Objectivism's answer: Is Charity a Virtue? - Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

Peter Schwartz, former chairman of the board of directors of the Ayn Rand Institute, is asked if Objectivists scorn charitable giving.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Ayn
• Rand
• center
• institute
• sharing
• private
• property
• Objectivism
• Objectivist
• capitalism
• altruism
• self-interest
• charity
• morality
• ethics
• duty
• need
• obligation
• gift
• benevolence
• good
• will
• bond
• society
• culture
• tsunami
• victims
• fire

[SwordOfApollo]

I find that most who dismiss Ayn Rand’s morality don’t really understand it. Her “selfishness” is long-term, principled self-interest. People are a combination of the physical and mental, and your self-interest includes psychological values. Self-interest is not to be reduced to only the physical, such as money. Other people can be of tremendous psychological value (i.e. friends, lovers, children.) Rand recognized that benevolence toward strangers is in one’s own interest, in a free country.

[Dracopol]

Never let anyone convince you that you have sme great purpose in life. They are trying to manipulate you for THEIR purposes...

[Solverwiz]

Charity is a choice. If someone wants to give up everything they own, whatever their reason is, that is their choice. When that person then demands we have a duty to support him so he can continue his habit, my choice is no. But, I'm not given that free choice.

[UnboundObjectivity]

@tomestubbs If an action involved the exploitation of others, then it was neither rational nor in anyone's real best interest. The point is to learn from mistakes when they do happen. I much prefer a philosophy that is 100% opposed to any use of force, that says every individual is an end in themselves. Any straying from this route, and you end up advocating the idea that man is a means to the ends of another or society. Such ideas rely on the expense, and -always- end in exploitation of others.

[tomestubbs]

@UnboundObjectivity The outcome of rational self interest in some situations wind up being at the expense or exploitation of others. Selfishness to an extreme as with radical libertarian types with sociopathisc tendencies walk all over people all of the time. A rejoinder here shopuld at the consideration of others instead of being selfish assholes with the "I got mine, screw you" mentality. And what about externalities?

[UnboundObjectivity]

No. But are you  going to tell me that the majority of universities advocate the philosophies of radical individualism, unregulated markets, and are anti-welfare?

[UnboundObjectivity]

@logtype47 "the victims, who opposed such laws, have a clear right to any refund of their own money—and they would not advance the cause of freedom if they left their money, unclaimed, for the benefit of the welfare state administration."

I define moochers as those who receive benefits from a system which they haven't paid into, or receive vastly more, adjusted for inflation, than they paid.

[logtype47]

@UnboundObjectivity Are you suggesting that public and private universities are socialist because they reject Rand's philosophy?

[logtype47]

Again, Rand makes no mention whatsoever of reclaiming tax revenue nor did she teach it? Please show us evidence that objectivist advocate this type of behavior.

"Moochers" are tax payers as well. How do you define "moochers"? Be specific.

Since Rand spent her life railing against the social programs and decided to partake in them - That most certainly is a big public ordeal.

[UnboundObjectivity]

@logtype47

The main reason I discredit this as supposedly proving her "hypocrisy" is that you seem to be implying that it would have been more consistent with her philosophy for her to allow her money to stay in the system to be mooched off of by others, instead of reclaiming it for herself. And as far as hiding it, I don't know -anyone- who makes receiving social security benefits a big public ordeal.