Ibis SladeAyn Rand’s morality of selfishness breaks with over two thousand years of traditional moral thinking, leading many to question how such an ethical code can be justified. In a recent episode of the Brain in a Vat podcast, Dr. Tara Smith, a member of ARI’s board of directors, offers exceptional clarity in addressing these concerns.
The podcast, hosted by Mark Oppenheimer (a human rights lawyer) and Jason Werbeloff (a sci-fi author with a Ph.D. in philosophy), caters to an intellectually curious audience interested in the exploration of how philosophical ideas impact real-life decisions. The interview is particularly significant because it tackles complex objections and misconceptions about Rand’s philosophy. The hosts, who lean toward utilitarianism, pose challenging questions, allowing Smith the opportunity to expand on the real meaning of self-interest.
Smith explains that self-interest is often misunderstood. In our culture, it is commonly associated with the behavior of predatory figures, such as Bernie Madoff or Sam Bankman-Fried. However, Smith observes that this sort of behavior is a recipe for misery, not success or flourishing. Challenged with thought experiments purporting to show that self-interest can sometimes require vicious behavior, Smith emphasizes that Rand’s ethics requires both consistent moral principles and sensitivity to context. While it avoids a case-by-case relativism, Rand’s ethics doesn’t shackle us down with arbitrary rules.
Smith also addresses rarely explored applications of Objectivism, such as how it integrates concerns about individuals with special needs or psychological differences.
This discussion complements Dr. Smith’s new book, Egoism Without Permission: The Moral Psychology of Ayn Rand’s Ethics, where she explores the intersection of morality and psychology, analyzing crucial issues that influence the practice of egoism and the pursuit of a flourishing life.
Watch the full interview here:
Ben Bayer
Ziemowit Gowin
