Confessional

[Here_to_Confess]

Hello.

I am new to this forum as a member, but am a long-time reader of the posts here. I am certain that what I wish to request is highly unusual, so if any moderators object, please let me know and I will withdraw this topic.

I have a long list of "sins" against Objectivism that I wish to confess. However, I wish to retain my anonymity as much as possible. I am not sure what the Objectivist view of anonymous confession is, whether it is immoral to hide one's identity to protect one's reputation, so again I ask that any posters who are very knowledgeable about Objectivism tell me whether my request is immoral or no. Only if you agree that my request is moral will I go ahead with my confession. Otherwise, I will drop out of this forum and not trouble you again.

Thank you very much.

[IAmMetaphysical]

First of all there are no "sins against Objectivism" since Objectivist ethics is egoistic any "sins" you commit are against YOURSELF, since it was your self interest you betrayed. Morality is not an end in itself, it is a means to an end, an end which is life qua man.

There is no need to confess, because confession of past wrongdoings does not change the fact that they happened. The best thing for you to do is to realize your past mistakes and not do them again. You don't need us to help you with that unless you need something you don't understand explained to you.

This is not Christianity.

[Here_to_Confess]

Yes, I am aware of how fundamentally different Objectivism is from religion qua morality. I am not seeking forgiveness from people I don't know. I guess I should have been clearer: what I AM seeking is the answer to the question of whether, given the things I have done and continue to do to some extent, I am FUNDAMENTALLY immoral, in the sense of being beyond hope of improvement. Further, even if there is hope for improvement, that does not erase what I have done in the past. Does it not shut me out forever from being considered a moral person?

[IAmMetaphysical]

Why do you care about being considered a "moral person"? Is morality an end in itself?? Should you goal of following morality be to become a moral person, or is being a moral person a means to a higher end?

It is never impossible for you to start being moral since you possess volition and you always have a choice to be moral or not. If you want to be moral start choosing the good consistently. But this won't be enough alone, you must want to be moral. To do that you must want to live, and to live successfully, to want that you have to realize/understand that reality is knowable and that you can successfully deal with it and command nature to do for you what you want it to do (while obeying its nature).

[Here_to_Confess]

Yes, I realize that morality is not an end in itself, and that I do have volition. Still, do you believe that a soul is infinitely elastic, that evil deeds after evil deeds can pile up on it and there is still a chance for it to be moral again?

Ayn Rand once said that, rather than "Do not judge others lest ye yourself be judge", "Judge and prepare to be judged". How can I have the ability to judge others now that I have lost that unimpeachable character? If some moral relativist demands of me, "Are you perfect? Have you never been immoral?", what response can I possibly give that person? "Yes, I have been immoral, but I'm good now"? To me, that sounds like a murderer pleaing to the judge, "Yeah, I have done some awful things, but I'm gonna make up for it." The rational response to that is: "You can't make up for it. You're evil through and through. The best you can do is die."

My feelings about this can be summarized by paraphrasing a quote from the movie "Wall Street": "As much as I wanted to be John Galt, I guess I'll always be myself."

[tommyedison]

Yes, I am aware of how fundamentally different Objectivism is from religion qua morality. I am not seeking forgiveness from people I don't know. I guess I should have been clearer: what I AM seeking is the answer to the question of whether, given the things I have done and continue to do to some extent, I am FUNDAMENTALLY immoral, in the sense of being beyond hope of improvement.

There is no such thing as FUNDAMENTALLY immoral. Any man can be moral no matter how low he has fallen if he wants to. However no one can escape the consequences of his actions.

Further, even if there is hope for improvement, that does not erase what I have done in the past. Does it not shut me out forever from being considered a moral person?

Why are you so worried about what others think of you? The most important thing is what you think of yourself.

[Here_to_Confess]

There is no such thing as FUNDAMENTALLY immoral. Any man can be moral no matter how low he has fallen if he wants to. However no one can escape the consequences of his actions.

Why are you so worried about what others think of you? The most important thing is what you think of yourself.

Would you say that mass murderers are capable of eventually becoming completely moral? And would it matter if they were? They would still have their evil acts on their conscience.

This isn't about social metaphysics. Indeed, my concern is EXACTLY the last thing you said, "what you think of yourself". I want that feeling of non-contradictory happiness and self-esteem that is the goal of Objectivist ethics. Yet, I cannot help but feel that so long as I have done things that now disgust me and fill me with self-contempt, I can never have that feeling.

