Saturday, March 22, 2008

Ayn Rand's writings and worldview

From John Piper in World (October 2007)...

This month marks the 50th anniversary of the publication of the novel Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. As I write, the book ranks Number 237 at That is phenomenal for a 1,200-page novel that contains philosophical speeches, one of which stretches to 90 uninterrupted pages. The book has sold over 6 million copies. In one survey from 16 years ago, Atlas Shrugged was ranked second only to the Bible as the book that influenced people most.

My Ayn Rand craze happened in the late '70s when I was a professor of Biblical Studies at Bethel College. I read most of what she wrote and was both attracted and repulsed. I was blown away with powerful statements of what I believed, and angered that she shut herself up in what Jonathan Edwards called the infinite provincialism of atheism. Her brand of hedonism was so close to my Christian Hedonism and yet so far—like a satellite that comes close to the gravitational pull of truth and then flings off into the darkness of outer space.

With the reference to Christian hedonism, I realize that Piper is in an ideal position to evaluate Rand from a Christian worldview.

I never had a Rand craze, but read Atlas Shrugged and then Anthem during the late 1980s as I was putting together my worldview-- and in particular, combining economics, politics and Christianity. I was certainly impressed by her, but can't say that I was repulsed by her. Either I was naive, overly-tolerant, read her as hyperbolic, or just took with a grain or shaker of salt as appropriate.

Atlas Shrugged was a long but exhilirating read. Anthem is in some ways more provocative but much shorter (100 pages or so) and reflects mostly on a single idea. If you haven't read Rand, I'd recommend Atlas Shrugged. If that's too ambitious for you, then I would recommend reading Kurt Vonnegut's short story "Harrison Bergeron" followed by Anthem. (If you'd like to read a former student of mine, commenting on the story, click here.)

She was born in St. Petersburg, Russia, in 1905, graduated with a degree in history from the University of Leningrad in 1924, and emigrated to the United States in 1926. "I am an American by choice and conviction," she wrote. "I was born in Europe, but I came to America because this was the country based on my moral premises and the only country where I could be fully free to write." She died on March 6, 1982.

She abominated altruism. All self-sacrifice is evil because: "Sacrifice is the surrender of a greater value for the sake of a lesser one or of non-value. Thus altruism gauges a man's virtue by the degree to which he surrenders, renounces or betrays his values (since help to a stranger or an enemy is regarded as more virtuous, less 'selfish' than help to those one loves). The rational principle of conduct is the exact opposite: always act in accordance with the hierarchy of your values and never sacrifice a greater value to a lesser one."

It's been a long time, but looking back, I'm not clear on whether she hated altruism per se or the idea of altruism (sacrifice for its own sake). I think it was the latter. It's also difficult to distinguish what she found bothersome about Christian theology-- and what was baggage from what she saw in institutionalized religion, particularly Catholicism.

From there, Piper wraps up by talking about her views within Christian theology.

Ayn Rand had no place for mercy, whereas Christianity has mercy at its heart. And the reason for the difference is that God was simply missing in Ayn Rand's universe. Since there was no God from whom she had received everything undeserved, and since there was no God who promised to reward every act that showed His supreme worth, she could only conceive of sacrifice as the immoral suicide of one's own values.

What Ayn Rand meant by altruism is seen in the words of Lillian Rearden to her husband in Atlas Shrugged: "If you tell a beautiful woman that she is beautiful, what have you given her? It's no more than a fact and it costs you nothing. But if you tell an ugly woman that she is beautiful you offer her the great homage of corrupting the concept of beauty. To love a woman for her virtues is meaningless. She's earned it, it's a payment, not a gift. But to love her for her vices is to defile all virtue for her sake—and that is a real tribute of love, because you sacrifice your conscience, your reason, your integrity and your invaluable self-esteem."

Since Ayn Rand had no place for a sovereign, all-sufficient God who cannot be traded with, she did not reckon with any righteous form of mercy. It is indeed evil to love a person "for their vices." But mercy in the Christian sense is not "because of" vices, but "in spite of" vices. It is not intended to reward evil, but to reveal the bounty of God who cannot be traded with, but only freely admired and enjoyed. It aims not to corrupt or compromise integrity, but to transform the values of the enemy into the values of Christ. While it may mean the sacrifice of some temporal pleasures, it is never the sacrifice of greater values to lesser ones. It is the sacrifice of lower values to higher ones.

Therefore, Ayn Rand's philosophy did not need to be entirely scrapped. Rather, it needed to take all of reality into account, including the infinite God. No detail of her philosophy would have been left untouched.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home