The Virtue of Selfishness (Signet) by Ayn Rand
|
List Price: Our Price: $3.37 You Save: $4.62 (58%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $2.00 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of The Virtue of Selfishness (Signet)
Book Review: One THOUSAND and ten stars for this heroic philosopher!
Summary: 5 Stars
The essence of this book is "Before you can truly love others, you must learn (and be allowed) to love yourself first. Before you can feed others, you must learn (and be allowed) to feed yourself first." The essence of this book was most accurately and concisely stated by Rand herself in another book (Philosophy: Who Needs It?): "Do not hide behind such superficialities as whether you should or should not give a dime to a beggar. That is not the issue. The issue is whether you DO or do NOT have the right to exist WITHOUT giving him that dime..."
Whether or not Rand herself always lived up to her own ideals does not diminish the accuracy or meaning of her ideals. Just because a moral ideal is not attained, does not prove it to be unworthy of attainment. From an artistic viewpoint, just because a singer hits a few wrong notes, does not make the song itself unworthy of being sung.
Rand has been castigated for proclaiming "selfishness" to be a virtue, in spite of the fact that selfishness is taught by most world religions. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," "Love thy neighbor as thyself," "Do what ye will, an harm none," and numerous other paraphrases of the Golden Rule all hold the "self"' as a standard for one's behavior toward others. Rand's profound contribution was to raise this principle from an EMOTIONAL guideline to the level of FOCUSED, CRITICAL THINKING: to apply this principle to everyday circumstances requires the most scrupulously rational thought processes.
How many times have we heard Jesus Christ characterized as "selfless," because he was willing to die on the cross for the sake of others? But according to scripture, he gave up a feeble life on earth in exchange for eternal life at the right hand of his Father in Heaven, as the Ruler over mankind. That is, he gave up something lesser for something greater. He profited. Not only was his death NOT an act of selfless charity, it was an act of purely rational-selfishness.
Much unnecessary ado has been made over Rand's "dictionary definition" of the word selfish. Whether or not the dictionary she claimed to use actually existed is IRRELEVANT, because what Rand was arguing against was the "popular" connotation of selfishness. In her experience (and in mine, as well) MOST people use the word invariably to convey a moral condemnation, even though it's possible to be selfish without hurting others.
Even if one defines selfishness as an "excessive" interest in oneself, then one must answer the question "Excessive...By what standard?" Whether you include the word "excessive" in your definition of selfishness, Rand's concept of "rational selfishness" provides an accurate and meaningful alternative to the popular image of a "brute who abuses others to satisfy his own capricious desires." Rand is the first philosopher to suggest and to successfully demonstrate that "selfishness" has the POTENTIAL to be either good or evil, and that ONLY consistently rational, critical thinking can distinguish between the two.
Critics who call Rand "narcissistic" or who CONFLATE (ie, to confuse, or blend together) rational selfishness and "brute" selfishness are simply MISREPRESENTING Rand's actual words. The first time I saw this book as a teen-ager, I shuddered at the title because I had been taught that "selfishness=bad." But after a few years in college, and in the "real" world of working for a living, I understood that Rand's concept of "rational selfishness" was the only moral code that allowed me to defend myself from those who would manipulate me to my detriment but for their own benefit; it was the only moral code that allowed me to earn a profit from my own behavior without hurting others in the process.
Rand was the original exponent of what is now called the "WIN-WIN" philosophy!
The only people I can imagine being opposed to Rand's concept of rational self-interest would be those who intend to profit, not through their own honest effort and the VOLUNTARY cooperation of others, but by cheating or abusing others.
DON'T judge this book by its cover! And don't judge it by what anti-Randian critics say... This is one book that MUST be read before it can be either rationally accepted OR rejected. BUY this book, and SING "The Song of Freedom!"
Book Review: The best ethical formulation in the history of philosophy.
