Reddit Reddit reviews The Virtue of Selfishness: Fiftieth Anniversary Edition

We found 17 Reddit comments about The Virtue of Selfishness: Fiftieth Anniversary Edition. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Literature & Fiction
Books
American Literature
Classic American Literature
The Virtue of Selfishness: Fiftieth Anniversary Edition
Check price on Amazon

17 Reddit comments about The Virtue of Selfishness: Fiftieth Anniversary Edition:

u/Sunlighter · 17 pointsr/Objectivism

The philosophy you are critiquing is not Objectivism. Here is what Rand actually wrote:

>The standard of value of the Objectivist ethics -- the standard by which one judges what is good or evil -- is man's life, or: that which is required for man's survival qua man.
>
>Since reason is man's basic means of survival, that which is proper to the life of a rational being is the good; that which negates, opposes, or destroys it is the evil.
>
>Since everything man needs has to be discovered by his own mind and produced by his own effort, the two essentials of the method proper to a rational being are: thinking and productive work.
>
>If some men do not choose to think... their survival is made possible only by those who did choose to think...
>
>If some men attempt to survive by brute force or fraud, by looting, robbing, cheating, or enslaving the men who produce... their survival is made possible only by... the men who choose to think and to produce the goods..."

...

>The Objectivist ethics holds man's life as the standard of value -- and his own life as the ethical purpose of every individual man...
>
>The difference between 'standard' and 'purpose' in this context is as follows: a 'standard' is an abstract principle that serves as a measurement or gauge to guide a man's choices in the achievement of a concrete, specific purpose. 'That which is required for the survival of man qua man' is an abstract principle that applies to every individual man. The task of applying this principle to a concrete, specific purpose -- the purpose of living a life proper to a rational being -- belongs to every individual man, and the life he has to live is his own.
>
>Man must choose his actions, values, and goals by the standard of that which is proper to man -- in order to achieve, maintain, fulfill, and enjoy that ultimate value, that end in itself, which is his own life.

-- Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness. Read the whole thing.

p.s. an even better quote follows:

> The moral cannibalism of all hedonist and altruist doctrines lies in the premise that the happiness of one man necessitates the injury of another.
>
> Today, most people hold this premise as an absolute not to be questioned. And when one speaks of man's right to exist for his own sake, for his own rational self-interest, most people assume automatically that this means his right to sacrifice others. Such an assumption is a confession of their own belief that to injure, enslave, rob, or murder others is in man's self-interest -- which he must selflessly renounce. The idea that man's self-interest can be served only by a non-sacrificial relationship with others has never occurred to those humanitarian apostles of unselfishness, who proclaim their desire to achieve the brotherhood of men. And it will not occur to them, or to anyone, so long as the concept 'rational' is omitted from the context of 'values,' 'desires,' 'self-interest,' and ethics.
>
>The Objectivist ethics proudly advocates and upholds rational selfishness -- which means: the values required for man's survival qua man -- which means: the values required for human survival -- not the values produced by the desires, the emotions, the 'aspirations,' the feelings, the whims, or the needs of irrational brutes, who have never outgrown the primordial practice of human sacrifices, have never discovered an industrial society, and can conceive of no self-interest but that of grabbing the loot of the moment.
>
>The Objectivist ethics holds that human good does not require human sacrifices and cannot be achieved by the sacrifice of anyone to anyone. It holds that the rational interests of men do not clash -- that there is no conflict of interests among men who do not desire the unearned, who do not make sacrifices nor accept them, who deal with one another as traders, giving value for value.

u/[deleted] · 12 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

She believes selfishness is a virtue, and even wrote a book about it.

u/srosorcxisto · 6 pointsr/satanism

After the Satanic Bible, The Satanic Scriptures by Peter Gilmore or Devil's Notebook by Anton LaVey are great if you want another book directly about Satanism.

If you want to branch out into related philosophical works, I would suggest The Ego and His Own by Max Stirner, The Virtue of Selfishness by Ayn Rand or The Gay Science by Friedrich Nietzsche.

u/DJWhamo · 5 pointsr/Libertarian

Rand was a very polarizing figure, but if you divorce the philosophy from the individual, she actually did bring something to the table. At the risk of sounding like an ad, if anyone is truly interested, check out Objectivism in One Lesson by Andrew Bernstein. It's a lot easier to follow than The Virtue of Selfishness, which is the closest thing I could find to a manifesto by Rand herself.

u/sdtrader · 4 pointsr/Anarcho_Capitalism

These various “desirable” scientific achievements are just one more example of what Frédéric Bastiat called that which is seen. You can always see clearly what the government has created. The fallacy is to not think about the unseen: What would people have done with the resources had they not been confiscated from them in the first place?

