HELP!

[Danneskjold]

My mom has declared all-out WAR on Ayn Rand and Objectivism. Of course, to her Ayn Rand is Objectivism. Furthermore, there is nothing to Ayn Rand beyond her affair. She is completely an utterly irrational about anything concerning Ayn Rand (so far as to be an utter hypocrite by not holding people to the same standard she sets Rand to in the area of sexuality who she respects).

So, if anyone can help me at all, I need some sort of rational as to why Rand would have the affair or something.

The other day I walked into the house talking about Objectivism with my dad. My mom immediatly has a negative reaction (not knowing the nature of the conversation) and goes on one of her rants. The kitchen remodeler, being a friend of the family, inquires as to what Objectivism is. I am walking up stairs when I hear my mom start her explanation of Objectivism with the story of Rand's affair. I rush downstairs in hopes of preventing my mom from making an ass of herself by doing two things:

1) Talk about something that is comopletely non-essential to Objectivism.

2) Look like a spiteful idiot.

If anyone has any sort of advice about the situation, it is more than welcome. I'm really tired of trying to learn while my mom is openly and irrationally hostile towards my chosen philosophy. I'm really not sure what she is trying to accomplish by attacking Rand, but it's not making me dislike Objectivism any more.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Jeff,

I can't think of anything to fix this. When hatred of Rand sets in, it seems incurable.

An attitude shift might help on the domestic scene, though. I do not know your mother but I do know one thing. She loves you with all her heart. I don't think she is opposing you out of a need to be a control freak. She is fighting what she thinks is something that will harm you. In her own mind, she is trying to protect you.

I find this sentiment noble and good in a parent. I highly approve of it.

The hard part is convincing her that you are growing up, that you need to see these things for yourself, and that she should trust you to make good decisions about ideas. After all, she was one of the main people who taught you and was one of your main moral examples from since before you can remember. I am sure her influence has been very, very good. You learned about integrity and independent thinking from somewhere. I suspect she was a prime source.

I would not try to convince her to agree with Objectivism. She is entitled to her thoughts and they seem pretty fixed.

About the affair—it was one huge screw-up. (And who is making this comment is one who has done his own.) There is no getting around that truth, so it should be admitted openly. People screw up like that at times. Objectivists do. Christians do. Communists do. Buddhists do. Nobody seems immune to screwing up at some time in their love lives.

I suggest telling her that you have to think through the issue of Objectivism on your own. If you are denied contact with the ideas, you will only huger for them more. But she should not be afraid. She was a wise mother. She now has a wise son. He will not allow himself to become evil or perverted from reading books.

Michael

[Danneskjold]

I do know that she loves me and is trying to do what's best for me. I also know that there is no possible way that the approach she is taking is the best one. How? Because she's making me more determined to get my hands on anything by Rand and she's failing completely at preventing it. She wants the best, but she's not being real rational about it.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Jeff,

Certainly not effective. That's why I suggest suggesting to her that she now let go and trust two things:

1. You, and

2. The upbringing she gave you.

(And I suggest you show her that you love her.)

Michael

[Victor Pross]

Jeff,

Tell your mother that it is either Objectivism - an atheistic philosophy or a Jim Jones type of cult-- a theist religion. Let’s really put her rationality to the test. :twitch:

-Victor

[Charles R. Anderson]

Jeff,

Michael's advice sounds really good, especially the parenthetical advice. Your Mom may be acting irrationally (therefore ineffectively), because she is afraid you will stop loving her.

My Mom is a Christian who takes her belief quite seriously. When I told her that I did not believe in God, she called me a Communist and compared me to Hitler. Nothing rational there! But, she went to bed angry and the next day, though she still disagreed with me, she told me she loved me and that she should not have said the things she said.

Most likely, your Mom will get over her fears, especially if you reassure her of your love. Very irrational behavior is most often brought on by fear and mother's often have a horrifying fear that their sons will stop loving them. They put a lot into raising you and they hope it will not be forgotten.

