Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Objectivists: Made or Born?

Rate this topic


Dagny

Recommended Posts

I always liked Ducktales as a child. The whole story of Uncle Scrooge coming from Scotland and earning his fortune through hard work really appealed to me (an immigrant myself). Little did I realize I was on my way to finding Objectivism. Here's a question....is an Objectivist made or born? Are there certain things that had to happen in their life to lead them there or could anyone become an Objectivist if they just read Ayn Rand?

I think a lot of the reasons why I loved Ayn Rand's works were because I already had the foundations for it (from my parents, school, books and events that happened in my life). Please don't misunderstand this as determinism. I obviously don't believe in fate. But I do think that there are certain things that happen in people's lives that lead them in certain directions. I would like to hear everyone else's thoughts. Did you watch certain cartoons...did you always like science...etc?

My husband, though he is really intelligent and has good values, says will never be an Objectivist (yes...he's read the books). I think it is because he doesn't have the same background that I do. At least that is the only reason I've been able to come up with.

example:

fave cartoon as a child: Ducktales

parents fave motto: "work hard, do your best"

fave subjects : science and math

fave books as a child : detective ones with logic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....is an Objectivist made or born? Are there certain things that had to happen in their life to lead them there or could anyone become an Objectivist if they just read Ayn Rand?

The Jesuits used to say (paraphrasing), "Give me a child for his first seven years and you can do what you want with him after that." I think there's a lot of truth to the idea that the first few years of a person's life have tremendous impact on the rest.

There can be many reasons why a particular person would simply never become an Objectivist. But a child who is a strong valuer, who trusts his mind, and who asks questions about everything shows good promise as a future Objectivist. Whether that promise lasts into adulthood is another matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Objectivists are self-made.

I think there are some things that have to emerge early. An element of pride has to be present early, and I suspect it's even more important than the other aspects early on. For example children with pride may grow up with a bad start, uneducated, poor, but the pride will drive them to develop their reason, independence, etc., as they grow. Conversely, a child may be taught by their parents to be honest, productive, rational, but without pride, they could abandon virtues over time.

Most Objectivists are not children of Objectivists, and I think many if not most came from early environments at least somewhat hostile to Objectivism.

I worry about this with my 3-year old. There are some things I can do to help her become a great person, but I think there are some things I can't and shouldn't try to control.

As I mentioned in another thread, I read Atlas Shrugged at age 9, but that wasn't the key factor in me later becoming a student of Objectivism. I think the key was the pride that led me to decide, "this summer I'm going to read an even bigger book, the longest novel I can find in the library."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it would be very hard for somebody who doesn't have at least some of the Objectivist values already to become an Objectivist. For instance, I know a person who I know will never become an Objectivist. Why? He lacks the virtues of rationality, self-esteem, and independence of thought. There are many corrolaries to these virtues but, if you are lacking in those three, it is nearly impossible to reach the person with reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if you're a true Objectivist, then you would believe that we are born tabula rasa, meaning that you have no ideas, Objectivist or otherwise. I think it's all about how you're raised and socialized. Conscious choice enters at the appropriate level of maturity. While I'm not an Objectivist, I have strong leanings in that direction, yet I was raised as a Christian. However, my parents, despite being Christian, are very individualistic. My first words, and no I am no making this up, were "I need money." My parents gave me a few coins and I went and put them in my room. My next words were "I need mo money."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if you're a true Objectivist, then you would believe that we are born tabula rasa, meaning that you have no ideas, Objectivist or otherwise.  I think it's all about how you're raised and socialized.  Conscious choice enters at the appropriate level of maturity.  While I'm not an Objectivist, I have strong leanings in that direction, yet I was raised as a Christian.  However, my parents, despite being Christian, are very individualistic.  My first words, and no I am no making this up, were "I need money."  My parents gave me a few coins and I went and put them in my room.  My next words were "I need mo money."

Well, that beats my first words of "Pizza!!!" :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it would be very hard for somebody who doesn't have at least some of the Objectivist values already to become an Objectivist. For instance, I know a person who I know will never become an Objectivist. Why? He lacks the virtues of rationality, self-esteem, and independence of thought. There are many corrolaries to these virtues but, if you are lacking in those three, it is nearly impossible to reach the person with reason.

