| | I remember an argument from Rand. I think it was in the essay: Philosophy: Who Needs It?. She said if you were a landlord and you had to choose a renter, but with limited knowledge, would you rather know about (1) their recent (or past) actions or (2) their ideology?
Her answer was that it was better to know someone's ideology than even to know their record of recent (or past) behavior. Think about it. Even if someone just killed someone else, you may still want to rent to them -- as it may have been in self-defense. And even if someone has a criminal record that is squeeky clean, they may be a dreaded existentialist who actually thinks that there is nothing guiding action in this life but your own naked will -- and that every life choice (such as murdering your landlord, for instance) is as good as any other.
Who are we to judge?
:-)
Ed
p.s. Some of the worst people in the world (e.g. Ian Brady) are existentialists.
(Edited by Ed Thompson on 9/06, 10:56am)
|
|
If I claim to have an ideology, the specifics of that ideology are a reflection of who I am. There can be no factor that more accurately speaks to the content of my character. For this reason, we must judge people's beliefs if we are to assess their character. If there is an intolerance that should be tolerated, it is the intolerance of ignorance.