Summary: 5 Stars
Many years ago while discussing the Chrysler bail-out with two colleagues, they mentioned that Lee Iacoca, in pursuing the government action, was pursuing his "self-interest". The discussion on government interference in economic matters interestingly took place in the context of a debate on the contents of this book. Listening to me defend its concept of self-interest and why I thought humans should indeed pursue their self-interest, they seem perplexed that I was objecting vociferously to the Chrysler bail-out. After all, was not Lee Iacoca pursuing his self-interests when he arranged the government bail-out? This conversation, done with two people who are now fairly well-known philosophers, illustrates the deep bias surrounding the concept of self-interest. The fact that Lee Iacoca thought he was pursuing his self-interest in arranging the bail-out does not mean that it really was in his self-interest. If a person is lost in a forest and starving, and then spots a mushroom he/she believes is nutritious but in fact is poisonous, are we to accept that the eating of the mushroom is in the person's interest? The fact that we believe something is in our interest does not make it so.
The author of this book makes a brilliant case for the ethics of self-interest, with this concept being rooted in the organism's identity. It is the characteristics of the organism that determine what is good or bad for it. Ethical values arise when the organism can exhibit choice over a collection of alternatives, and is distinctly self-aware of these choices. And due to the complexity of both the organism and the environment, the context will determine the choices available to the organism. An Eskimo in the Artic North certainly faces different choices than an individual living in the jungles of the Amazon. In addition, because the organism is not omniscient, the choices made may act to the organism's detriment. Adaptation takes time, and the organism will suffer or even die if bad choices are made.
Organisms with a self-awareness of choices, or moral agents, are thus governed by what characteristics they possess, and the environments in which they find themselves. The author of this book argues brilliantly for a morality of self-interest, and her care and skill in elucidating the concept of self-interest and ethics in general, makes this book the best formulation of ethics in the history of philosophy. In addition, the book could be read in the context of modern theories of rational agents, both in philosophy and the field of artificial intelligence.
The author has defined "rationality" in a manner quite different from what the word stands for in economic theory, the latter of which views it as a descriptive concept. If a person is labeled as "rational" in economic theory, it means that the person is attempting to optimize his self-interest, regardless of the facts that might indicate otherwise. "Rational" for the author is quite different. What the author is saying, and is most profound, is that many of the actions that have been taken as an excuse for self-interest, such as lying, deception, and violence, are indeed never in one's interest. To label a human as "rational" in her view, is to characterize the person as one who is optimizing their self-interests, but these interests, because of the nature of the biology of humans, and the nature of the human psyche, never involve lying, deception, and violence. This is a bold and interesting move in ethical theory, and differentiates the author's formulation from most others in the history of philosophy.
The ethical doctrines of this author are also intimately related to what science can tell us what indeed is in the interest of organisms, in order for them to optimize their health and general well-being. Most refreshing though is that this formulation of ethics is exceedingly optimistic. It asks the reader to consider that rationality, productiveness, and pride are the virtues of self-interest. Plundering, violence, cheating, and deception never are. With its emphasis on the power of the human mind and its efficacy, it is certainly a philosophy that meshes will with our time. Even though written down over four decades ago, its optimism coupled with its practicality makes it pure 21st century.
Book Review: Must read! Very good ideas in this book!!!!
Summary: 5 Stars
Review: The Virtue of Selfishness (Signet)
General Overview: The Virtue of Selfishness is essentially a collection of essays written by Ayn Rand (and two essays written by Nathaniel Branden) that pertain to the topic of "Objectivism." In this book, there is a total of 19 essays, that range from 30 to 5 pages each. The essays themselves cover just about every aspect of Objectivism. Below is the list of essays that comprise this book:
1)"The Objectivist Ethics"
2)"Mental Health versus Mysticism and Self-Sacrifice" (by Nathaniel Branden)
3)"The Ethics of Emergencies"
4)"The "Conflicts" of Men's Interests"
5)"Isn't Everyone Selfish?"
6)"The Psychology of Pleasure"
7)"Doesn't Life Require Compromise?