Ayn Rand said it very well too:

> “The unanswered and unanswerable question in all of their “desirable” goals is: To whom? Desires and goals presuppose beneficiaries. Is science desirable? To whom? Not to the Soviet serfs who die of epidemics, filth, starvation, terror and firing squads—while some bright young men wave to them from space capsules circling over their human pigsties. And not to the American father who died of heart failure brought on by overwork, struggling to send his son through college—or to the boy who could not afford college—or to the couple killed in an automobile wreck, because they could not afford a new car—or to the mother who lost her child because she could not afford to send him to the best hospital—not to any of those people whose taxes pay for the support of our subsidized science and public research projects.” (The Virtue of Selfishness, Chapter 10: Collectivized Ethics, 1963.)

u/LeVraiBleh · 3 pointsr/Libertarian
u/houinator · 3 pointsr/Libertarian

Ok, sure, but Rand was definitely talking about the former. She literally wrote a book about it: https://www.amazon.com/Virtue-Selfishness-Fiftieth-Anniversary/dp/0451163931

u/seriously_chill · 3 pointsr/Objectivism

> Perhaps you'd care to disclose the particulars of the metaphysical pincicples that cash out capitalism, and what the rational/axiomatic justification is for accepting them, then?

This is a start - http://campus.aynrand.org/more/selected-full-essays/

I know I sound like a broken record but it really helps to read and grok before seeking out discussions or debates.

u/Sword_of_Apollo · 1 pointr/philosophy

All evaluations are relational to someone doing the valuing, including moral evaluations. But this doesn't make them subjective, in the sense that there is still a fact of the matter. (See: Values Are Relational But Not Subjective for further explanation of this.)

Further, in The Virtue of Selfishness, Rand argues that, when long-term consequences are taken into account, there is no actual conflict of interests among people. (This position excludes some highly unusual, dire emergencies.)

u/MickJaggerSwagger · 1 pointr/relationships

Dude, stop being dumb. You're not going to make peace, and you're going to piss her off. And you know what? It doesn't fucking matter.

You are miserable, this is toxic, and you constantly act as if you want it. Dozens of people have told you this many, many times.

Start thinking about yourself, for once. This may be drastic, but you need the kick in the pants. Learn yo' self, fool.

u/FreezinginNH · 1 pointr/INTP

That was Cambodia.
http://i.imgur.com/LmfiYRj.jpg

Again, theory is not reality. Humans are greedy. Humans are out for their own self interests. Given absolute power some can be absolute tyrants. Read some Ayn Rand. The total opposite of what you've been reading. The Virtue of Selfishness is a pretty easy read. Rather idealistic but a good place to start. Always look at both side of an issue. I have a MyYahoo page with a dozen news feeds RSS'd to it, including Peoples World.

u/ngoni · 1 pointr/Conservative

Philosophy: Who Needs It is a better introduction. If that makes sense then move on to The Virtue of Selfishness

u/modern_quill · 1 pointr/satanism

So... I'm writing up another post in notepad with a lot of Reddit comment formatting code and whatnot as a starter for creating quality stickies. Here's what I'm working with currently. There will be more to come. Feedback is welcome:


***


Link to previous Q&A sticky: Sticky 1, Sticky 2



Unlike many other subreddits, we at /r/Satanism enjoy nearly complete freedom of speech. The tradeoff for that free speech is that sometimes you will be exposed to ideas or opinions that you don't agree with. Keep in mind that bad behavior and not bad ideas will get people banned from this subreddit. As Satanists most often believe in stratification, the voting buttons in /r/Satanism can be used to that end. Because of this, moderators like myself likely will not remove links to sites that you would expect to be removed from other subreddits.


***


FAQ:


Note: This FAQ is written by moderator of /r/Satanism and member of the Church of Satan, /u/modern_quill. I am trying to remain unbiased and fact-based in these Q&A responses, so if you feel that I have somehow misrepresented your organization or philosophy, please let me know and we can work together to make the appropriate corrections.





Q: What is Satanism?


