Quote: Original post by slayemin
I really wonder what Ayn Rand would say...

I don't think we'd get on.

Quote: Original post by slayemin
I really wonder what Ayn Rand would say...

I wouldn't give anything to an homeless Ayn Rand.

Quote: Original post by slayemin
I really wonder what Ayn Rand would say...

Interesting question. What prompted it?

From what I understand of Ayn Rand, she reveres individualism, so she'd likely say that people are homeless by choice rather than circumstance and if they became homeless by choice then they can "unbecome" homeless by choice as well. I suppose that boils down to the admonishment "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps".

Quote: Original post by Geoffrey

Quote: Original post by LessBread
The next time you see the guy, ask him if he needs help and if so ask him what you can do to help him. The other thing to do would be to contact a social worker at the homeless shelter and ask that person what you can do to help.

He'll just ask for money - I don't think has a longer term plan than this. He did say he'd like to have a job, but I don't know what to suggest other taking him to a job center. What kind of work should he be looking for?

How do you know that? Have you asked him? If you haven't, then aren't you prejudging him? Are you worried that he'll ask for money and you'll feel obliged to give him some? It seems to me that asking him that question doesn't oblige you to supply the help he asks for. It merely opens up a dialogue or a negotiation between the two of you, and even then, you're still not obligated to supply him with help regardless of your good faith intention. He might ask for help that you can't give or simply won't. Who knows, he might simply be lonely and looking for someone to talk with now and again. The thing is, you can't know if you don't ask.

Quote: Original post by Geoffrey
Asking staff at the shelter is a good idea.

Asking them what kind of services they offer to the homeless is probably a good idea too. They might have a direct pipeline to the job centers in your town.

Quote: Original post by LessBread

Quote: Original post by slayemin
I really wonder what Ayn Rand would say...

Interesting question. What prompted it?

From what I understand of Ayn Rand, she reveres individualism, so she'd likely say that people are homeless by choice rather than circumstance and if they became homeless by choice then they can "unbecome" homeless by choice as well. I suppose that boils down to the admonishment "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps".

Eh, I'm taking a philosophy class on moral theory and she was brought up in passing when we were looking at utilitarianism. I was curious to know more about her views, so I did some cursory research on wikipedia. Apparently, she's an advocate for "rational self-interest", or in other words, an egoist utilitarian (maximize what is best for me!). This seems to be consistent with her laissez-faire view of the world, ie. "let people be as they are". She also condemns altruism, which seems counter to intuition but still consistent with a person who lives by rational self-interest. I find myself agreeing in large part with her philosophy of "Objectivism".

If the world was full of Ayn Rands and the world also had homeless Ayn Rands, then because it's not in anyones self interests to be altruistic, the homeless Ayn Rands would starve to death. Social darwinism would be gratuitously brutal. I dunno, it seems like a pretty strong argument against her position, but I also may not understand her well enough yet. I'd almost accuse her of lacking empathy.

So, I think the question regarding helping homeless people comes down to a question of morality:
A) Is it morally obligatory for anyone with the ability, to help the homeless? If a homeless person stops you on the street and asks you for a dollar so that he/she can eat and you have the dollar, must you give it to them?
B) Or, is it merely optional to give? For the Ayn Rand haters: If it's merely optional and you continuously exercise the "no" choice, yet you condemn Ayn Rand, would you really be any different from her?
C) Or, is it forbidden to give?

No almost for me, I would accuse her of lacking empathy. Human beings are not purely rational creatures, so that undermines any claims to "rational self-interest". The Communists thought their ideology was rational too. I see both claims as an effort to portray their ideologies as extensions of science, and thus truth, as well as the progressive betterment of humanity.

I suspect that long before the homeless Ayn Rands died, they would change their attitudes towards altruism and rational self-interest. And as the bodies piled up, the Ayn Rands with homes probably would too. Their rational self-interest would lead them to recognize that dead bodies bring disease but not immunity.

So, empathy for others would not be a strong moral motivation for the Ayn Rands of the world.

What about compassion? If an Ayn Rand is completely self-interested, and realizes that everyone is ultimately self-interested, then in the interests of self-interest, if all Ayn Rands have compassion for others, it would ultimately be in their best self-interests. From a "I scratch your back, you scratch my back" perspective, empathy doesn't have to be a necessary requirement for compassion. But, it would be contradictory to individualism, right?

Hehe, maybe I'm just trying to gerrymander this too much.

...

[Edited by - Awoken on September 15, 2009 7:28:18 PM]

Quote: What about compassion? If an Ayn Rand is completely self-interested, and realizes that everyone is ultimately self-interested, then in the interests of self-interest, if all Ayn Rands have compassion for others, it would ultimately be in their best self-interests. From a "I scratch your back, you scratch my back" perspective, empathy doesn't have to be a necessary requirement for compassion. But, it would be contradictory to individualism, right?

I have a friend who is an objectivist; she may as well be Ayn Rand reincarnated. Once, she asked me, in all seriousness - "what is the difference between compassion and pity? I don't get it."

My experiences with her and other people who display objectivist tendencies is that there is a general lack of emotion or desire to assist unless it benefits them or their interests in some way. Things are taken literally - helping the poor monetarily isn't seen as something enriching, it's seen as bringing everyone to the same level (you spend your money on them; they are slightly richer and you are slightly poorer. They won't use the money, or they will continue to be poor, so the money will be wasted, so say the objectivists). Objectivists aren't necesarily mean - it's more that they see everything going forwards. This action will get me there, and this action won't affect the objective positively or negatively, so I don't want or need to do it. To an outsider, their decision-making looks harsh, but to an objectivist it's all about putting the most logical steps in order to achieve a goal. If it doesn't make sense, they don't do it.

Hmm, thinking about it further, I wonder if Rand's objectivist views are even compatible with parenthood?

I suppose one of the flaws of the Randian version of objectivism is that it fails to value the aggregate good.