Did Ayn Rand idolize a serial killer?

[elucidator]

@Lemur866

She wrote this particular journal entry when she was 23, so “old cougar” doesn’t apply. We can stipulate the “skanky”.

Oh? Seen a birth certificate?

[Rand_Rover]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

I’m not posting much in here, but I want to let folks know that I’m reading with interest, especially folks with Rand in your names–the one because you’ve got seriously useful input that helps me understand Ayn Rand much better than these articles did, and the other because your contempt is a badge of honor.

As is yours.

You know, there are better ways for a person to deal with their psychological issues than to throw out baseless assertions against an author they don’t like.

[chorpler]

@Rand_Rover

As is yours.

You know, there are better ways for a person to deal with their psychological issues than to throw out baseless assertions against an author they don’t like.

I thought the whole point of the thread was to find out if the assertions were baseless or not.

[New_Deal_Democrat]

It is the individual who is not interested in his fellow men who has the greatest difficulties in life and provides the greatest injury to tethers. It is from among such individuals that all human failures spring.

• Alfred Adler, from What Life Should mean to You

This is why Ayn Rand’s attitude is usually dysfunctional.

[Paranoid_Randroid]

@Rand_Rover

You know, there are better ways for a person to deal with their psychological issues than to throw out baseless assertions against an author they don’t like.

I’m going to echo chorpler, and add that it would be difficult for someone to research this without obtaining a copy of Ayn Rand’s journals; there aren’t a great many resources online that are not of the variety posted by the OP. He did the right thing by posting the question.

[BrainGlutton]

@Captain_Amazing

Rand was apparently planning a book, “The Little Street”, with a Hickmanlike hero; a character named Danny Renahan, who kills this evil minister in a way similar to the way Hickman killed his victims. So, in her journal, she’s writing about her planning of the book, and she’s writing about Hickman:

Yes, he is a monster—now. But the worse he is, the worst must be the cause that drove him to this. Isn’t it significant that society was not able to fill the life of an exceptional, intelligent boy, to give him anything to out-balance crime in his eyes? If society is horrified at this crime, it should be horrified at the crime’s ultimate cause: itself. The worse the crime—the greater it’s guilt. What would society answer, if that boy were to say: “Yes, I’m a monstrous criminal, but what are you?

And remember, at this point in her life, Rand was Nietzschian and had adopted some of those ideas (and honestly, I don’t think she ever fully abandoned them), and so when she’s planning the book, she’s seeing Hickman, and the monstrous things he did, she’s saying, how is it that this man doesn’t have any purpose in his life, and how is that he does this horrible thing? And it’s her answer is that it’s society. And that’s what she wants to examine in her book; how did her character, Renahan, who she concludes isn’t that much like Hickman, because Hickman never had a purpose, how is it that he comes to kill this minister, for a purpose, and how has society failed so that he has to.

So it’s not that she admired Hickman, really, and in her journals, she points out that he’s a monster and directionless, but she’s fascinated by the idea of a person who’s totally uninterested in what society tells him he should believe, and instead acts according to his own value system. And it’s those ideas that lead to Howard Roarke, Dabny Taggart, and John Galt.

Isn’t it kind of, well, un-Objectivist to blame society?

[Captain_Amazing]

You can read parts of the book on Google Books:

The Journals of Ayn Rand

[Captain_Amazing]

@BrainGlutton

Isn’t it kind of, well, un-Objectivist to blame society?

She was 23 and hadn’t come up with Objectivism yet.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Rand_Rover

As is yours.

You know, there are better ways for a person to deal with their psychological issues than to throw out baseless assertions against an author they don’t like.

It’s weird for you to call me an author, but absolutely I hope you find a better way to deal with your psychological issues. Seriously, good luck on that, dude.

[BrainGlutton]

@Czarcasm

And unfortunately it spawns those who believe that ethical egoism is, in itself, a supreme talent.

It can be, of a sort . . .

Henry: I feel sorry for you, Mark. You just don’t know how to have fun.
Mark: What?
Henry: It’s because you’re scared all the time. I know. I used to be scared too. But that was before I found out.
Mark: Found out what?
Henry: That once you realize that you can do anything… you’re free. You can fly. Nobody can touch you… nobody. Mark… don’t be afraid to fly.
Mark: You’re sick…
Henry: Hey, I promise you something amazing, something you’ll never forget. Where’s the gratitude?

– The Good Son

[BrainGlutton]

@Paranoid_Randroid

Egoism gets too bad a rap from those who think it’s merely an attempt to philosophically justify sociopathy.

No, it’s an attempt to philosophically admire sociopathy.

[BrainGlutton]

@Paranoid_Randroid

I suppose it’s incumbent upon the lukewarmly sympathetic parties to defend Rand – ah, well.

You’re missing something essential about her conception of goodness with regard to goals and behavior. It’s true that, in Rand’s view, a good person regards other individuals as instruments to her own happiness; but such a person also respects the rights of others to pursue their own happiness. That is, she believes in self-ownership applied not only to herself but to every other human. A perfect individual is one who wishes to strive and achieve success due to her own merits. She should find abhorrent the act of cheating or stealing or coercion generally.

It’s simply not the case that a Randian hero would brutally take the life of a little girl for his own gratification. It says something about Rand that one of the closest real-life expositions of her philosophy was given by a sociopath, agreed. But her position is somewhat more nuanced than to deserve an immediate dismissal.

That’s as may be. But, if so, Rand’s philosophy is also . . . easily misconstrued, isn’t it?

Robbie Gould: I didn’t blow a summer hauling toasted bagels just to bail out some little chick who probably balled every guy in the place.
[Baby is pouring water into glasses for him]
Robbie Gould: A little precision please, Baby. Some people count and some people don’t.
[brings out a copy of The Fountainhead from his pocket]
Robbie Gould: Read it. I think it’s a book you’ll enjoy, but make sure you return it; I have notes in the margin.
Baby: You make me sick. Stay away from me, stay away from my sister or I’ll have you fired.
*[Baby pours the jug of water on his crotch] *

– Dirty Dancing

[BrainGlutton]

@rogerbox

In principal this sounds all well and good and sounds a lot like LeVayan Satanism which I can respect. In practice, Randians and Libertarians don’t care a wit about others’ pursuit of happiness and readily impede others for their own benefit. Randianism and Sociopathy has a very thin, gray, hazy boundary.

Here is wisdom, my children: Objectivists are morally worse than Satanists!

[panache45]

@New_Deal_Democrat

Ayn Rand was an ethical egotist. Ethical egotism only works for those who are supremely talented. Even then it is probably a liability.

(Forgot to respond to this earlier.)

You should have met Rand’s husband. He looked like one of her heroes (in her opinion, not mine), and had no discernible talents outside of the bedroom. He went from mediocre actor to mediocre artist to mediocre floral designer . . . yet Rand utterly worshiped him. He was a very nice guy and nothing more. His only claim to fame was the fact that he came up with the title Atlas Shrugged.

She met and fell in love with him around the same time she wrote about Hickman.

[Digital_Stimulus]

@panache45

She met and fell in love with him around the same time she wrote about Hickman.

And then later had an extended affair with a protege and couldn’t understand why neither her husband nor her lover was happy with the resulting situation. She was perfectly content with the setup.

As I recall reading about it, anyway. Someone feel free to correct that as needed…

[John_Mace]

@Digital_Stimulus

And then later had an extended affair with a protege and couldn’t understand why neither her husband nor her lover was happy with the resulting situation. She was perfectly content with the setup.

As I recall reading about it, anyway. Someone feel free to correct that as needed…

That’s right. And she was furious when Nathaniel Branden (the protege) dumped her.

[Rand_Rover]

@New_Deal_Democrat

It is the individual who is not interested in his fellow men who has the greatest difficulties in life and provides the greatest injury to tethers. It is from among such individuals that all human failures spring.

• Alfred Adler, from What Life Should mean to You

This is why Ayn Rand’s attitude is usually dysfunctional.

How is “Ayn Rand’s attitude” equivalent to being “not interested in her fellow man”?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Rand_Rover

How is “Ayn Rand’s attitude” equivalent to being “not interested in her fellow man”?

One of her signature traits was not only a complete lack of empathy, but an actual contempt for it.

[Rand_Rover]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

One of her signature traits was not only a complete lack of empathy, but an actual contempt for it.

How is a lack of empathy equivalent to a lack of interest?

[Bryan_Ekers]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

One of her signature traits was not only a complete lack of empathy, but an actual contempt for it.

I admit I haven’t read all of Rand’s work, but I thought it was pity rather than empathy that she had a problem with.