5 responses

  1. Anthony Garland
    April 19, 2017

    Dr. Hicks,
    Thank you, an excellent and original essay.
    I have a single objection: “The life of the individual is the standard of value”.
    Surely not? – “Man’s life” is the … etc.
    (“A standard is an abstract principle that serves as a measurement or gauge to guide a man’s choices…”AR) If one’s own life is the “measurement” this becomes self-referencing or circular- with a possible outcome, subjective egotism. I think this distinction is crucial to Rand’s egoism. Do you agree with my re-interpretation?
    Again, a most valuable article. As well, your analysis of post-modernism of which I now have a clearer grasp.
    Tony

    Reply

  2. scott r
    July 19, 2017

    @ Tony,

    “Life of the individual as standard of value” means that a man’s life if his own, not a means to the end of others, and that the good is that which furthers it. Don’t get caught up in definition games, it’s very basic- What furthers your life is not subjective, an action furthers your life or it does not. Those actions that do are good. I may want to eat ice cream all day long & think it’s going to further my life, but it wont.

    A man is a specific being of a specific nature and as such there are specific requirements to thrive, these requirements are not subjective. You should read Rand’s novels if you are interested, she has many examples throughout of this kind of thing.

    Reply

  3. Anthony Garland
    July 31, 2017

    Well, I can’t agree.
    “The Objectivist ethics holds man’s life as the *standard* of value–and *his own life* as the ethical *purpose* of every individual man”. VoS
    Rand here obviously discriminates between “man” and individual man. Yes?
    She goes on to define “standard” as an abstract principle – a gauge, etc. – and a gauge evidently cannot be used by oneself to measure oneself by.
    One could claim: My own life is the standard of value which is its own standard of value…etc.

    Nope, this is self-referencing and subjective. It is rather that “specific nature” of man qua man and his life, which is one’s standard of value. That gives the individual an objective measure. “…by the standard of that which is proper to man … to enjoy that ultimate value, that end in itself, which is his own life”.

    Reply

  4. scott r
    August 3, 2017
  5. Anthony Garland
    August 5, 2017

    Ta, it should be useful reading once I register.
    In the meantime, Rand speaks directly and clearly. I don’t see why it should be complicated.
    (You have not yet shown where Rand explicitly stated that an individual’s own life is “his own standard of value” — and this is the crux of the issue).

    Why else would Rand distinguish “man” from “individual”, and explain: “The difference between “standard’ and “purpose” is an abstract principle that serves as a measurement or gauge to guide a man’s choices in the achievement of a concrete, specific purpose”.

    (Abstract concept–>concrete, individual purpose”).

    “Man must choose his actions, values and goals by the standard of that which is proper to man…”

    So, one holds the abstraction “man’s life” (and all that entails) as the standard of value — against which one measures one’s own life’s purpose, values, actions, etc..
    Repeat -“By the standard of that which is proper to man”. i.e., “man’s life”, the standard of value.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top
mobile desktop