Ayn Rand Friday, October 23, 2009
Posted by Tom in culture, faith, life, people, theology, thoughts.trackback
Atlas Shrugged. The Fountainhead. Classics by Ayn Rand. I have read the former but not the latter. Ayn Rand is a phenomenal writer with engaging story lines and, ohhhh boyyyy, a huge philosophical/political agenda.
So this is why I am surprised when I see “moral conservatives” such as Beck recommending her books and her web site. I am surprised when I see people I am related to who are some of the most staunch conservatives I know who quote Ayn Rand (but probably have never read anything by her) but will chastise anyone who quotes Ghandi or Wallis or Sider (you know Wallis and Sider, right? They are those nasty Christ-followers who happen to lean left on some issues).
This is why gets me about Rand. She embraces Objectivism (this is actually a philosophy she created). Objectivism declares that the moral purpose of one’s life is the pursuit of one’s own happiness (or rational self-interest).
Rational self-interest is a combination of both rational and ethical egoism. Rational self-interest says that it is “both immoral and irrational to act against one’s own self-interest.” That an act is only rational if it maximizes self-interest. So much for Jesus.
Rational self-interest also has no place for religion or organized religion.
I am not implying that Ayn Rand didn’t have good things to say. And didn’t get it right on some things. But when Christ-followers simply latch on to people like Ayn Rand (who rejected not only religion but rejected the attitudes and values that Jesus, Paul, and the whole counsel of scripture calls us to) because it matches up with their political leanings but will reject Wallis and Sider (who are Christians, who do see a place for religion, whose values and morals are shaped by their understanding of Scripture) because their politics run contrary to the conservative agenda, then something is wrong. This is simply politics driving our theology rather than our theology driving our politics. Or as Michael Babcock has said it so well, this is an example of “putting the political cart before the theological horse.”
I have an idea for a new sort of biblical (and other religious text) hermeneutic: namely, identifying and extracting all of the passages that could involve the tinge of the writer’s or the religion’s self-interest. What sort of text would emerge? If you are interested, pls see my post at http://deligentia.wordpress.com/2009/11/01/self-interest-in-religion-and-the-related-conflicts-of-interest/