Ed,

You described Rand’s ethics as “being based on building one’s character via virtue.” You noted that her ethics is focused “on one’s nature as a human being” and that “it can be characterized as ‘agent-focused’ morality.”

But Rand first treats value, then virtue. She defines the latter in terms of the former. It would seem that for Rand value is first not only in order of teaching-presentation, but in the conceptual order correctly reflecting living nature, including human nature.

You observed that utilitarian ethics are “beneficiary-focused.” Don’t value and beneficiary precede virtue in the conceptual dependencies in Rand’s ethical theory? Isn’t an appeal to self-benefit part of how Rand makes ethics a rational endeavor? It would seem right to say that in the center focus of Rand’s ethics there is value and with it the organism to which value pertains.

~~~~~~~~~~~

David Kelley has added to Objectivist thought about virtue. He emphasizes that we are motivated by the desire to achieve our goals, not by the desire to conform to our principles. “One’s motivation flows from one’s purpose. One does not live for the sake of being moral; one acts morally in order to make the most out of one’s life” (IOSJ Spring 1992). He takes virtue to consist “in the rules of conduct, the traits of character, that are required for living successfully. . . . The purpose of virtue is to help us live in the world. . . . This is not to say that virtue is merely an instrument. Because we are beings of self-made soul, because our character is itself a crucial achievement, virtue ought to be a source of satisfaction in its own right—and a matter of concern in any action we take. But it nevertheless must take second place to achievement as a global value” (IOSJ May 1993).

In Rand’s conception, “productive work is the central purpose of a rational man’s life, the central value that integrates and determines the hierarchy of all his other values” (OE 25). Kelley elaborates this conception. Recall that moving, final scene for Eddie in Atlas: “not just business and earning a living . . . but Dagny, business and earning a living and that in man which makes it possible—that is the best within us.” (Cf. NE 1177a12–18.) Kelley thinks that “productive work expresses ‘the best within us’ because it reflects man’s basic relationship to reality: the use of reason to create the values his survival requires” (IOSJ May 1993). Kelley generalizes from work (in the sense of making a living) to achievement, which would include work, raising children, maintaining a house, sustaining a happy marriage, organizing a civic cause, or overcoming a physical handicap or psychological problem. “An achiever is a doer: someone who projects a goal, who takes responsibility for bringing it about, and who takes pride in doing it well” (ibid.).

This generalized value, achievement, Kelley calls a global value. Global values cut across many, more particular values. Other global values would be enjoyment and virtue (virtue as a value). Such values have enough breadth and depth to be serious possible answers to the questions, “what do I want out of life? What is it that gives my life meaning and would leave me feeling empty and aimless were it taken away?” (ibid.). Kelley argues that the values of enjoyment and of virtue are intimately connected with the value of achievement, but that achievement should be the central global value, if our ultimate value is life and our highest purpose is happiness.