds man’s life as the standard of value and his own life as the ethical purpose of every individual man (Rand, 1964, p. 27). According to Kritsonis, the ethical language is used to alter feelings and behavior, so as to produce more harmonious satisfaction of desires and interest. Objectivist ethics is “the morality of life and that the ethical theory has brought the world to its present state”. (Rand, 1964, p. 37). In our society today in comparison to the past, most philosophers will agree that the ultimate standard of ethics is whim; meaning arbitrary postulate or emotional commitment. As individuals we must agree that ethics is a subjective issue and that in our modern society we must challenge the ethical histories which exist. In metaphysics the view that reality is so often dependent on human consciousness integrates one philosophical view of the objectivist ethics.

Ethics at Work The philosophical view of human regarding ethics can often be seen as contradicting. More so, in our society individuals’ work for various reasons. Every so often we vividly see ourselves in positions within work environment which is quite comprehensive and empirical. Ayn Rand (1964) contends that the emotions in order to pay off in the coin of happiness must be programmed correctly. The moral and necessity of being ethical in our work is irrational and incoherent. In addressing the philosophical ethics in ones’ daily work life, the ambiguousswindle of altruists becomes induce and daring. For example, at a particular HBCU university there was 4

a job vacancy in a department. The job was advertised by the Human Resource Department and five persons applied for the job. All of the five applicants were interviewed for the job. Prior, to the applicants selection for the interview one of the requirement was to complete a skills typing test. The interview process was completed, but the selection committee members were brief about one of the participants. The person selected for the job had the lowest score on the skills typing test. The empirical results indicated that the person selected for the job had very close relationship with the hiring department head. The morality of this is when this becomes ethical or unethical. The question to ask is when does ethics becomes real ethics in the work place. There is more dichotomizations and exhortation, but bad metaphysics doctrinates what Ayn Rand initialize ethics to be within us humans. In most cases work ethic can be seen as a set of values based on hard work and diligence. It is also a moral benefit of work and its ability to enhance character that work ethic is also a form of alienation from truer connections. In the twentieth century work ethic has unilateral demands which will evolve from a mass confusionto an element of obligation. Rand states that productive work is the central purpose of a rational man’s life, the central value that integrates and determines the hierarchy of all others is values (Rand, 1964, p. 27). It is precise and a great thing that as humans we are expected to help our falling brothers and sisters, but contrary to that Rand states that it is philosophy that sets men’s goals and determines their course (Rand, 1964, p. 39).

Ethics of Emergencies An emergency are unchangeable, unchosen and unexpected events within limited time and creates conditions under which human survival is impossible. In an emergency the primary goal is to combat the disaster and escape the danger to rectify normal conditions under which human survival is feasible. “If a man accepts the ethics of altruism, he suffers in proportion to the degree of his acceptance” (Rand, 1964, sp. 49). For example, Phil is on Spring break with his family in the Cayman Island. Phil and his Dad decided to take a swim in the sea which is calm. Moments after they are far out at sea they suddenly realized that they are surrounded by several black head sharks. Phil who is an Olympian swimmer can swim much faster than his dad; his dad tells him to swim to shore to save his life. Moments later the sharks began to attack Phil dad, the life guards tried to rescue him but he was killed by the sharks prior to getting any assistance. The psychological result from such incident implicates that as individuals the subject of asking when it is ethical to save another person life in the case of an emergency becomes a reality. The results of altruism may be observed in the fact that a great many people approach the subject of ethics by asking such questions as: “Should one risk one’s life to help a man drowning” (Rand, 1964, p. 49). In our daily lives people tend to help those who are in need, 5

however, it is important to differentiate when helping becomes unselfish or profoundly egoistic. The rational welfare of helping my son or daughter from drowning is no different from another person who helps his/her wife from drowning but panics then spends the rest of his or her life in loneliness. Another aspect of ethics in emergencies applies to the idea of a state of nature that is relevant to government’s role in disaster preparation response and planning. Disasters often result in a second state of nature the main ethical systems of virtue ethics, deontology, and consequentialism, are relevant to disaster-related situations in ways that suggest the importance of being able to combine all three. The altruist ethics is based on metaphysics that man by his very nature is helpless and doomed; emergencies, disasters and catastrophes are the norm to combat ones primary goal in an emergency (Rand, 1964).