That's sort of a pessimistic view. Before somewhere either my freshman or sophomore year of college, I was a hopelessly fundamentalist Christian. I wasn't all that devout, but I had a habit of burying my head in the sand whenever someone challenged my faith. I am no longer a Christian and have strong Objectivist leanings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if you're a true Objectivist, then you would believe that we are born tabula rasa, meaning that you have no ideas, Objectivist or otherwise.  I think it's all about how you're raised and socialized.  Conscious choice enters at the appropriate level of maturity. 

Two people can come from the same parents and the same background and end up being entirely different philosophically. My older sister always said that a good person should put others needs first. I always thought she was on drugs. And guess what? Now she is! But that's not the point.

I have a brother who is big into collectivist thinking and 'social justice.' He knows that this is antithetical to everything I believe in so we simply don't talk politics. We were raised in the same environment though. I have to believe that nature sometimes precludes nurture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's sort of a pessimistic view.  Before somewhere either my freshman or sophomore year of college, I was a hopelessly fundamentalist Christian.  I wasn't all that devout, but I had a habit of burying my head in the sand whenever someone challenged my faith.  I am no longer a Christian and have strong Objectivist leanings.

I also came from a fundamentalist background but realized much later that I already had some of the Objectivist values in me.

For example: I remember having a heated arguement with the pastor of my church because he was using an irrational arguement to try and wish away one of those difficult passages in the Bible that fundys want to ignore without truly explaining it (his response was, "That was then and this is now!" i.e. truth is not static).

Of course, bear in mind this is only my own experience and I can't really speak for anyone else on the matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to have serious problems with the way my fellow Christians would argue too. I have an essay (that's actually the first chapter in a book that I'd like to write at some point) about my journey through Christianity that I've considered posting in the member's essays sections...I just don't know if it's good enough to post it yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a brother who is big into collectivist thinking and 'social justice.'  He knows that this is antithetical to everything I believe in so we simply don't talk politics.  We were raised in the same environment though.  I have to believe that nature sometimes precludes nurture.

I don't know if this describes my sister or not, b/c she doesn't really get into politics, but she does strike me as being a hippie, and I know she voted for Kerry. I love my sister to death, but don't think I could have a political conversation w/ her without ripping her head off.

Is that last statement sort of antithetical to Objectivist epistemology? I agree with the Lockeian view that there are no innate ideas. We have innate mechanisms that allow us to form ideas...that's one reason why some people are smarter than others--they have better cognitive mechanisms. But that doesn't mean that they are born with better ideas...just that they are born with better abilities to discover those ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I mentioned in another thread, I read Atlas Shrugged at age 9, but that wasn't the key factor in me later becoming a student of Objectivism. I think the key was the pride that led me to decide, "this summer I'm going to read an even bigger book, the longest novel I can find in the library."

That's awesome! Just curious--was Atlas Shrugged in your elementary school library, or was this a public library you went to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to have serious problems with the way my fellow Christians would argue too.  I have an essay (that's actually the first chapter in a book that I'd like to write at some point) about my journey through Christianity that I've considered posting in the member's essays sections...I just don't know if it's good enough to post it yet.

I'll be watching for it. I'm always quite interested to hear perspectives from other ex-Christians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if this describes my sister or not, b/c she doesn't really get into politics, but she does strike me as being a hippie, and I know she voted for Kerry.  I love my sister to death, but don't think I could have a political conversation w/ her without ripping her head off.

Is that last statement sort of antithetical to Objectivist epistemology?  I agree with the Lockeian view that there are no innate ideas.  We have innate mechanisms that allow us to form ideas...that's one reason why some people are smarter than others--they have better cognitive mechanisms.  But that doesn't mean that they are born with better ideas...just that they are born with better abilities to discover those ideas.