It is interesting that your Dad is fine with discussing Objectivism with you. Is it possible your Mom is worried that you are encouraging his interest in Objectivism and she will then lose him or simply be outnumbered by the two of you?

[Kevin Haggerty]

Hey Jeff,

I'm very sorry to hear about the trouble in your house. I think Michael is right in focusing on this issue of you growing up and therefore, to some degree, growing away from your mom. It is an innevitable part of becoming a man. You and your mother both will grieve the loss of your boyhood in your own ways and for your own reasons. Hopefully, the two of you will find some common ground there at some point. But for now, AR and Oism, are in some ways the most obvious signs of you growing away from your mom. It may be that deep down, when your mom hears you talking about Objectivism, she hears you leaving. See what I mean? Rather than deal with the pretty overwhelming fear of losing you, she focuses her fear and anger on Oism.

So I think Michael is spot on when he councels you to reassure your mom that you love her and that there will always be a place for her in your heart, regardless of whether or not she's an Objectivist. I suspect she's afraid that you may decide that since she is not an Objectivist that you might denounce her or otherwise "break" with her, just as AR broke with NB.

Hey, Michael, maybe you could start a thread for people to discuss "Loving the Non-Objectivists in Our Lives." I'm sure Jeff isn't the only Objectivist here who has an important relationship with a non-Oist.

I do know that she loves me and is trying to do what's best for me. I also know that there is no possible way that the approach she is taking is the best one. How? Because she's making me more determined to get my hands on anything by Rand and she's failing completely at preventing it. She wants the best, but she's not being real rational about it.

It's remarkable to me that your mother wants what's best for you and that her actions make you all the more committed to studying Objectivism. You see how, subconsciously, the two of you are in agreement? She wants what's best for you and you believe that studying Oism is best for you. If we look past the surface, you can see that your mom is getting exactly what she wants! You know the old saying, "Be careful what you wish for..."

-Kevin

Edited January 27, 2007 by Kevin Haggerty

[Chris Grieb]

Jeff; Charles and Michael's advice is very sound. It's very clear that your parents do love you. Use that fact to work with and I think you will get through this OK.

[Danneskjold]

Thanks a lot for the advice guys. I'll put it to use.

[reason.on]

My mom has declared all-out WAR on Ayn Rand and Objectivism. Of course, to her Ayn Rand is Objectivism. Furthermore, there is nothing to Ayn Rand beyond her affair. She is completely an utterly irrational about anything concerning Ayn Rand (so far as to be an utter hypocrite by not holding people to the same standard she sets Rand to in the area of sexuality who she respects).

So, if anyone can help me at all, I need some sort of rational as to why Rand would have the affair or something.

The other day I walked into the house talking about Objectivism with my dad. My mom immediatly has a negative reaction (not knowing the nature of the conversation) and goes on one of her rants. The kitchen remodeler, being a friend of the family, inquires as to what Objectivism is. I am walking up stairs when I hear my mom start her explanation of Objectivism with the story of Rand's affair. I rush downstairs in hopes of preventing my mom from making an ass of herself by doing two things:

1) Talk about something that is comopletely non-essential to Objectivism.

2) Look like a spiteful idiot.

If anyone has any sort of advice about the situation, it is more than welcome. I'm really tired of trying to learn while my mom is openly and irrationally hostile towards my chosen philosophy. I'm really not sure what she is trying to accomplish by attacking Rand, but it's not making me dislike Objectivism any more.

My advice; don't stress too much Jeff, ultimately you mom's war isn't your own. And keep in mind that most people have some kind of intellectual disagreement with one or the other of their parents. Also, be patient with your mom, as you've already noted, she is likely trying to protect you from something she sees as harmful, she may be mistaken, but it is wise to at least be cognizant of where she is coming from.

It sounds like intellectual discussions are pretty common in your home, so I would suggest trying to talk to your mom about why she feels betrayed or angry with Rand, or maybe even talking to your dad about it, since he may have some insight. But, if your mom is able to articulate her feelings and thoughts to you, her emotional reactions may decrease; let her know that you are open to hearing what she has to say, even though you may not agree, allow her the space to work past her emotional reactions.