[Capitalism Forever]

OK, fess up: Whom did you kill?

[ggdwill]

Hi fellow Newbie,

I think what you're talking about is very important. I wasn't going to to share anything, but I felt I had to. In fact, I wasn't doing much more than skimming over this discussion until the last thing you said caught my eye.

I can't really offer any advice and I haven't really given this issue any clear thought. I think what was pointed out earlier that all that matters is what you think of yourself is very important.

All I can do is share a little bit of myself and hope that it helps. It helps me just to write these thoughts down.

I have been studying Objectivism for about 5 years now, and it has become such a part of me that I don't even realize it. Despite alot of effort, I have never been able to remember what I felt like and how I approached simple tasks of thinking before I discovered it. I like to think that I've always been this way, and that Objectivism just gave me the words to understand it, but I don't know. I certainly entertained and even advocated alot of bad ideas in my past. Everyday I have to remind myself just how different I am from most of the people I come in contact with - usually not in the content of my thinking, but in my passion for it. It is a very difficult and painful task, but it sure is better than losing my cool or becoming zealously arrogant. I used to do that alot and I think it has cost me in ways I will never know.

I struggle daily with the job of weighing the pain of being different with the pride of knowing that I'm right. Alot of things factor in to how I will feel about a given situation, but it always boils down to one of those two outcomes.

As an added tangle, when I reflect, and realize that those two outcomes are at odds and that I have not been consistent, I can feel even more shameful and disappointed in myself. This is where practicing forgiveness and compassion are very important to me. We need to accept ourselves for who we are as individuals, and it's alot easier said than done. Personally, I practice meditation whenever I can, and I cultivate the habit of mindfulness continuously. Those two definitely reinforce one another and help overall.

But anyways, when it comes to actions, I have alot of regrets. It's even more painful since some of them involve actions that I'm not sure are wrong - even in the context of my life. They are kind of like open wounds that I am still trying to heal through my thinking and learning. As for doing things that I know to be immoral, I have done them, but I honestly do not feel guilt about them any more. I have become such a different person in the last 5 years, partly because of the natural process of maturing but mostly because of Objectivism, that I don't even remember the feelings I had while I was doing those things.

Another painful type of regret that I have involves things that I have done that I know to be moral, yet for whatever reason are socially or legally unacceptable. As you might expect, this can bring out alot of anger. It does, but for me it comes out discreetly in little bursts during private moments or in cold silence. More often, I fall into a kind of passive resignation. I don't know what either one is doing to me psychologically in the long run, but I do know that neither is going to solve the problem itself.

For instance, right now I'm facing serious legal trouble and I just don't know how to feel about it. In many ways my future hangs in the balance, but I just can't appreciate the reality of the situation. Sometimes I can and it hits me like a ton of bricks, but most of the time the certainty I have surrounding the issue dulls any intense emotional experience I might have because of it.

Recently, I was rereading a portion towards the end of Atlas Shrugged. It is a description of Henry Rearden's thoughts and feelings as he watches the proceedings of his divorce from Lillian. His detachment and his calm were so clear to me. It's as if the pages were speaking to me. I thought that if he were me, he would do the same thing. I am still weighing what I will do to resolve my problem, but honestly the biggest challenge I have faced since this started is warding off the guilt. Ayn Rand was very right in her discussions of undeserved guilt. It is a filthy emotion. The more I become aware of it within me, the more I am becoming convinced that it is perhaps the most destructive emotion on Earth. Another part of Atlas Shrugged that I revisited that literally brought tears to my eyes when I read it involves Galt telling Dagny about the Gulch. He says: You have seen the Atlantis they were seeking, it is here, it exists - but one must enter is naked and alone, with no rags from the falsehoods of centuries, whith the purest clarity of mind - not an innocent heart, but that which is much rarer: an intransigent mind - as one's only possession and key."

If you're feeling it, I implore you not to let it envelope you.

Anyways, I know what you have just read may seem useless and it is just my rambling, but I think sharing emotions - or at least recognizing them, both good and bad - is an invaluable exercise. So if you did take anything away from reading this, I'm glad. I know I did by writing it.

[Maarten]

Still, why does it matter if you are moral or not? Like IAm said, it's not an end in itself to be moral. It is impossible to change the past at this point, the only thing you can do about it is try to learn and never fall to those depths again.

If you are primarily interested in how you feel about yourself, then why are you trying to get someone here to tell you whether you can be moral or not? If what someone here says truly matters that much, then you are not independent in this aspect, we may offer you advice but we cannot simply say something to make all your troubles go away..

[Here_to_Confess]

OK, fess up: Whom did you kill?

With all due respect, I would appreciate not hearing sarcastic or insensitive remarks. (Unless you were being serious, in which case I can assure you that I have not sunk THAT low.)

If you're feeling it, I implore you not to let it envelope you.

If you mean 'unearned guilt', that's not what I'm feeling. I DID earn my guilt.

I originally meant to write a long post asking how I can go on with my guilt, how I can continue to preach and practice Objectivism knowing that I have deeply betrayed it in the past. I was going to ask, How should I respond to a moral relativist who retorts with, "Well, nobody's perfect. Are you perfect? Have you never done anything wrong?" And then I came up with an answer: a good response in such a situation is, "Yes, I have done wrong things, things of which I am ashamed. My shame in committing them proves that morality is absolute. If morality were relative, I could feel neither shame nor pride in what I did." It sounds, though, like a "feelings are facts" argument, which of course is fallacious. Any ideas on how to improve it? My whole aim is to reconcile my past failings with my committment to Objectivism, both internally and externally (i.e., to prove to myself and to others that I am no hypocrite).

[IAmMetaphysical]

Think about it in terms of conjugation. You want to be moral, you WERE immoral, if you now ARE moral, then you ARE a moral person who once WAS immoral at times.

Also: being able to judge someone does not require that one be perfectly moral in one's choices. What one needs to judge is a clear understanding of morality, not necessarily an adherance to it. To be able to say "You're bad" one does not need to be good, one merely needs to know what constitutes good and bad, because as you have said numerous times, YOU were bad, how are you to judge your own guilt if being guilty makes you unable to judge?

What a moral relativist seeks is to drag the good down by saying there is no good, because he knows he's evil and wishes to escape judgment by destroying the good, so all there is is bad.

Edited May 19, 2006 by IAmMetaphysical

[RationalBiker]

If you have earned guilt, perhaps one way to resolve it within yourself is to make right those things that you can. For instance, if you once stole something from someone can you now offer them restitution?

Are their things you have done that cannot be undone or repaired no matter what you do? If that is the case, you will have to try to accept that. If it can't be undone, it can't be undone.

I don't know that you can just magically "wash" away your "sins" of yesterday, but I think you can make them fade away slowly by changing your behavior NOW and demonstrating to yourself that you are not the same person you used to be.

[Maarten]

But especially when your wrongs were extensive, the onus of proof is on you to prove that you are better than before, and you are likely to run into some pretty heavy skepticism from those people who knew you back then. It is not easy to change the way someone thinks about you, especially not if it was at one time an earned judgment.

[Groovenstein]

I want that feeling of non-contradictory happiness and self-esteem that is the goal of Objectivist ethics. Yet, I cannot help but feel that so long as I have done things that now disgust me and fill me with self-contempt, I can never have that feeling.

You may not be able to. I don't know your specific situation. The thing about doing evil things is that they're really hard, if not impossible, to get rid of, at least in my experience. I still feel bad sometimes about things I did many years ago. But overall, I am quite happy, because I have realized my mistakes and have no doubt they will never arise again. Sadly, I am not able to make restitution for some of my mistakes. Maybe you can, and if so, you should really think about following RationalCop's suggestion and doing so, even if it's just one at a time.

Even if you can't be fully happy, you might still be able to find satisfaction. Things like admitting to yourself that what you did was wrong and making restitution to your victims can help. While it should certainly not be your goal for the future to be merely satisfied, with regard to the past, that could be something to try to achieve. Again, I don't know your specific situation, but achieving some satisfaction about your past mistakes could help you get along with the rest of your life, however long it may be.

That's just as far as you are concerned. With regard to others, you should fully expect them to be skeptical, fearful, or whatever state is appropriate in light of whatever it is you did, when you did it, and what they know about you since then. If you stole lots of money, expect not to be trusted to handle someone's money. If you committed a sexual crime, expect not to be trusted about romantic partners and small children. You will just have to deal with this, but it is hopefully something that can be managed over the long term.

[tommyedison]

I want that feeling of non-contradictory happiness and self-esteem that is the goal of Objectivist ethics. Yet, I cannot help but feel that so long as I have done things that now disgust me and fill me with self-contempt, I can never have that feeling.

That will take time. I would say atleast 2-3 years or even more depending on your current state. Changing your sense of life is not the same as changing your shirt. Just rely on your mind and be rational.

