Rand says in her aesthetics writings in The Romantic Manifesto that art concretizes metaphysics and performs the psychological and epistemological function of allowing us to directly grasp that metaphysics. What is the deepest significance, then, of the fact that Rand portrays in her novels a deeply chaotic and turbulent world?

The explanation is found not in Rand's aesthetics, however, but in her metaphysics—-specifically, in her "metaphysical view of man's nature," a given view being defined by answers to certain metaphysical questions. The answers to one such question—-does man have the power of choice or not?—-are, respectively, the Volition Premise and the Determinism Premise. The answers to another—-is the universe knowable or not?—-are the Intelligible Universe Premise and the Unintelligible Universe Premise. The answers to another—-can man achieve his goals in life or not?—-are the Benevolent Universe Premise and the Malevolent Universe premise.

Since both critics and supporters of Rand frequently misunderstand this last pair of premises, a brief digression seems in order.

One can begin, as many people do, with the anthropomorphic assumption that the universe is (or is inhabited by) a superior Being that cares one way or the other whether human beings are happy or miserable. One thus has a choice between seeing the universe as actually benevolent or malevolent in a personal, psychological sense.

Or, one can adopt instead the more open-ended, naturalistic view that the universe is, in fact, so constituted that one either can or cannot achieve happiness. As Leonard Peikoff observes Objectivism: the Philosophy of Ayn Rand, p. 342), there is a sense of "benevolent"—-viz., "auspicious to human life"—-which does apply to the universe. He points out that "if a man does recognize and adhere to reality, then he can achieve his values in reality; he can and, other things being equal, he will."

Although Peikoff does not say so, there is an obvious parallel between this view of the universe's benevolence and Rand's discussion of morality ("Causality vs. Duty," Philosophy: Who Needs It, pp. 118–19). Just as the "demands" of reality are not "categorical imperatives" but "conditional imperatives," so too is the "benevolence" of the universe not "categorical benevolence" but "conditional benevolence." If you adopt an objective attitude of respect for the facts of reality, and if you enact the causes necessary to produce particular desired effects, then you will be able to achieve your values in reality. (Perhaps an unpublished essay, "Causality vs. Blessedness," is lurking somewhere among the archives of the Rand estate!)

The (conditional) benevolence of the universe, it can now be seen, is just another aspect of the turbulent, dynamic, chaotic processes that Rand and others see in the world around us. Just as (Rand has observed) knowledge is both possible and non-automatic, so too, more generally, are achievement and happiness. Knowledge, in particular, may be gained, but only with the right attitude, the right method, and the requisite effort. Specifically, one must have a respect for facts, employ logic in validating one's conclusions, and use whatever ingenuity and persistence it takes in order to pry those facts loose from a world which does not (usually) hand us ready-made intellectual contents on a silver platter.

No one said it would be easy! Not knowledge—-and not achievement or happiness either. The world is a messy, turbulent place, and it takes effort to grasp and retain one's fulfillment, whether cognitive, existential, or emotional. It is possible, because the universe is (conditionally) benevolent-—that's the Benevolent Universe Premise—-but it's not automatic, because the universe is turbulent and requires effort from those who want to survive.

Rand has written of the anti-effort mentality, the attitude of resentment toward the Law of Causality, and especially the fact that survival is not automatic and requires effort. Although these insights have been driven home time and again in the descriptions of her characters in The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, however, they unfortunately were not included in her catalog of metaphysical value-judgments.

The time is ripe for us to amend that catalog by adding (for want of better names) the Pro-Effort (Turbulent Universe) Premise and the Anti-Effort (Placid Universe) Premise. It seems undeniable that some sort of acknowledgment of the fundamental importance of the non-automatic-achievement parallel to the Benevolent Universe Premise is in order.

REB