cancer caused by bad premises?


jts

Recommended Posts

According to Barbara Branden's book "The Passion of Ayn Rand", Ayn Rand had the idea that cancer and some other diseases are caused by bad premises. And Ayn Rand couldn't understand how she got lung cancer because she didn't have any bad premises.

What exactly is the theory?

Version 1:

bad premise --> lung cancer

Version 2:

bad premise --> bad conclusion --> bad decision --> bad action (smoking) --> lung cancer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why this is a bad thread. Why would something Ayn Rand said not be taken seriously in OL? There are at least 2 reasons why the idea that cancer can be caused by bad premises should be taken seriously (I didn't say necessarily believed).

1. Anything Ayn Rand says should be taken seriously (vs just dismissed as unworthy of discussion).

2. Certain doctors take seriously the idea that mind can affect body. They base this on practical experience, not merely on what they memorized in medical school. For example in Dr. Tilden's books the theme of mind affecting body pops up from time to time. Tilden (and others) held to the idea that certain negative emotions (jealousy, hatred, anger, etc.) over time can produce body states and affect health. Dr. Tilden held to the idea that there are 2 main causes of diseases: appetites and passions, and you can be master of your appetites and passions or a slave of your appetites and passions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jerry,

Would you please provide the full context? Would you mind quoting the section of Barbara's book that deals with Rand and her views on cancer and bad premises?

Thanks,

J

I have a copy of the book but it is hidden in a box and hard to find. So I found this:

http://www.meetup.com/HoustonSTARS/messages/boards/thread/7894088

The following is a direct quote from _The Passion of Ayn Rand_ on page 383:

...From time to time in the next months, she would raise, disturbed, the question of how she could have contracted cancer; she tended to think that cancer, as well as many other illnesses, was the result of what she termed "bad premises - that is, of philosophical-psychological errors and evasions carried to their final dead end in the form of physical destruction. How could she have a malignancy, when she had no bad premises?...

My question is: what is the theory exactly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why this is a bad thread. Why would something Ayn Rand said not be taken seriously in OL? There are at least 2 reasons why the idea that cancer can be caused by bad premises should be taken seriously (I didn't say necessarily believed).

1. Anything Ayn Rand says should be taken seriously (vs just dismissed as unworthy of discussion).

2. Certain doctors take seriously the idea that mind can affect body. They base this on practical experience, not merely on what they memorized in medical school. For example in Dr. Tilden's books the theme of mind affecting body pops up from time to time. Tilden (and others) held to the idea that certain negative emotions (jealousy, hatred, anger, etc.) over time can produce body states and affect health. Dr. Tilden held to the idea that there are 2 main causes of diseases: appetites and passions, and you can be master of your appetites and passions or a slave of your appetites and passions.

To be clear, I was just joshing with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the quote that you provided, I don't think that we have enough information to know the "reasoning" behind the idea that bad premises cause cancer. All that I can say, is WTF? Was she coked to the gills on pain meds at the time? Or was it just another example of her being occasionally nutty?

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following is a direct quote from _The Passion of Ayn Rand_ on page 383:

...From time to time in the next months, she would raise, disturbed, the question of how she could have contracted cancer; she tended to think that cancer, as well as many other illnesses, was the result of what she termed "bad premises - that is, of philosophical-psychological errors and evasions carried to their final dead end in the form of physical destruction. How could she have a malignancy, when she had no bad premises?...

If you control you appetites and passions your whole life long you still die in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that there is a strong impact of the mind on the body has been known ever since doctors started prescribing placebos for certain people. They often work on actual physical symptoms.

(That's just a manner of speaking, though. The placebos in themselves don't actually work, They essentially trick the mind into working.)

I believe Rand based her opinion by extrapolating from this point, but that is only my speculation.

The real ironic tragedy is that emotions. not cognitive thoughts, have proven to be causes of body trouble and Rand often wallowed in negative emotions. It's pretty common knowledge that strong emotions (irrespective of valence) cause the brain to release hormones and make other changes in neural chemistry.

