An Answer to her Detractors from Academia
Many years ago The New York Times published an article about the lack of Women philosophers.
They had a photo of Ayn Rand at the beginning of the article.
Some snide commentators, mostly from academia, complained that Rand wasn’t a philosopher.
I thought it might be of value to post my published response here with a few minor changes:
Ayn Rand’s sin, for which she can’t be forgiven by many academics, is that her writing is intelligible to the general public.
She wrote philosophical novels that continue to be accessible to the man and woman in the street.
She believed in the power of reason.
She rejected the mind-body dichotomy.
She wrote about the supreme power and practicality of moral ideas.
And she created a philosophical system — Objectivism — for anyone who may be interested, not just philosophers.
Perhaps Rand’s greatest sin, however, was her total rejection of altruism as a moral ideal.
For this, she will never be forgiven by those on the political left and right who realize that altruism* is the linchpin of everything they profess to believe.
Those who think that philosophy should help them lead a productive and successful life owe Ayn Rand a debt of gratitude for her great sin of clarity.
—
* When Rand wrote about altruism, she was focusing not on the popular misconception of its meaning as goodwill toward others, but of its true philosophical meaning:
“Altruism (also called the ethic of altruism, moralistic altruism, and ethical altruism) is an ethical doctrine that holds that the moral value of an individual’s actions depend solely on the impact on other individuals, regardless of the consequences on the individual itself.” — Wikipedia
