Rand’s Vision of Heaven
By Jordan MongeBefore becoming a Christian, I was a big fan of Ayn Rand. Her novels touched my soul in a way that no other novel has. After much reflection, I found her morality to be without foundation and thus somewhat futile. Yet there was still something that made her philosophy so attractive: she described the objective goal of having “a face without pain or fear or guilt.”
This idea struck me as having merit, even though I couldn’t explain why. Rand’s solution to the problem of pain and fear and guilt is to simply stop feeling them – to become a super hero who can do no wrong. However, as soon as I tried living out this philosophy in my life, it utterly failed. I couldn’t live without pain; I would accidentally hurt others and they’d hurt me It was an inevitable part of life that even the closest of friends will cause each other to suffer at least a little bit. I couldn’t live without fear; the prospect of life ending or of not being able to live up to the high standards that I set for myself was utterly terrifying because it rendered my life meaningless. I couldn’t live without guilt; I’d invariably do something wrong and regret that I hadn’t handled the situation better. Living without pain or fear or guilt was impossible. Yet it still held some appeal.
Rand's goal is obviously impossible on this earth. Her very own picture pains our eyes.
It struck me that Rand’s insistence on rejecting pain and fear and guilt stemmed from her hatred of religion. Christianity seemed to uphold suffering – pain – as good. For Christians fear of God was of inestimable virtue. Guilt seemed to be the backbone of the faith, reminding Christians of their unfulfillable obligations to their imaginary deity.
It wasn’t until I became a Christian that I began to appreciate how pain and fear and guilt are all vital parts of life. They shouldn’t be our goals, but they all help us recognize and reject sin. The reason that we will inevitably feel pain and fear and guilt is because “all men have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” A man feels pain because he has been sinned against. A man feels fear because he knows that others may sin against him, or because he knows that his own sin may soon be revealed. A man feels guilt because he has transgressed the moral code ingrained in him and knows he has fallen short of Perfection.
Christianity never assures us that we will be rid of sin in this life, but it promises us a Paradise where sin – and thus, pain, fear, guilt, and tears shall be no more. Rand’s dream of “a face without pain or fear or guilt” can be found fulfilled in only two places: her novels and Heaven. Only one of them is real.
Comments (2)
Rand’s philosophy is not, as you say, “without foundation.” It is certainly more rational and logically justified that modern religion, although that is not saying much. Rand coached us in Atlas Shrugged to constantly be checking our premises and to use our minds, not our hearts, to make decisions. It seems that you have made a choice to reject your mind in favor of a wish that you have to live in a “Paradise where sin – and thus pain, fear, guilt and tears shall be no more.” Well, isn’t that nice? The truth is that you cannot offer a rational argument in justification of your philosophy. You’ve made the wrong choice, but your punishment will not be spending time in hell, it will be wasting the only life you will ever have pursuing childish fantasies rather than your own happiness.
I must confess that I’ve never felt the attraction of Rand’s philosophy. I remember reading something about objectivism several years ago and (in a bitter, cynical, intellectually dishonest High School sort of way) coming to the conclusion that trying to arrive at a system of objective normative ethics from mere metaphysical realism was a doomed endeavor. Moreover, I read the first chapter of The Fountainhead and had to stop because I felt like I was being battered to death with her thinly and artlessly concealed individualism. So perhaps I can’t be trusted to give Rand the credit she’s due.
That said, the idea that objectivism is somehow more rational or justified than Christian theism is interesting and surprising to me. Many people seem sold on Ayn Rand. But never have I been presented with an argument or putative justification by any disciple of Ayn Rand. So why don’t we see how deep the rabbit hole goes? What are your /reasons/ for being an objectivist?