Instant redemption is a hallmark of the descent into insanity known as “being saved” by the Christers. Those people aside, it’s extremely unlikely that any person can suddenly say “Dang! My brain’s been off for the past 10 years, lemme turn it back on. There – all better”. So one should not expect that a declaration of “all better now” translates into a re-evaluation of a person. Actions, over the long term, are what will persuade rational people.
This analogy made me smile; it made me think of all the deux-ex-machina (I hope I spelled that right) moments of the old Greek tragedies, where suddenly some great consciousness comes in and fixes everything all at once. I think the realization that “dang! my brain’s been turned off” or “dang! I’ve been evading a lot of aspects of reality” can happen suddenly, but the process to fix such flaws is not something that one’s own consciousness can even fix so quickly.
I was thinking about the process of concept formation today and couldn’t help but wonder if self-improvement isn’t really just the formation of the concept “me.” I know that identity is an axiomatic concept, but as I understand it that concept speaks only to the fact that “I exist,” and doesn’t delve into the more abstracted concepts of consciousness that are involved in self-perception. Just like any concept formation, aside from those tied directly to sensory perception and the axioms themselves, self-improvement is a process that involves many steps; steps that begin in honestly accepting reality and perceiving it for what it is. From there, we begin to form definitions for all the things that we do, and then that helps us to start thinking about what values we may have and why (an abstract thought process, no?). Once we understand what our values are, we can begin putting them into a meaningful hierarchy. And finally, we can begin acting in pursuit of those values. We can live by what we say. When one begins to live as they say, integrity falls into place and then one’s actions begin to speak for themselves. Actions of integrity are very real to perceive, and a rational person I suspect would be able to spot them easily.
But changing one’s self is, as we all seem to agree, a process. Even Rand’s heroes and heroines undergo this process (though I think Galt’s process occured prior to where the events of the novel begin, but I think he would have had to have gone through such a process none the less). Some people are able to go through this process when they are young, some people when they are old. For some people the process is short, for some it is longer. BUt it remains a process in all instances. Every individual will be unique in regard to the length their process requires as his or her particular hierarchy of values, and admissions of flaws to overcome, may vary. It’s a nice thought to think it could be fixed suddenly, but it really can’t. Maybe that’s where the general pessimism toward the notion of someone really changing comes from: it takes longer than most people (esp those that were skeptical to begin with) are willing to stick around to see. I think the resolution to begin the process can be thrown by a mental switch rather suddenly, but it takes continuous and consistent effort to maintain that forward motion; a motion that perhaps never ceases for a rationale person who is constantly striving to better themselves in some way. Am I wrong to think there is a great danger in thinking that living morally ever becomes automatized? It seems like you always have to keep cognition going in full gear, and constantly weigh new incoming data with previous conceptions, etc. in every situation, even in regard to self-perception. It is still a process, but it is a process where you constantly have to keep throwing that switch over and over again to make it meaningful to you, first and foremost, and to make it acknowledgeable by others as a bonus. One can believe in their ability to change, but they must CONSTANTLY act to pursue it. You can’t just say, well I fixed that, let’s move on. That is, as you say, just like the notion of forgiveness in religion and it’s abhorable. Forgiving one’s self is possible, but the cause and effect of the effect must be taken into account; the act of forgiveness, nor change, can stand on its own. It, like everything one has to learn, requires proof. More than anything it requires effort, and perhaps only the individual trying to change can understand the effort involved. That may be another reason why it’s hard for others to see or to believe.