8)"How Does One Lead a Rational Life in an Irrational Society?
9)"The Cult of Moral Grayness"
10)"Collectivized Ethics"
11)"The Moment Builders"
12)"Man's Rights"
13)"Collectivized "Rights""
14)"The Nature of Government"
15)"Government Financing in a Free Society"
16)"The Divine Right of Stagnation"
17)"Racism"
18)"Counterfeit Individualism" (by Nathaniel Branden)
19)"The Argument from Intimidation"
Quality of writing: When Ayn Rand is brought into the picture, one can expect nothing other then high quality writing (keep in mind, Rand wrote Atlas Shrugged!). The Virtue of Selfishness completely lived up to my expectations. The language was clear, concise, and informative. Rand made sure to explain all of her ideas thoroughly so the reader wouldn't get lost half way through. Even though a few of the topics in this book are complex by nature, Ayn Rand was still able to present them in a way that even the most n00b of scholars can comprehend.
Quality of Content: The Virtue of Selfishness brings a lot of interesting ethical theories to the table. Some theories I agree with, while others I disagree with. Me being an Anarchist, I found myself disagreeing with a lot of her assertions on Government and taxes. However, I found myself agreeing with her theories on individuality and personal strive for happiness.
One essay I fell I must give special recognition to is the essay titled: "Racism." By far, this is my favorite essay in the book. Absolutely fantastic! Rand argues that racism is a form of collectivism (Which I never thought of prior to reading this book). After reading this essay, I view the topic of racism with a completely different eye.
One final note I feel I should make is how this book makes several references to Atlas Shrugged. Despite this, I personally recommend people read the Virtue of Selfishness before they read Atlas Shrugged. The Virtue of Selfishness almost seems like a small companion-handbook to Atlas Shrugged; and by "companion-book", I mean: to serve the purpose of explaining the ideas presented in Atlas Shrugged in a (MUCH MUCH) more concise manner.
What I like:
-Easy to ready writing
-Innovative ideas
-Changed my life
-Rand's rare (but much appreciated) anti-collectivist tirades
-Cheap price (retail value on book is only $7.99)
What I don't like:
-Rand's assertions on Government
-Wish it was a little longer (it is 168 pages, medium font)
Final note: If you are a Communist or Leftie, and you get "butthurt" easily over Capitalist writings, then just pass this book up. Reading it, will do nothing but make you want to punch a hole in the wall and cry to your mommie and daddie.
Book Review: A Treatise on Avoiding Sociological Shell Games
Summary: 5 Stars
The Virtue of Selfishness by the revolutionary free thinker, Ayn Rand, espouses the value of establishing one's self awareness in life. Though this work was written well over forty years ago, many of the ideas hold firmly even to this day.
Because it was written long ago, contemporary critics who have read but not really looked at the heart of the matter in the book have too quickly dismissed the views of Rand, not just in The Virtue of Selfishness but also in her other nonfiction works such as Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, as obsolete. Why too quickly? From just one key standpoint, like Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin, Rand repeatedly affirmed one's right to pursue happiness and that this pursuit could not meet its goal without taking into account one's own self interests and being aware of his/her own interactions with nature and society and thus developing a refined understanding of the pleasure and pain principles that exist in our daily lives.
Though I do not regard myself as an absolutist, I do not think that you have to be one to delve into the principles of Rand's Objectivism. I think that those who attempt to completely discredit Rand for refusing to incorporate shades of gray elements into her writings are prone to play the Devil's advocate without analyzing what were her, or anyone else's, underlying themes.
Essentially, Rand was stating that pride (though not of the condescending variety), the pursuit of happiness, self-awareness, and the refusal to let others make their decisions at mere whims are key ingredients to enable one to live life to its fullest.
It is true that extenuating circumstances can appear so as to make one wonder if Objectivism can be applied in daily life. My response to this dilemma is that if you look at the bigger picture, that is, perceive what occurs not only from a philosophical standpoint but also from the views of a historian or mathematician, especially a game theorist, you will be able to constitute or reconstitute how the attainment of both short-term and long-term joy can be interconnected so as to endure or how they should be valued or sought after, especially when the two are mutually exclusive.