Collectivized Ethics The notion of collectivism presupposes that one is required to live for the benefit of a collective whole, such as a society. Under this system, certain policies are decreed as beneficial for the majority and are to be carried out at the expense of other individuals. It is by this principle that public projects are instituted within a society, such as public health-care systems, welfare programs, and public parks. The ends of these projects are the benefits they provide to the majority; the means by which these projects are carried out are those produced by individuals through money, labor, and other means. Rand (1964) opposes the idea of collectivized ethics because it devalues individuals. The defense for advocates of indefinite global economic growth is that it is needed to eradicate collectivized ethics in our society. This argument is at best disingenuous by any reasonable assessmentin terms of indulging in altruistic politics. Ethics are implemented in the psyche of a man as he learns to observe the events around him. Most of the times, ethics are planted in man's mind as a result of learned behavior. He is taught that to lie is wrong as a tenet of life. If he lies and is caught, then the punishment received is faulty and inconsistent. Collectivized ethics will also imply that the ethical perspectives of such a member is vivid and rancorously (Rand, 1964). Aristotle views on Ethics Aristotle conceives of ethical theory as a field distinct from the theoretical sciences (“Richard Kant, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy”, n.d.). Aristotle views ethics as an order to improve peoples’ lives, and therefore its principal concern is the nature of human well-being. Aristotle follows Socrates and Plato in taking the virtues to be central to a welllived life. Like Plato, he regards the ethical virtues (justice, courage, temperance and so on) as complex rational, emotional and social skills. Aristotle’s ethics are the result of imprecise translations from the ancient Greek text. He uses the word hexis to denote moral virtue an active condition, a state in which something must actively hold itself.

6

Aristotle concept towards metaphysics is built around the progressive narrowing of the word being until its primary meaning was discovered. His first description required the one acting choose an action knowingly, out of a stable equilibrium of the soul, and for its own sake. The knowing in question turned out to perceive things as they are, as a result of the habituation that clears our sight. Rand was greatly influenced by Aristotle work; Rand's greatest influence was Aristotle, especially Organon ("Logic"); she considered Aristotle the greatest philosopher. In particular, her philosophy reflects an Aristotelian epistemology and metaphysics both Aristotle and Rand argued that "there exists an objective reality that is independent of mind and that is capable of being known. Although Rand was ultimately critical of Aristotle's ethics, others have noted her egoistic ethics "is of the eudaemonistic type, close to Aristotle's own. The greatest distinction is that Rand epistemology did however conflict with Aristotle's at least on some level. Aristotle is one of the most brilliant and influential philosophers in ancient history Ayn Rand is one of the most brilliant individuals in modern tradition, are not much different from each other. Both philosophers identify that an individual’s life is its standard of value; thus, all actions made to further life are good, and those that threaten life are evil. Aristotle, who did not articulate a model of an ideal human being or an outline of the ideal life, experience or activity, focused on the best life a human can live theoretically by observing individuals throughout his society and drawing conclusions, which he then conceptualized into treatises. (“Ayn Rand Encyclopedia of Philosophy”, n.d.). Ayn Rand work is often praised for her reflection on the philosophy of her predecessor. Example the work of Aristotle which was focused on actions that hindered the survival of man. She agreed with most aspects of his ethics accept for one crucial concept, the fact the he did not specifically plot an “ought to” list for individuals; thus, Aristotle does not tell his readers what is “morally right.” Rand expounds upon this by formulating a “scientific process” for individuals to achieve eudaimonia. Rand discredits Aristotle’s position that the ultimate life and ultimate happiness are only reachable by a select few by explaining that her method is equally attainable by all (Rand 1964).

Concluding Remarks In conclusion, Ayn Rand philosophy of ethics gives defining and attaining values. Her philosophy is that ethics and morals are judged in relation to achieving specific ends with the final end being an individual’s life or flourishing. The act of deciding necessitates the investigation of how our action pertains to what is ethical for one’s own life.

7

Reference Ayn Rand encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved February 16, 2009 from http://www.iep.utm.edu/r/rand.htm Kraut, Richard, Aristotle’s Ethics, Retrieved February 16, 2009 from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristole-ethics/ Kritsonis, W. A. (2005). Ways of knowing through the realms of meaning. Houston, Texas National Forum Journal Rand, A. (1964). The virtues of selfishness. New York: Penguin Putnam. Liberalism vs Objectivism. Retrieved February 16, 2009 from http://www.ojectivistcenter.org/cth-32-2119_qa.aspx

8