| | Ted, it depends upon what you are contrasting "Reason" with. In my case, I was raised in a home that respected reason - that is, if one of us kids made a good argument, we were listened to. But emotions were taboo. No yelling, no crying, no expressions of anger. I acquired the false impression that emotional expression was irrational and that you couldn't be reasonable and have strong feelings (think Spock, or the Stoical man of the West). So, when I was hit by the thundering passion with which Rand delivers such exquisitely reasoned thoughts, I was turned head over heels.
Seeing reason and passions together on the same side validated all the strong feelings I'd suppressed for years, while taking reason to greater heights than I'd seen before. Reason, my favorite tool, and part of my identity, had abilities I had never even dreamed of. I had sacrificed emotions because of the degree to which I valued reason, and she showed me that the sacrifice wasn't needed while validating my love of reason.
I had already sensed, but had no words for, the concept that reason was the foundation for right and wrong. I suspect that most kids start at that spot ("That's not fair!" cries the kid with an implicit call for intertwining logic and ethics.). Rand said we were right.
I'd only add that I was strongly individualistic as a personality and that I often saw obstructions put in my way being justified by irrational 'reasons.' I had tied reason to individuality on a sense of life level before reading Rand, and what she gave me was a validation and understanding of what I already was in an important sense.
Of all the items you listed, "Moral certainty" strikes a note, but one that only makes sense in light of everything I wrote above. The others are non-starters for me. The other great attraction was her portrayal of man as heroic.
|
|