Aside from intelligence differences, I was thinking more along the line of preference for thinking as opposed to feeling. Someone who prefers logic might look at a hungry person and say he jacked off his money and opportunities and therefore got what he earned. A more emotional person might say oh look this guy is hungry. He is *unfortunate* (as if people just luck up on results). It is my opinion that collectivists are more emotional than logical and I was postulating that there might be an inherent preference to personality type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I view accepting Objectivism as almost a series of tests. As you learn more about it, you learn a lot of things that defy social conventions and traditional ideas. So, neglecting those that become "Objectivists" to be "different," it takes independence and intellectual honesty to oneself. I don't think the subjects one is interested in matter that much as such--philosophy applies to everything. I definitely see how math/science interests would keep one more logical and open to reason than a field like literature (and university English departments) would, but I don't think the subject is the root cause.

I think the most important quality is independent thought (or the propensity to discover how to think independently). Environmental influences can definitely impact this, especially over long periods of time, but a significant amount of it comes from within.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from intelligence differences, I was thinking more along the line of preference for thinking as opposed to feeling.  Someone who prefers logic might look at a hungry person and say he jacked off his money and opportunities and therefore got what he earned.  A more emotional person might say oh look this guy is hungry.  He is *unfortunate* (as if people just luck up on results).  It is my opinion that collectivists are more emotional than logical and I was postulating that there might be an inherent preference to personality type.

Or the "feeling" person might just get really pissed off at the bum for wasting his life and yell at him. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since when has emotion become an automatic vice, and capacity for syllogism an automatic virtue?

Have you guys ever heard Noam Chomsky speak? He is one of the most powerful and logical speakers I know of today, and his errors lie buried underneath mountains of very logical arguments, arguments usually devoid of emotions and delivered in a leveled monotone.

Reason is important, crucial, but let's not hold Vulcans as the ideal here.

---

Stephen Speicher has said something very insightful on these forums recently. He said that to him, a person who was a valuer but not necessarily an Objectivist was more important than a person who was not a valuer but knew all of Objectivism by heart. Think about that, that really says a tremendous deal about relationship between the heart and the mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Objectivists: Born, Raised, then Made.

As for the raised part… the most important thing I want to give my children is a flawless methodology. They will have to learn to love their lives for themselves – but gosh darn it they are going to think correctly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing you are born with is the capacity to learn. After that, it all depends on your environment and interests at a young age.

For instance, my parents divorced when I was six years old, and my mother took no more from my father than what belonged to her. We were living on the meager child support, which amounted to about $10k/yr for my sister and I. We had hard times, but my mother never took a dime of welfare money because she said she'd be ashamed of it. Instead, she learned a trade and worked from the home; today that little basement business turned into a nice sized corparation.

It's the determination that children learn from their parents at a young age that has a profound influence. These experiences could be positive like mine, or negative. For instance, if your father was always coming home drunk or with other women, one might turn to Objectivism to learn what values are or the meaning of love.

I had always been raised on "conservative" values. By "conservative" I don't mean politically, but I understood that happiness wasn't whimical and there were consquences for my actions. So, when I picked up AS this summer, I knew exactly what Ayn Rand was saying about morality.. that I didn't have to return to morality, but to discover the true definition (somewhat based on altruism at the time thanks to being raised a Catholic.. we can't all be perfect :ninja: )

So, to sum up:

1/ You are born with the capacity to learn

2/ Your parents are important in shaping your outlook on life, whether positive or negative

3/ You need some kind of values system as a prerequisite, even if they are religious in nature

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ditto what everyone says about it not being inborn. Since Objectivism holds that we have no instincts and must learn everything, that goes without saying.

Environment definitely has an influence; it's basically the stage, the "ground-zero" from which you embark. In my case, where I grew up, at any given time, there were usually just one or two kids my age in the neighborhood. So, I spent a fair amount of time finding ways to amuse myself, from hiking, building things, drawing, etc. developing self-reliance. Also, my father's a chemist, so rationality was in my household; it was assumed.

This is not to say it was a done deal, because after high school I was probably more of a subjectivist (that evil false cousin of individualism) than anything. I wish I had found Objectivism about in about 9th grade, rather than in college as it actually happened...

P.S. - I would not have read Atlas Shrugged at age 9 because: ...no color pictures! :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...