So it's a good speculation that Rand probably helped her cancer along by constantly condemning things with a lot of emotional intensity.

Now here's the irony. Her premise--one that she lived by--that intensely hating evil is a good thing, is a false premise. The opposite is true. Intensely hating anything for prolonged periods is bad for you.

A far healthier attitude is to dispose of evil in the same manner you dispose of vermin, but not dwell on hating it.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following is a direct quote from _The Passion of Ayn Rand_ on page 383:

...From time to time in the next months, she would raise, disturbed, the question of how she could have contracted cancer; she tended to think that cancer, as well as many other illnesses, was the result of what she termed "bad premises - that is, of philosophical-psychological errors and evasions carried to their final dead end in the form of physical destruction. How could she have a malignancy, when she had no bad premises?...

If you control you appetites and passions your whole life long you still die in the end.

Nothing is of value unless it lasts forever? You have no values?

If you had ALS like Stephen Hawking or if you were blind or if you had some other disability or if you had a constant pain, would you not want to recover from it if you could? Or would you say it doesn't matter because you won't live forever anyway?

The same could be said of wealth. If you were living in extreme poverty and had the opportunity to recover from poverty and live in wealth, would you say it doesn't matter because you won't live forever anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following is a direct quote from _The Passion of Ayn Rand_ on page 383:

...From time to time in the next months, she would raise, disturbed, the question of how she could have contracted cancer; she tended to think that cancer, as well as many other illnesses, was the result of what she termed "bad premises - that is, of philosophical-psychological errors and evasions carried to their final dead end in the form of physical destruction. How could she have a malignancy, when she had no bad premises?...

If you control you appetites and passions your whole life long you still die in the end.

Let's concretize that in a way that is close to home for you. Many years ago you quit smoking. Was that worth doing, considering that in the end you will die anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure it was worth it. I felt a whole lot better and I suspect if I had kept on smoking I would not have made it to my present age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure it was worth it. I felt a whole lot better and I suspect if I had kept on smoking I would not have made it to my present age.

Now instead of being mortal vs being immortal, it is shorter life vs longer life. What if you could somehow know that quitting smoking would not result in living longer (living better perhaps but not longer)? Would quitting smoking be worth doing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The premises of jts' query are entirely reasonable. If you introspect the sensations when feeling fear, anger, envy, resentment and hatred, you will know that all sorts of activity is going on in your body. Increased respiration and floods of chemicals causing tensed muscles and a bunch of other stuff. Fine and good in short bursts when facing danger etc.

However, unlike animals we have the capability to remember our enemies and battles, to mentally

focus on looking for new ones, and to sustain those emotions - keep whipping them up, so to speak, by directing our own consciousness. The effects on a body must be devastating if that is constant over a long period. It rarely permits oneself to be at ease.

Not a cause of dis-ease like cancer, on its own, necessarily - but a contributing factor for pre-existing, incipient conditions - I've no problem accepting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure it was worth it. I felt a whole lot better and I suspect if I had kept on smoking I would not have made it to my present age.

Now instead of being mortal vs being immortal, it is shorter life vs longer life. What if you could somehow know that quitting smoking would not result in living longer (living better perhaps but not longer)? Would quitting smoking be worth doing?

Living better is worth it. Although I would not prefer a short glorious life to a longer one with a little pain and bother. Being able to see my grandchildren grow up is worth a few aches and pains to me.

If will say living longer than average does have one draw back. I am now outliving some people I have come to like (I live in a retirement community). That is a sadness. There are basically two strategies. One; keep distance from every one except blood family members, or two; develop normal friendships and come to like people (who are likable), but if they die first there is the sadness of parting. Since I try not to be a prick, I opt for strategy two, with the inevitable price-tag of some sadness. That is the way it is. The human condition. I chose to pass for a human being and now I am encountering the consequences.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now