San Diego Objectivist Study Group

My interpretation of Ayn Rand’s new conception of egoism: (excerpted from a longer post elsewhere)

• moral code: [code of values:] a set of abstract principles serving as a system of teleological measurement which grades the choices and actions open to man, according to the degree to which they achieve or frustrate the code’s standard of value–whether that standard be life qua man, life qua brute, or pleasure, or death.
• egoism: the moral code that a man’s existence is his to live and enjoy and that rationality is his highest virtue.
• altruism: the moral code that a man’s existence is to serve other men and that sacrifice is his highest virtue.
• rationality: the use of reason as the only means for acquiring knowledge and guiding one’s actions.
• sacrifice: the giving up of a higher value for the sake of a lower value.
• volition: a capacity of man for choosing to think or not.
• reason: the faculty of consciousness that a human must choose volitionally to activate in order to think.
• self: the faculty of reason in the context of choosing to evaluate.
• mind: the faculty of reason in the context of choosing to act.
• nonvolitional action: an animalistic nonrational action.
• volitionless action: a man’s action without volition in the presence of coercion or interference from other men.
• volitional action: a human action with volition in the absence of coercion and interference from other men.
• freedom: the absence of coercion and interference from other men (a.k.a. liberty:).
• A reflex action is nonmotivated by any conscious self (e.g., digestion, hiccup).
• An animal action is motivated 100 percent by self-interest.
  • In a situation without freedom,
    • A coerced man has no choice but to act nonselfishly (without the self).
    • A tyrant acts selflessly or unselfishly (against the self).
  • In a situation with freedom,
    • A rational man acts selfishly (pro self, with the assent of the conceptual mind).
    • An irrational man acts selflessly or unselfishly (against the self).
    • A rational but erroneous man acts selflessly (mistakenly against the self).
• self-interest: that which relates to the means for gaining or keeping one’s values.
  • selfishness: a concern for one’s volitional rational self-interest.
  • selflessness: a concern for one’s volitional irrational self-interest (a.k.a. unselfishness:).
  • nonselfishness: a concern for one’s volitionless nonrational self-interest.
• egoist: one who values his mind, respects its judgments, and respects its nature (e.g., fragility).
• non-egoist: one who disvalues his mind, disrespects its volitional nature, and elevates irrational emotions and desires above rational judgments.
  • hedonist: a non-egoist who takes pleasure as the standard of value.
  • altruist: a non-egoist who takes selflessness as the standard of value.
    • second-hander: an altruist who depends on the minds of others and sacrifices his life to them.
    • power-luster: an altruist who depends on the minds of others and sacrifices their lives to him.

On Rand’s conception, a rational man acts selfishly. An irrational man acts unselfishly [or selflessly].

Many people new to Objectivism, though earnest to become egoistic but having been thoroughly indoctrinated in altruism, often wonder about the subtleties of self-interest; more specifically, they wonder about the actual manner of becoming egoistic. For example, they wonder whether it is objectively moral to purchase for a friend an energy drink if that friend looks exhausted from the all-night studying. Is it considered altruistic to buy him a drink?

My answer is that the act of buying a drink for a friend is a consequence of a long chain of reasoning. So the act by itself, as a situation, i.e., as an event, can come from many motives. An altruist or an egoist could both end up buying a drink for someone else—the former, because he feels it is his duty to serve; the latter, because he esteems his friend and cares for his well-being. A person’s motive depends on what he values, and values are determined by the integration of one’s primal desires and an accepted moral code. If you want to evaluate the morality of an action, you have to know the actor and his moral code.

Objectivism does not denigrate doing “good” deeds. There is the virtue of benevolence, which is very much integrated with the basic virtues in the Objectivist ethics.

There is nothing wrong with feeling gratified afterward either. In fact, it is natural to experience gratification for gaining a value. What is at issue however is not the experience of gratification but the nature of that which one values. A person’s set of values, his hierarchy of values—i.e., those things he commits his life to gain and keep—are they in fact objective to his nature as a rational being? What is the standard of values from which that hierarchy was evaluated? So, if someone chooses fame for a value, and he works and eventually gets praise, celebrity, fame; then it is natural for him to feel gratified. But is “fame” an objective value? Peter Keating in The Fountainhead went for fame and praise from others, and look where he ended up. So, if someone chooses to help a friend, to buy him an energy drink, to give him a supportive hug, to cheer him on in his studies, because he is a friend–with all that that entails–then there is no conflict in self-interest.

altruism: the moral code that a man’s existence is to serve other men and that sacrifice is his highest virtue.
sacrifice: the giving up of a higher value for the sake of a lower value.
egoism: the moral code that a man’s existence is his to live and enjoy and rationality is his highest virtue.
rationality: the use of reason as the only means for acquiring knowledge and guiding one’s actions.
moral code: [or in TVOS, code of values:] a set of abstract principles [serving as] a system of teleological measurement which grades the choices and actions open to man, according to the degree to which they achieve or frustrate the code’s standard of value.
benevolence: the principle that, because other men are potential traders (of the material and spiritual), in order to cultivate voluntary trades with them, one should treat them with civility, generosity, and respect. [rev., T.]
trade: the voluntary exchange to mutual benefit of a value for the sake of an equal value.