Customer Reviews

The Philosophic Thought of Ayn Rand

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

*The Philosophical Thought of Ayn Rand* is a collection of ten essays on Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism, more or less hierarchically organized into three parts: Metaphysics and Epistemology, Ethics and Politics.

The essays included fall into two very distinct categories: those written by independent Ayn Rand scholars, like Den Uyl, Rasmussen, Machan or Mack, who show a real familiarity with Rand's published works (or, to be more precise, those works published prior to the publication of the book in 1984); and essays written by generally unsympathetic philosophers who merely took the trouble of reading a few Objectivist essays before refuting what are mostly misunderstandings of Rand's statements or arguments.

One example is Anthony Flew, whose pompously titled essay "Selfishness and the Unintended Consequences of Intended Action" combines a very cogent defense of the free market with a completely inept treatment of Rand's rational egoism. Flew takes the following statement from *The Fountainhead*: "No man can live for another... It is impossible in concept"; interprets it as meaning that no action can be unselfish and self-sacrificing; easily refutes the latter; and then blames Rand for her "false conclusion", her "lapse" and the "mess" she got herself into. Unfortunately for him, Rand was not saying that it is impossible ever to *act* in a self-sacrificial way, but that it was impossible consistently to *live* for another, which is totally different, and which I do not think Flew would be able to refute. As for his comment that "Rand is... mistaking it that all human relationships are or should be trading transactions", I surmise it is based on too literal an interpretation of the "trader principle", which is the Objectivist alternative to predatory egoism and altruism. Finally, the refutation of the Objectivist principle that there is no conflict of interest among rational men is based on an unjustified reading of "interest" as synonymous with "desire".

But the nadir of this collection is probably Wallace Matson's "Rand on Concepts" which claims to reformulate the Objectivist theory of concept-formation in a way that "preserves what is of value in Rand's treatment" and then proceeds to get rid of concepts altogether, claiming they are a dispensable "mysterious and subjective... third entity between word and thing"!

Of the ten essays included here, I would say that the five written by the better-informed Ayn Rand scholars are worth reading and often contain interesting observations and criticisms (though none that are so earth-shattering as to really threaten the structure of Objectivism), while the other five, when they are not off-topic, are generally lame.

This is the first book that examined Rand's philosophy from an academic perspective, and it has proven to be one of the most useful secondary sources on the philosophy. The essays by the editor, and all of the essays in the ethics section especially, or well worth reading. In some cases an academic gloss to Rand's work is provided, in others an academic critique. Should be of help to those who are looking for strong, well-developed arguments for and against Rand's theories.

Published in 1984 `The Philosophic Thought of Ayn Rand' edited by Uyl and Rasmussen is a collection of essays discussing the philosophy of Ayn Rand. Rand is a well known twentieth century American novelist and political commentator. The following thoughts are offered for potential purchasers.

The text is divided into three sections,; metaphysics and epistemology, ethics and politics. Each section has an introductory essay by the editors. With only two contributions the segment discussing metaphysics and epistemology is the shortest and least interesting part of the book. While there is a rich philosophical tradition in these areas , Rand appears to have a limited interest in these subjects aside from the role they play in underwriting her ethical and political views. Consequently, there is not a lot of source material to use. Rand seems to advocate naïve/common sense realism, positing the existence of an agent-independent world and our ability to access and understand it via our senses and cognitive abilities. While helpful in highlighting some of Rand Aristotelian views the essays in this section are rather weak.

Rand's writings in the areas of ethics and politics are much more extensive and, as a consequence the related essays are accordingly more interesting. Hollinger's essay discussing Rand's connection to Aristotle and the virtue ethics tradition is well written and insightful. The notion of human flourishing evident in the virtue tradition is helpful in understanding Rand's view of value. From my perspective, the best essay in the collection is from Charles King, Many readers approaching Rand for the first type find her work difficult as a result of her emotive language and rather esoteric use of terminology. King is helpful in clarify Rand's terminology and identifying her underlying contentions. Flew's essay on Rand's politics is also worth a look, in particular, his thoughts with regard to strengthening her argument for capitalism are interesting.

