1. Is Rand correct that if you accept altruism, then you end up with a lack of self-esteem and a lack of respect for others? I think Rand is wrong about altruism because, not everyone wants help; therefore it is not another persons obligation to help another if they don’t want to. When we help someone it should come from the heart not because we feel as though we have to, also when we give, without expecting in return that is true charity. However, it has nothing to do with neither lack of self-esteem nor lack of respect for others. It’s like a baby who is learning to walk. Do we continue to help the baby walk, if we do the baby may become overly dependent, and will never learn on it’s own. Now aren’t we hurting the baby by doing this? I would think so. 2. Is Rand criticizing ideal or reciprocal? Do you think that she would differentiate between the two? Would you? Just because one person does something doesn’t mean others will follow. And what one person does to help may be against another person’s beliefs. I think that Rand would not be able to differentiate between the two: ideal & reciprocal as she has an obsession on reciprocal altruism and she is unable to see that pure ideal altruism. As an example, a woman in agony due to complications in her pregnancy would rather die than let her child die; such selfless unconditional love is intangible.
3. The proper method of judging when or whether one should help another person is by reference to one’s own rational self-interest and one’s own hierarchy of values: the time, money or effort one gives or the risk one takes should be proportionate to the value of the person in relation to one’s own happiness. What might the social and political outcome be if that approach were implemented? As far as a political outcome is concerned, I feel that this approach has already been implemented. Politicians only care about themselves and what they can get out of the deal, as power and greed take presence before the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document