Some cultural effects of Ayn Rand’s theory of concepts, part 1.

Originally posted October 8, 2006

There are several reasons for the appeal of Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism. The philosophy is based on reconciling the aspects of reality with one’s own life by way of conceptual integration. Objectivism offers practicable solutions for problems in thinking, managing one’s life, and living among others. It also argues for the currently best existing approach which an artist should take as to idealizing a better world by using physical materials in a Romantically stylized manner.

There’s an interesting tangent I want to mention. I wish to offer a potential point of controversy for consideration or even discussion. Since some people are under the mistaken impression that questioning an authority is equal to demeaning the same, I wish to clarify my intention here. I’m not interested in undermining the credibility of Ayn Rand’s aesthetic theory. I do think that, given the way she communicated that theory, it is at the least harder to discern her intentions for her broader view of art (as compared to her view of politics or ethics.)

She wrote several novels, a play, and several short stories. She also wrote a book on her theory of art, but it was focused on the art of literature. She also has offered opinions on music and painting among other arts, but she wasn’t a musician or a musical teacher. Nor was she a sculptor or an Earth material art teacher. Dr. Leonard Peikoff’s systematized offerings of her view of art in _Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand_ and _Objectivism Through Induction_ should be considered in terms of being authoritative interpretations of her view which are not _officially_ her view. One implication of this situation is that it is likely even more important than usual to review the primary sources of her aesthetic theory as against substantiating her other views.

While the comparatively different and respective attention Ayn Rand paid to different philosophical subjects has no essentially negative impact on a student’s interpretation of her philosophy, those students will have to adjust their study method accordingly. Further, given the nature of society, Ayn Rand’s mechanical approach to issuing her body of work has similar implications for how her ideas are distributed among wider audiences. Though not entirely reflective of Ayn Rand’s work, the way Objectivist experts approach their polemic work is telling. For example, the Ayn Rand Institute has typically advocated Ayn Rand’s aethetics by promoting her own fictional works. On the other hand, ARI speakers more often lecture on her ethics and politics than her epistemology and aesthetics. It should also be noted that no one person or organization can currently comprehensively promote her large body of work in just one chronological generation (of roughly 20 years.) Ideally, I would like to see other organizations rationally promote her work whether they are Objectivist or not. No such other organization can currently compare to ARI in this respect although I have some hope that (in another generation or two) they will not _substantially_ remain alone in this endeavor.

Advocates of Objectivism should not only consider what parts of the philosophy they wish to promote by priority but also the method which they use to make their promotion effective. I think Objectivists who are engaged in this type of promotion have substantially varied in the quality and focus of their work. There is more to their success than their respective passions and education. In some future post, I will offer a key component to taking Objectivist polemics and activism to “the next level”.