[dbc]

I am still curious as to what you wanted to confess.

[DavidOdden]

Only if you agree that my request is moral will I go ahead with my confession.

Evasion and dishonesty are immoral. If you have a problem that you want to talk about (honestly, without making stuff up), you can do that here. You could have even just said what things you did, without using your real name, since most people here don't use their real names. But I would say that you should now own up to what you've done without playing games, since your integrity has been cast in a poor light from the first post. Don't ask for forgiveness in advance.

[ggdwill]

Evasion and dishonesty are immoral. If you have a problem that you want to talk about (honestly, without making stuff up), you can do that here. You could have even just said what things you did, without using your real name, since most people here don't use their real names. But I would say that you should now own up to what you've done without playing games, since your integrity has been cast in a poor light from the first post. Don't ask for forgiveness in advance.

Wait a minute, he can't use a fake name since that name may end up belonging to a real person. And as we have been so eloquently reminded lately, that would be an act of theft. Why risk committing yet another immoral act in the process of confession past ones?

[DavidOdden]

Wait a minute, he can't use a fake name since that name may end up belonging to a real person. And as we have been so eloquently reminded lately, that would be an act of theft.

Good point. Well, I think THX 1144 is free (I'm surprised how may of the preceding numbers were already taken). Okay, I own the name Boris Quoque but I haven't used it for a long time, so she can use it for this purpose. Edited May 19, 2006 by DavidOdden

[JMeganSnow]

My whole aim is to reconcile my past failings with my committment to Objectivism, both internally and externally (i.e., to prove to myself and to others that I am no hypocrite).

Hypocrisy consists of espousing two contradictory ideas at the same time, not espousing one idea in the past, changing your mind, and espousing a new one in the present. Hypocrisy is most usually apparent in people that say one thing and do another, btw.

Human beings are not omniscient or omnipotent (and we're volitional in the bargain), so the possiblity of making errors or being evil always exists. If you act in accordance with wrong ideas, you're still acting morally: the problem lies in your understanding. Non-contradictory happiness and self-esteem don't require that you be born again to attain moral purity, what they do require is that you commit to being moral now and act on that commitment.

If you want, take a look at Atlas Shrugged. Look at the horrors that Reardan and Dagny both commit, Reardan by intentionally not applying his ethics to his wife, Dagny by her refusal to admit the nature of the looters. Yet in the end, they're free: they realized their mistakes and changed to a new path. They both lost tremendously (Reardan lost Dagny and his mills, Dagny lost her railroad), but the sense was that they had shed the old nightmare and could start over again.

In general, when you've acted wrongly in your life you lose something: a friendship, an opportunity, a job, money . . . something. THAT is the price you pay for wrongheadedness. You've already paid. If you're feeling guilt or shame, it's most likely because you know deep down that you haven't completely fixed the problem yet. Once you have, and down to the core where you'd never willingly act that way again, the guilt will dissipate, you'll accept the consequences, shed your skin, and move on.

It takes time though, and you have to work at it.

However, I urge you most sincerely NOT to confess. You've just met the people on this forum; why taint their view of you with a reiteration of your character flaws, imagined or real? The only result I can foresee is a lot of moralizing and snooty nose-elevation on the part of the other forum members, a great many of whom have character flaws (such as nosiness) of their own. You can certainly include ME in that statement.

Instead, let us take you as you are now. Post a few things. Let us see what you think and how you explain it. We can judge you perfectly on THAT information; we don't need to hear anything else.

(Worse, people may comisserate with you, and sharing misery doesn't help anyone in the long run: it just makes everyone feel worse.)

If the demon is really asleep, let it stay that way.

[Sherry]

.......

However, I urge you most sincerely NOT to confess. You've just met the people on this forum; why taint their view of you with a reiteration of your character flaws, imagined or real? The only result I can foresee is a lot of moralizing and snooty nose-elevation on the part of the other forum members, a great many of whom have character flaws (such as nosiness) of their own. You can certainly include ME in that statement.

Instead, let us take you as you are now. Post a few things. Let us see what you think and how you explain it. We can judge you perfectly on THAT information; we don't need to hear anything else.

(Worse, people may comisserate with you, and sharing misery doesn't help anyone in the long run: it just makes everyone feel worse.)

If the demon is really asleep, let it stay that way.

JMegan has an excellent point here.

