Jordan,
It sounds like you need a vision--or mission if you prefer that language. Something you can believe in--in the good sense of being able to commit to it and have the emotional juices flowing at the same time, not in the blind faith sense.
It sounds like you need something exciting that allows you to use your rational mind at the same time.
This point has always been a difficult one for people in O-Land who do not have what Rand called "the curse" in her notes. Some people just know what they want to do and love it intrinsically. They see what others cannot or do not.
Other people--many others--get shoved from here to there as they grow up and now can't feel any real passion for anything on a vision level.
What to do if you are one of those?
Well, you can adopt the vision of someone else. I know because that's exactly what I did with Ayn Rand. I was shoved. My parents didn't divorce like yours did, but I got beat a lot. Hillbilly crap. That sure as hell works for shoving and it did get my attention growing up. It also spoiled any chance I had at learning what a glorious vision was from observing my parents and their world.
We are primates and one of the fundamental ways primates learn is by modeling--by imitation--by monkey see, monkey do. We are wired that way. (It's not the only way we learn, but for a kid, it is the predominant method. And we never shake free from it, but that's another discussion. I've been studying applied neuroscience and psychology, so this isn't second-hander stuff. More later if you are interested.)
Maybe I didn't get a good vision from my parents, but I didn't get rid of the hunger for one, either. This sounds a lot like you sound right now.
Then along came Rand. She painted such a shining vision I was blown away.
Were you?
Regardless, there's a trap. If you adopt her vision, it's her vision, not yours or mine. If you don't come up with your own vision, you will always be referencing hers as a standard, even for stuff like the person you fall in love with and what you do as a profession. (I speak from experience.)
Some of her vision doesn't reflect reality--
by definition. She called art, "a selective recreation of reality according to an artist's metaphysical value judgments." I would take that further and say according to the knowledge and the time/space constraints of the artist. Note that she is explicit. She says she is not giving you the whole picture. She's being selective on purpose.
I'm not sure if the expression "living a stylized life" came from her, but I have seen this used in several places in O-Land. That's her art premise applied to life.
Well, here's the news. You (and I and everyone else) have a life that includes a lot of stuff that is not covered in her vision. Some of it's not even implied.
What to do?
Simple. You have to come up with a vision of your own. One you can believe in. One that you can commit to. One that excites you and gets you out of bed in the morning.
That sure is easy to say, ain't it? Heh. Say it, wave a magic wand and it's all resolved. Life suddenly has meaning. Yeah, right.
But if you do acquire a vision like that, you can add selections of Rand's vision to it if you love her works. In other words, you can use Rand's world to enrich your own--and be selective as all get-out yourself--rather than stepping into the selective world she devised and trying to become part of that.
So how do you come up with a vision?
How do you come up with a profession you can love?
I know a lot of people feel like the passage below from
The Fountainhead, but they are afraid to say it out loud in O-Land. After all, who wants to be Peter Keating?
"If you want my advice, Peter," he said at last, "you've made a mistake already. By asking me. By asking anyone. Never ask people. Not about your work. Don't you know what you want? How can you stand it, not to know?"
"You see, that's what I admire about you, Howard. You always know."
"Drop the compliments."
"But I mean it. How do you always manage to decide?"
"How can you let others decide for you?"
"But you see; I'm not sure, Howard. I'm never sure of myself...."
As a vision for a way of being (Roark, that is), this is a wonderful place to get to. But as a method for someone who has deep doubts, this "method" really sucks. (And I say that will a great deal of love and respect for Rand and her work.)
You know what to love and do because, well... you just know. And you don't know how anyone can be any different. And when a person asks how, he is wrong just for asking.
That's great.
Dayaamm!
I listened to Peikoff once say he received a lot of questions asking what someone should do if they don't have a driving passion in life. He didn't dismiss it as something icky like Rand did here (probably because of the sheer number of questions he received about this--and that made it so he could not ignore it), but I remember his answer was extremely unsatisfying.
I'm going on memory, so this may not be accurate. As I recall, he basically said to find something you like, commit to it, try to grow into it and see if the passion comes. And he added that's not perfect, but what else is there to do?
I can think of a butt-load of things to do and I am working on a project about it right now.
But I'm not sure if this is what you want to discuss.
Are you with me or have I gone off on a tangent and am not addressing your problem?
Michael