I have heard one say that life is a word problem. To me, such a statement is, by and large, true, except that life is oftentimes more complicated than that. Nonetheless, the ability to understand word problem type situations frequently can and will equip one to tackle any added difficulties that lie ahead. For instance, changes in regulations in terms of how banks are operated or how money is transferred might somewhat circumvent one's understanding of the accumulation of simple and compound interest, but it does not totally nullify the potential future value of money or the acquired, even if not entirely complete, understanding of it through textbook readings and pencil and paper percentage problems.
Indeed, if outside parameters that might just happen to exist as infinitesimal counterexamples to what has been held as true are brought to the forefront or to the center stage, then every ounce of attained human knowledge and every printed page since Guttenberg might as well be thrown out the window.
All in all, I recommend that just as Newton's laws of physics were limited in scope but are still heavily vital to the understanding of today's rocket science, The Virtue of Selfishness should be upheld as a primary bedrock upon which other meaningful works concerning the achievement of a rewarding life were built upon and without which these latter publications could not be so well understood.
Book Review: Provocative ideas, even if you disagree with them
Summary: 5 Stars
There are nineteen articles in this volume, fourteen by Rand and five by Nathaniel Branden. The longest is "The Objectivist Ethics," in which Rand explains her philosophy of "Rational Self Interest." The remaining articles are examples of the application of this philosophy.
Rand contends that "that which furthers (a living being's) life is the good, that which threatens it is the evil." Thus the basic human value is "rational selfishness...the value required for man's survival."
How do people determine if something is "good or evil"? If the person experiences pleasure, it is a signal that the experience is "good" and that the person is acting properly. If the individual has pain, the feeling shows that the experience is "bad."
People understand these sensations by using their intelligence, by thinking. Since people are not born with intelligence, they must study about the world and how to think well so that they can live properly.
There are two essentials for survival: thinking and productive work. A person who tries to survive without thinking is no better than an animal. Productive work is the way people sustain themselves, getting food, adequate comfort, and time for study and self improvement. The work should be "the fullest and most purposeful use of the mind." Living by her agenda results in a feeling of pride, the realization that one has achieved the best that one can achieve.
This achievement is selfish. The individual is interested in himself, his own life, and not the life of another or of society.
The individual deals with others only when he wants to do so, without constraints or directives, unforced, in an exchange that "benefits both parties by their own independent judgment."
Society is good when it gives individuals the two things necessary for human existence: knowledge and trade. "The only proper, moral purpose of a government is to protect man's rights."
Since a person's life is the top value, how should a person act in the following examples?
1. Should a man save his wife who he loves and feels that he can't live without or twenty strangers? The wife because she is dear to him.
2. Should a man act courageously and take an unreasonable chance to save another person's life? No, his life comes first.
3. Should people devote their lives to help the poor rise from poverty? No, he should devote himself to his own concerns, his life.
4. Is faith and self sacrifice for others correct? No, they are the cause of all evil and the deterioration of humanity.
There are three problems with this volume. First, it is very repetitious. Rand's philosophy is contained in the first chapter and the book presents nothing new after it. It only rehashes the message and applies it to various situations.
Second, Rand bases her philosophy on ethics, an amorphous subject that many scholars correctly feel is very subjective. She would have done much better to base her ideas upon reality, upon what is "true and false," upon the nature of people and the laws of nature. The result is the same, but the presentation would be clearer.
Third, many philosophers would agree that the basic human nature, that which distinguishes them from animals and inanimate objects is their intelligence, and that, as Rand contends, being altruistic is not an inherent part of a human being. Yet, as Aristotle pointed out, man is a social animal, he must live with and interact with people to survive. Thus helping others is necessary, at least to some extent. Rand ignores this when she insists that altruism is evil.