A: This is a simple question, but it has a complex answer because it depends on who you ask. Satanism as a philosophy and religion was first codified by Anton Szandor LaVey in his 1969 publication of The Satanic Bible. Some people refer to this secular Satanism as "LaVeyan Satanism" as a nod to Anton LaVey. The Satanic Bible borrows from the works of Might is Right by Ragnar Redbeard, Ayn Rand's Objectivism, and Frederich Nietzche's Der Wille zur Macht. This is the most widely practiced form of Satanism and is championed by the Church of Satan (CoS) to this day. At its most basic definition, "LaVeyan Satanism" is about living the best life that
you want to live, and bending the world around you to your will to achieve that goal. A Satanist sees themselves as their own God. There is, of course, much more to Satanism than that very basic definition, but we expect people to do their own research as well. Most LaVeyan Satanists will simply call it Satanism, as there is only one form of Satanism from the Church of Satan's perspective. Members of the recently formed secular organization called The Satanic Temple (TST), by comparison, see Satanism as political activism. The Satanic Temple often makes news headlines with their efforts to establish a separation of church and state and do not include The Satanic Bible as part of their organization's canon, but rather The Revolt of the Angels by Anatole France. There are also theistic Satanists, some believe in a literal Satan and some do not. Ask a theist like /u/Ave_Melchom what they believe and they'll likely share their thoughts with you, but you probably won't find very many theists that share the same philosophy. There are also more esoteric organizations such as the Temple of Set (ToS), which was formed by former Church of Satan member Michael Aquino after infighting within the organization in 1975 caused many theistic members to split away and become Setians. /u/Three_Scarabs and /u/CodeReaper moderate /r/Setianism subreddit and are a wealth of information on the subject. There are also organizations that fall into a more neo-nazi ideology such as the now defunct Order of Nine Angles (ONA or O9A) and self-stylized "Spiritual Satanists" of the Joy of Satan (JoS), which are often not tolerated by other members of this subreddit. The words, "Fuck off, Nazi!" have become somewhat of a meme on /r/Satanism.





Q: If Satanists don't believe in Satan, why call it Satanism at all? Why not Humanism?


LaVeyan A: Modern secular Satanists see humans as just another animal within the greater animal kingdom, no better than our avian, reptilian, or mammalian friends. Our technology and our intellectual advancements may have placed us at the top of the food chain, but it has merely encouraged humans to be the most vicious animals of all. To us, Satan is a metaphor that represents our strength, our pride, our intellect, our carnality, and all of the so-called sins as they lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification. The Hebrew word Satan simply means adversary, and Satanists take that adversarial stance to a great many things in their lives; the way we approach an issue, the way we tackle a problem, the way we overcome an obstacle. While Humanists may try to live like Bill & Ted and be excellent to eachother, a Satanist recognizes that emotions like anger, even hate are natural to the human animal and we shouldn't feel guilty for such natural inclinations. While Christians may turn the other cheek when wronged, you can be sure that a Satanist will have their revenge, with interest.


*

Q: Do you sacrifice or molest children/animals? Do you drink blood?*

LaVeyan A: No. Sacrifice is a
Christian concept that was projected on to innocent Satanists during the "Satanic Panic" of the 80's and early 90's by charlatan law enforcement "consultants" and Christian religious "experts". One trait common to Satanists is their love of life as Satanists view life as the greatest of indulgences; children and animals represent the purest forms of life and imagination that there are. In fact, the abuse of children and animals is forbidden by the Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth. Also, why would we want to drink blood? Christians* are the ones that (symbolically) eat the flesh and drink the blood of their savior. I'd rather enjoy a nice scotch.


Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth


  1. Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.

  2. Do not tell your troubles to others unless you are sure they want to hear them.

  3. When in another’s lair, show him respect or else do not go there.

  4. If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat him cruelly and without mercy.

  5. Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.

  6. Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved.

  7. Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained.

  8. Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself.

  9. Do not harm little children.

  10. Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.

  11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.


    ***

    More FAQ Below - (10,000 character maximum per post.)

u/Scottmk4 · 0 pointsr/DebateAnAtheist

> You can judge people, but you're judging them by your standards (or your group's standards), not an absolute standard.

Such a judgement, absent a reference to reality as you insist it must be, is just irrelevant personal preference. George Washington = Stalin in this paradigm.

>In fact, the only places I've ever seen the idea of an absolute standard being defined is in religious texts.

May I suggest you look into Objectivism then.

Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand

and

The Virtue of Selfishness

are probably the most relevant.

u/mrhymer · 0 pointsr/philosophy

This is like priests trying to be celibate. It will end badly over time. Go the other way and embrace self completely. Throw out the selflessness and destructive altruism from your life. Read this

u/cometparty · -1 pointsr/Economics

Well, the wealthy have never been that enlightened, but I think people just stopped feeling guilty about it after reading Ayn Rand. She tried to rebrand it as a virtue, and I think it caught on due to a lot of anti-Soviet sentiment at the time.