Despite its limitations I enjoyed the book - Rand's work has been largely overlooked by the philosophical world and this small anthology provides some rare and critical insight into her thought. That said, it is a modest collection of essays from minor philosophers (with the exception of Flew). I would, however, not want to sound overly critical of the contributors. While Rand is a colorful character with some interesting thoughts she is a `philosopher' only in the broadest sense of the term. As noted by several of the commentators, Rand seems to have limited awareness and interest in the broader philosophical world - this is unfortunate as it limits her effectiveness. Rand is an accomplished writer of romantic fiction and many of her ideas (for good or bad) are not presented in a clear and systematic way that lends itself to easy analysis.

Overall, the text is largely a period piece and is likely of interest to a limited audience.

This is an excellent compendium of articles on Rand by a range of philosophers. The close reader of Rand will note how Wheeler and Flew display the academic mindset of Anglo-american philosophy which reads nothing of what happens in other countries, particularly their hangups on how Rand ignores prepositional conventions typical to English in discussing epistemology.

Yet these are the questions and issues brought up by intelligent persons who have trouble leaving their local judeo-christian mindset. Precisely this sort of discussion is required for her ideas to be absorbed by many. One hopes that as Rand's ideas are discussed in other countries, a follow- up volume with a more cosmopolitan range of philosophers will follow from the authors.

The full title of this book should have been: What Some People Who Were Genuinely PHILOSOPHIC THOUGHT OF AYN RAND.

And some of them didn't think much of her at all. Jack Wheeler, for example, tries to be nice but argues that she didn't really understand Aristotle very well. And Antony Flew, who has said elsewhere that he thinks her contribution to philosophy was 'zilch', makes mincemeat of her understanding of 'selfishness'.

The essays in here aren't all negative (nor should they be; Rand wasn't *completely* batty). And they *are* all thoughtfully and carefully written. But Rand's 'philosophy' won't withstand fifteen minutes of careful scrutiny by anyone who knows anything about the field from any non-'Objectivist' source.

If, as it appears, Rand is going to get some academic attention after all, then this volume should be kept handy. At least SOME of the attention should be negative.

This book, despite its occasional faults and shortcomings, nevertheless represented, at the time of its publication, a considerable leap forward in Randian criticism. While some of the essays (most notably, those by the editors and Tibor Machan) add little if anything to our understanding of Rand, most of the rest contain at least several important insights, and some contain scores of them. Wallace Matson, despite his odd desire to replace concepts with words and his fallacious remarks about the problem of induction, nevertheless has some apt things to say about the Objectivist axioms. "The subjectivists are not so obliging as to deny existence outright," he rightly points out. And his remarks about Rand's abuse of the "fallacy of the 'stolen concept'" are on the mark as well. Hollinger's essay, which, as far as I know, is the only critical examination of Rand's theory of history, is one of the best in the book. Wheeler's ensuing essay on Aristotle is helpful in pointing out various instances when Rand misunderstood or misinterprets the old pedant of Athens. The best essay in the book, however, is J. Charles King's masterful refutation of Rand's ethical theory. King shows that life cannot possibly be the ultimate standard of value because life is a means to an end, not an end in itself. Next we have Eric Mack's refutation of Rand's theory of rights. While it is true that Mack just skims the surface of the problem, Mack's treatment is still the best to date.

Reviewers have been nearly universal in condemning Antony Flew's excellent essay on Randian selfishness, for reasons that I don't quite understand. (I suspect they were more interested in refuting Flew than in understanding him.) Flew, a distinguished British philosopher, contributes an essay of remarkable insight and good sense. He points out that Rand's moral ideas "could have been much better illustrated with the help of detailed accounts of paradigm lives, both good and bad." He aptly describes Rand's view that there can never be a conflict of interest between rational men as an "embarrassment of all concerned, reminiscent of the revelation in the Communist Manifesto that, in the upcoming utopia, 'the free development of each will be the condition of the free development of all.'" Flew proceeds to demolish the Randian view by pointing out that Rand's whole discussion of the matter involves "a constricted and factitious interpretation of the term interests." (Many of the problems in Rand's philosophy stem from "a constricted and factitious interpretation" of terms.) He ends the essay by showing how Rand's case for competitive capitalism can be bolstered by introducing ideas first developed by Adam Smith. In all, a very fine collection of essays; but worth reading only for those capable of understanding philosophical argumentation. Dogmatic, uncritical Objectivists had best stick with works recommended by Peikoff.

This collection of essays came out in 1984 and is a little bit dated in light of more recent work on Rand. While the collection contains a couple of clunkers, it contains at least one real gem: J. Charles King's "Life and the Theory of Value," the best refutation of Rand's ethics I'm aware of.