I've posted before about why I am an egoist. But, as I noted, one can be an egoist and still believe in helping others. In fact, so do I. Then isn't that simply vacuous egoism? I don't think it is. Strong, Randian egoism comes from the premise that the only actual person relevant to any discussion is the individual. Rand denied that there was anything such as humanity, in a rather Humian fashion. And yes, I like the play on words there. She claimed that humanity is nothing more than the aggregate of all its parts- humans. Any other notion, claimed Rand, denied the individual his due autonomy, and would be nothing more than collectivist fascism.
This is precisely where I would disagree. I haven't worked out all the details in my head yet, but it's clear to me that individuals are also parts of communities. Besides the oft quote Aristotelain maxim that man is a social being, society in crucial in man's upbringing. Without society, man simply would not develop in the same way- and not in a positive way at all. There have been cases where children have been kept in complete isolation, and upon entry into society, simply could not learn to talk. No matter how long.
That said, what is it that society makes? I agree here with Rand that it, first and foremost, makes an individual. It is quite the paradox that individual cognition can only be achieve through communal help, but it seems to be the case nonetheless. But, people's bonds of association run deeply. Rand was wont to explain love as a capitalist transaction, whereby one loved someone only as a result of achieving value in them.
This seems false- I love my parents, but that love does not consist in the value I see in them, for often I don't see such value. Now, that love was probably caused by the situation I was raised in, in other words, the facts that they care for me and showed me love as well. Even though this was the cause of the love, it is not the content of that love. Likewise, it is not restricted by that cause. Even were my parents to be so despicable that I hated them, and their evil actions far outweighed whatever good they gave to me, I would still love them nonetheless. Why? Because that love so formed it part of my self-conception of personhood.
In other words, and more simply, I see myself as part of my family. But, not only that, it is a perception that is almost impossible to escape. It would require specific deliberation and action, and even then, there is not guarantee that it would work. So, I see myself, in addition to being an individual, as part of my family, as part of two nations (America, and the Jewish people), and as part of humanity in general.
Now, I still haven't completely reconciled these two ideas. I don't know that reconciliation is possible, maybe they are simply two conflicting strains of perception. My inquiry runs parallel to the very same inquiry I have in Judaism. Hopefully I will address that in a future post- and the answer there may help me here.
Monday, 5 November 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment