By the way, I spent some time reading almost all of the published non- fiction of Ayn Rand, including a number of issues of the Objectivist Newsletter, and discussing them with a confirmed Objectivist, after I graduated from college. I have read "Anthem", and made a good faith effort to finish "Atlas Shrugged", although the terrible writing finally defeated me.
As far as the scheme being settled in my mind for a long time, that is actually not true. I have frequently revisited the subject, and looked at it with somewhat fresh eyes. I used to re- read the Nicomachean Ethics every year, for about a decade. I have re- read Kant's "Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals" numerous times, as well as Nietzsche's "Beyond Good and Evil", and other texts. I developed a new respect for the Constractarians in the last 3 or 4 years, and, I think, finally understood Hobbes adequately. I have come to a greater appreciation of the pertinence of Hegel fairly recently. Most of what I have laid out, in this particular round of argument, is, in fact, new, although some of it existed embryonically in my thought.
I do not think you intend to defend sociopaths. But the definition of a sociopath is someone who fails to internalize a system of values, and is indifferent to the effects of his behavior on society. The only sort of person who is incapable of embarassment, guilt, or shame is a sociopath..... |
