| | Let me add a few more thoughts about why Objectivists might feel rage.
One is that you see clearly the truth, and you know your opponents are muddled and confused, and yet you are alone and looked down on by others. You're considered immoral, evil, or maybe just immature and gullible, from people who make it a policy not to think about things like this too much or too clearly. This grave injustice in the world is enough to make anyone angry if they dwell on it too much. It's not at all surprising that Objectivists feel anger easily, whether at a particular person, or at the world in general.
There are plenty of other reasons, like how irrationality (like faith) is promoted as a virtue, and how smug people are that they're sacrificing their mind for no point. They even feel superior to those who don't. When moral standards are so entirely reversed, it's easy to get angry.
Or how about how people can preach vicious ideas that would lead to horrible consequences if put into practice, and these same people are not interested enough to learn whether they're right or wrong. The world seems to think you can commit any kind of crime as long as you don't think about it. You're not evil if you kill lots of people without thinking about it much. Actually, Barbara says in her article: "I wish only to deprive you of specifically moral outrage when it is unjustly directed at your opponents. Be fiercely angry because you know the deadly consequences when certain ideas are translated into action. But recognize, recognize clearly, that it is likely that many of your opponents do not grasp those consequences—and that, if they did, they would change their convictions." For some reason, the moral outrage is only reserved for those who if they understood things clearly, they'd still do it. If people don't grasp the consequences, I guess we can't be angry with them? Weird.
Is any of this common to Objectivists? I think environmentalists feel the same kind of moral outrage. They think they're in the minority. They think the world is too apathetic to look into the facts. They think they're looked down upon by ignorant people.
There's no need to suggest theories like group-think or neurosis to explain the anger. If there was no anger, I think it would be damn hard to explain the absence!
There might be one thing that needs to be explained, though, and it wasn't in this speech. The question is why do Objectivists feel such rage towards other Objectivists?
Theories?
1.) They should know better. They understand so much, and have been exposed to the ideas, so they must be corrupt.
2.) Egos. They don't recognize him as the Objectivist leader he aims to be.
3.) Money. Too much competition for funding.
4.) Control. To be the authoritative source for Objectivism means discrediting others and then pretending they don't exist.
5.) Personal squabbles. There are a lot of unpleasant people.
6.) Rejections of social skills. People believe that to be nice or pleasant is living for others, and only a complete rejection of social skills/principles is morally acceptable.
7.) Everyone thinks they know everything. Obviously disagreements turn ugly.
I'm sure that only scratches the surface.
|
|