If you are a different person, let your posts reflect who you are now. Let your past stay in the past. If you want to bring it up at a later time when you feel confident that you are really among friends go ahead.

There is a tendency today in this world for people to start confessing past sins to total or near strangers, perhaps to help form some kind of instant bond with them. I think that is a bad idea, something that perhaps sprung from self help groups...people just starting applying what went on in the groups to outside. Kinda scary. Finding common ground on negative experience only is usually a bad idea.

Objectivism isn't about making yourself looking in other people's eyes or being forgiven by other people. This isn't Catholicism. It is good to have a confidant, someone that understands the philosophy you are trying to live, absolutely! But, perhaps you need to find a few friends to "confess" these too, before you actually do such "confessing" to a bunch of strangers.

Perhaps the real problem you have is that you need more understanding of the philosophy you are trying to live. That is where I would focus my energies. After all, if Objectivism is an actual practical, working philosophy that really is for living or earth, than it requires no self sacrfice and shouldn't be so hard to live where you should have to even feel the need to do any confessing. This isn't religion.

Check your premises.

[KevinD]

Here_to_Confess, you claim to understand the difference between religious morality and Objectivist morality. I'm not at all sure that you do. You've said a number of things which imply that although you no doubt reject religious morality in content, you seem to, at least to some extent, accept it in form.

Particularly troubling is the statement you made at the start of this discussion, about your having committed "sins" against Objectivism, much as a Christian would speak of having sinned against God. As IAmMetaphysical pointed out, you can't "sin" against a secular philosophy: Objectivism provides you with a comprehensive worldview, including a code of moral values (i.e., principles) to guide your choices and actions, with the purpose of helping you to live successfully and achieve happiness. You speak too much as if you were the servant of Objectivism, not the other way around. If that's the case, then it's not at all surprising that you're now looking to Objectivists to pronounce a judgment upon your life and moral worth in general:

what I AM seeking is the answer to the question of whether, given the things I have done and continue to do to some extent, I am FUNDAMENTALLY immoral, in the sense of being beyond hope of improvement.

To continue to behave irrationally — i.e., to know full well that a given course of action is wrong, yet you still choose to undertake it — is absolutely, unequivocally immoral. But does taking such action, however egregious, make you "fundamentally" immoral? I can't even begin to imagine what that would mean in an Objectivist context, even given your definition. But in Christian terms, it sounds an awful lot like the doctrine of Original Sin.

I have to wonder if that's what you're really after here. Would you secretly like for someone will tell you that you are indeed beyond hope and redemption — that you are so depraved, on so deep a level, that you cannot possibly improve and thus will never enjoy grace (i.e., achieve self-esteem and happiness) — so what's the use in trying? Do you seek a kind of twisted sanction from us, one which will in effect permit you to continue to act destructively, since such is in your foul nature anyway?

Or perhaps you're hoping that you'll be told, after all of this fanfare and buildup, that your "sins" are in fact, mere minor transgressions — that you're making much too big a deal about them, and that you can rest assured knowing that you can still get into Heaven in spite of your (continuing) petty evils. Is that the kind of sanction you seek from us?

Objectivism rejects Original Sin, and the notion of "sin" in general, and any concept of right and wrong which places it outside of the volitional control of the individual. You're not damned by virtue of having been born human, and you're not morally disfigured today merely because a less mature and responsible version of you chose to undertake a wrong course of action yesterday. A person's moral worth is determined by him; by what he does, not necessarily by what he's done. Your past is your past; it's a fact, and like all facts it must be accepted and dealt with to the very best of your ability. Just as it would be dishonest to sweep past events under the rug and pretend that they never happened, so it's doubly dishonest to wallow in your feelings of guilt over bad decisions made in the past, while using such feelings as an excuse to continue behaving badly in the present.

[IAmMetaphysical]

Excellent posts JMeganSnow and Kevin Delaney, awesome! You know I admire you Jenni anyway, but you continue to make me happy everytime I read your thoughts.

[Here_to_Confess]

Thank you all for your responses. Some of them I felt were courteous, others rude, and still others hit me right where it hurts the most. But I do not seek pity, so I do not blame those who felt my posts were bloody foolish, or worse. I see that I have been subconsciously exploiting the intelligent posters of this forum by asking for their opinions on something that should be my own personal, private matter. I also see that, as far as Objectivism goes, I know far less than I thought. Well, I've taken my proverbial medicine. I shall cancel my account with this forum, and someday when I am wiser, I will return (with a more secular user name ). Goodbye.