

Ayn Rand vs. the Pygmies - locopati
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_evolution/2012/10/groups_and_gossip_drove_the_evolution_of_human_nature.single.html

======
skittles
The cheating pygmy in this article isn't being "rationally selfish" (a phrase
used by Rand). One who is rationally selfish doesn't harm others by their
selfish actions. Instead, they just make sure that personal and family needs
are met first. Any benevolence would be a personal choice not influenced by
feelings of guilt or peer pressure.

~~~
viggity
you stole the words out of my mouth. I don't mind being altruistic, I mind
being forced to be altruistic, which really isn't altruism at all.

------
digitalengineer
"What he has found is in direct opposition to Ayn Rand's selfish ideal. For
example, in 100 percent of LPA societies ... generosity or altruism is always
favored toward relatives _and non-relatives_ alike, with sharing and
cooperation being the most cited moral values"

Would Rand think it is wrong to be an altruist _just for your own family_?
(E.g. your family's survival).

John Galt chose to exit the corrupt society and start (a small) new society
based upon his values. If I remember correct he was waiting (and actively
helped for) society to implode so he could reboot it. He didn't do what the
article claims: "He refused to participate in society and no one has seen him
since."

~~~
nirvana
In fact, John Galt, and the others, bore significant personal risk and harm,
in a variety of ways- for the goal of ultimately benefiting society.

Galt was an altruist, by the modern use of the word.

The error the author makes is confusing voluntary sharing with theft (Eg:
sharing at the point of a gun)... and they always make this error because they
want to pretend like the theft is voluntary so that they don't have to face
the fact that they are advocating violence.

~~~
digitalengineer
Great comment (I'm placing it here but there are more).

------
fourmii
Can someone explain to me why Ayn Rand and a work of fiction is held in such
high regard? (I'm not trying to be facetious). As a foreigner living in the US
for the past almost 7 years, I find it interesting that so many people (some
with important jobs like our politician friends in the far right) base so much
of their ideals on fiction. One could draw a comparison with Scientology where
a whole religion was started by a science-fiction writer...

~~~
RyanMcGreal
There will always be some people who will take solace and even delight in the
argument that they are not only allowed but indeed morally obliged to be
wholly self-interested.

~~~
nirvana
That is a derogatory characterization and it is false.

The best outcome for society is for government to adhere to the principles
laid out in Atlas Shrugged.

Collectivism has given us poverty, illiteracy, the 2008 financial crisis, etc.

Worse, whenever they screw things up really bad, they use the fact that things
are screwed up to claim that they need even _more_ power to exploit poor
people and violate the rights of everybody, and they wrap themselves in the
flag of "serving the poor" to sell it.

These people pretend like Rand was advocating self centeredness, and that they
are advocating altruism, when the reverse is more accurate.

Rand is advocating freedom and liberty and they are advocating a form of
slavery.

~~~
RyanMcGreal
> That is a derogatory characterization and it is false.

It may be derogatory but it's not false. Rational self-interest was the
centrepiece of Rand's moral philosophy.

> The best outcome for society is for government to adhere to the principles
> laid out in Atlas Shrugged.

The most successful societies, by a wide variety of measures, manage to
balance individual freedom, agency and entrepreneurialism with a foundation of
civil liberty and social equity that provides the best opportunities for
everyone to succeed.

> Collectivism has given us poverty, illiteracy, the 2008 financial crisis,
> etc.

Labelling the whole gamut of different forms of government under a pejorative
ism has given us a legacy of dogmatic, wooly-minded incoherent political
discourse.

> Worse, whenever they screw things up really bad, they use the fact that
> things are screwed up to claim that they need even more power to exploit
> poor people and violate the rights of everybody, and they wrap themselves in
> the flag of "serving the poor" to sell it.

Some of them do that some of the time, and one solution is to eliminate
government, but that has not worked anywhere ever. What has worked - what is
working today in many places - is to press for a better, more responsive
government that forms policies based on evidence and respects human rights.

> These people pretend like Rand was advocating self centeredness, and that
> they are advocating altruism, when the reverse is more accurate.

The 2008 economic crisis, incidentally, was made possible in large party
through deliberate state _de_ regulation of the financial industry in the late
1990s, a catastrophic outcome that was predicted at the time but ignored by
those people who were most loudly touting libertarian governing doctrines.

------
Tycho
The Objectivist viewpoint:

 _I will collaborate with the other hunters because I value their wellbeing
and community and they can help me fulfil my own goals._

The altruist (in the Randian sense) viewpoint:

 _I will collaborate with the other hunters because the needs of the tribe
supersede my own._

------
dwoldrich
I am so pleased to see such low snarkiness levels overall in a discussion
regarding Ayn Rand. There is a lot not to like about the harshness of Randian
principles, but I find the ideal she paints of the human condition compelling.

------
nirvana
Ayn Rand never objected to groups of people working together, after all, that
is what a corporation is.

Rand and Objectivism never oppose charity or altruism at all. The "altruism"
she opposed is when a group of powerful people (usually government) use
violence to take money from people, or enslave them, and claim that they are
doing it "for the benefit of everyone".

What she proved was that this was not for the benefit of everyone, but for the
benefit of the politicians who are doing the taking. The science of economics
bears this out as well.

This article is simple flamebait, and it fails to be honest in its premise.

If you have not read Atlas Shrugged, be aware that most of the time you see a
mainstream article attacking Ayn Rand, they are usually being dishonest about
what she actually said, as this article is as well. This is for political
reasons (and that the left ideology is desperate to demonize her so that their
adherents won't read the book and see the errors in leftism.)

Voluntary associations are not collectivism.

