James Leroy Wilson's blog

Saturday, June 11, 2005

A Mystic Reads Rand

A new article series at the Partial Observer by Jonathan Wilson, an evangelical pastor, debuts.

Excerpt:

On the basis of this common ground, my hope is that the Libertarian Atheist will read these essays with as open a mind as I employed as a Libertarian Mystic reading Ayn Rand. Here is a summary of my arguments which I will develop over this series "A Mystic Reads Rand":

1. That more important than the premise of atheism in Objectivist philosophy, is the premise of consciousness.

2. That theists who have come to personal consciousness will be exhibiting objectivist principles in all of life.

3. That any Christian evangelism which promises an excuse from responsibility, a justification for mediocrity, and an entitlement to the charity of others, is a misrepresentation of the gospel.

4. That any Christian ethical formulation which induces guilt for being successful, which diminishes achievement and rewards failure, is a misrepresentation of the core principles of the faith.

5. That one's mercy and compassion for another are neither grounded in one's own guilt nor in any entitlement of the other. Mercy and compassion are grounded in two principles: one's own pleasure, and investment.

6. Concerning the investment in compassion: Rand's chief concern is that when one's mercy becomes the entitlement of another, co-dependency develops. This is of a different nature from the true quality of mercy and compassion, which on Christian principles is an investment in another person's redemption.

7. That we see redemption as a result of compassion in Rand's own characters.

8. That redemption results from an awakening to consciousness. Each awakening to redemption is celebrated as a great pleasure by Rand's characters.

3 comments:

  1. Having read Rand quite a bit (manic - Atlas Shrugged - 3 times), i'd have to agree with our christian here. as a scientist (science is a religion, in and of itself) who has searched religion for meaning and found none beyond manipulation of the masses - i believe that rewarding the creation of increased value, rather than penalizing it is the first necessity to getting back on track for a free humanity.
    Take for instance the carbon sequestration approach to global warming. (First let me say that sequestration is good - no matter the justification - elaborotation if requested). The problem is that plants collect CO2 - the highest oxidized carbon aton and bring it back into the system. It would be more energy efficient to leave it as a higher energy hydrocarbon than to combust it completely. When we take more energy to create bio-oil that we realize as a result, then no amount of government grants and supplements can make the economics work.
    The Zone - www.howdt.com/blog

    ReplyDelete
  2. my typing is atrocious today - can you edit Jim?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I checked blogger help and found out I can't edit comments. Don't worry, your point was clear.

    ReplyDelete