Rational Self-Interest
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Ayn Rand didn’t stop smoking after she’d been warned about the risks.
Because her books weren’t selling, she ended up on welfare.
To her admirers she is a model of the power of intellect and the glory of self reliance and independence
-
"The only moral use of [thing I disapprove of] is my use of [thing I disapprove of]."
A quote that may have originally been about abortion, but applies to most things that serial disapprovers disapprove of.
See also: "Do as I say, not as I do." or as it usually is these days: "Do as I say. I am also doing as I say and if think you see me doing otherwise, no you didn't."
-
source: existentialcomics.com/comic/364 (it has mouseover text too…)
-
I'm still waiting for a critique of rational self-interest that doesn't fail right out of the gate by stipulating an irrational position or decision.
This one wasn't even vaguely close.
-
Lady in red is presenting an extremely common series of steps that companies take for the owner/investor self interest in profit.
How is it critiquing an irrational position?
-
Do unto others as you want done unto you. Basically all of game theory. The threat of a guillotine. These are all extremely basic and rational arguments that merely ask you not to be a dickhead.
-
All of Ayn Rand’s own examples of rational self interest were irrational and against her interests. It’s such an easy philosophy to mock because it’s just really stupid. True rational self interest would involve creating cooperative structures that give a safety net if anything goes wrong just like how it’s rational to get home insurance even if you don’t expect to burn your house down. Anyone drawing Randian conclusions can’t have thought of rational self interest.
-
True rational self interest would involve creating cooperative structures that give a safety net if anything goes wrong just like how it’s rational to get home insurance even if you don’t expect to burn your house down.
This is the part that drives me nuts. Plenty of today’s decision makers only survive later thanks to social nets. But they’re so sure that they won’t be, they’re willing to cut back social benefits to make a quick buck.
-
She’s not worth spending time on. Any rational person would understand that.
-
I genuinely hate to disagree but taking social security when you need it is acting in your natural self interest. It’s not hypocritical. Ironic yes but not “do as I say not as I do”. Also doesn’t make it a good philosophy to govern by
-
I will never get tired of linking to this: The Only Moral Abortion Is My Abortion
-
That series of steps, common or not, is bludgeoningly irrational, and for multiple reasons.
In fact, the introductory part of the comic, showing her rejecting the entirely rational option of working half as long to produce the same amount clearly communicates the point that it's irrational, as does the last frame, illustrating the consequences of her self-evidently irrational choice.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Can I be tired of how relevant it still is?
-
All of Ayn Rand's own examples of rational self interest were irrational and against her interests.
Yes, they were. She was a shallow, ego-driven, willfully ignorant egotist.
But that has nothing really to do with rational self-interest as an idea.
It's such an easy philosophy to mock because it's just really stupid.
Except that it's not.
What's stupid is the plainly irrational choices that are made and ascribed to "rational" self-interest.
True rational self interest would involve creating cooperative structures that give a safety net if anything goes wrong.
Exactly.
So the simple fact of the matter is that when someone argues against those safety nets, they aren't actually arguing from a position of rational self-interest.
The philosophy hasn't failed - they have.
-
She is, however, acting in her own rational self-interest by keeping all the value of the new machine for herself and not passing it on to her workers. If she were acting in the group’s rational self-interest, she would allow them to work half as long. Since she is acting in her own rational self-interest, she threatens to fire her workers if they do not work the same hours as before and pass the value on to her.
-
It is rational self interest, not rational group interest. Hence why she doesn’t act in a way that would benefit others, because they can now do twice the output in the same amount of time because of the machine!
‘Rational self interest’ is just being selfish.
-
Or more pointedly, they are all things that illustrate ways in which it's in your rational self-interest to not be a dickhead.
-
Yes, they were. She was a shallow, ego-driven, willfully ignorant egotist.
While I agree that she’s had an overall negatice effect on society, I wonder if her world view more came from trauma of living in the Soviet Union and (falsely) assuming that the exact opposite had to be good
-
Rational group interest IS rational self-interest.
As social animals living in communities and as part of any number of groups, we must, if we're rational, be mindful of the well-being of groups, because our own well-being depends on it.
'Rational self interest' is just being selfish.
No it in fact is not. Selfishness causes any number of negative consequences - suffering, hostility, crime, conflict, rebellion, war, death... So it's bludgeoningly obviously irrational, and therefore cannot be rational self interest.
-
She is, however, acting in her own rational self-interest by keeping all the value of the new machine for herself and not passing it on to her workers.
No, she rather obviously is not, as vividly illustrated by the fact that she caused so much hostility that she ends up going to the guillotine.
She is very clearly acting in her irrational self- interest.
If she were acting in the group's rational self-interest, she would allow them to work half as long.
And if she were acting in her own rational self-interest, she would do the same, since her well-being (and in fact, as neatly illustrated in the comic, her very life) depends on the well-being of the group.
Since she is acting in her own rational self-interest, she threatens to fire her workers if they do not work the same hours as before and pass the value on to her.
No. Again, she is rather obviously acting in her own irrational self-interest, as vividly illustrated in the last panel.
Any purely rational person (as opposed, mind you, to an empathetic one) would take the option to do that.
What on earth leads you to believe that rationality and empathy are mutually exclusive?
As social animals, empathy is eminently rational, and in fact I would argue that rationality is impossible without it.