Maybe you can engage you mom in a discussion about elements of Rand's thinking (individualism, a commitment to happiness, rational thinking, an appreciation of achievement, political freedom) that stand on their own despite Rand's choices in her personal life; find the common ground you may still share.

I'm thinking that your mom might also benefit from reading Nathaniel or Barbara Branden's books about their time with Rand. Reading one or both may help her put some rational context to the affair, and help her to understand why it happened. She may not initially be open to exploring the situation, but it might be worth the suggestion.

RCR

Edited January 27, 2007 by R. Christian Ross

[Laure]

I recommended these to someone else on this site, and I'll recommend them to you as well, Jeff. Check out "Letters of Ayn Rand" edited by Michael S. Berliner, and "Facets of Ayn Rand" by Charles and Mary Ann Sures. Try to get your mom to read them. They show Rand as a real person who had many fine qualities. Your mother has bought into the worst possible twisting of the Brandens' depictions of Rand. "Letters" especially might bring a balance to her opinion of Rand. You can hardly go 2 pages in that book without encountering an expression of gratitude or love from Rand to a letter's recipient.

Another thing to point out to your mother is that you're not signing some kind of a contract that says you have to agree with everything Rand said or did! You have your own ideas.

[Rich Engle]

Michael's advice is indeed calm, and sound.

Jeff, sometimes these things have the appearance of being much larger and threatening than they really are. Emotions on both sides come into play.

If I understand correctly, she didn't forbid you from reading Rand. I'm sure she knows better. Just go quietly on your path. And continue to be warm, and loving, and respectful to your mom, of course.

It's not purely a matter of whether someone is being "rational," or not. Objectivism is like any other discipline-- nothing in it can 100% guarantee that someone somewhere will take it wrong, and become into a nasty or hypocritical person. Somewhere, maybe it truly is what she knows of The Affair that makes her distrustful of Rand-- the practice what you preach thing (something that is a fine goal--if only human nature allowed for perfection).

I guess I am telling you that as much as I love "rational," there is a lot more to life. Even reality, sometimes, is overrated...there are moments.

I always find it's better to think about how you are going about living your personal philosophy, rather than promoting or defending it.

Smile more if you need to. Go hug your mom and tell you you love her, even more than your books... Yes, she knows, but people can never hear it enough, especially moms.

Edited January 27, 2007 by Rich Engle

[Victor Pross]

Jeff,

I agree with Laure. The Letters of Ayn Rand offers a tremendous insight into Ayn Rand’s personality. In it, we are offered a candid look into the human being and the artist. The letters captures, as Leonard Peikoff states in the book’s introduction, “her mind—and also her feelings, her actions, her achievements, her character, her soul.” There is much controversy and debate in assessing Any Rand, the human being, as to what type of person she really was, and this book reveals the truth, and rises above the misplaced veneration and murk that has plagued Ayn Rand for decades.

-Victor

Edited January 27, 2007 by Victor Pross

[sjw]

She is completely an utterly irrational about anything concerning Ayn Rand (so far as to be an utter hypocrite by not holding people to the same standard she sets Rand to in the area of sexuality who she respects).

So, if anyone can help me at all, I need some sort of rational as to why Rand would have the affair or something.

It sounds to me like you want to argue with/convince your mom. Up to a point, that may be fine, but don't lose sight of the fact that she is your mom, and you are in effect a guest, your parents give you food and shelter, you are not quite an adult yet, you are a dependent. In other situations it might be a compromise of your principles to suffer irrational behavior, but in this situation the most fundamental issue is the fact that you are a guest in their house and should be a gracious guest.

Another point I'd make is that adults don't tend to change their ways very easily, and having a 16-year-old kid tell you what's what (even if he's right) is probably not going to be the most convincing scenario. Maybe you should try to defer these issues until you're older. I say maybe because I don't know enough about the situation, only you of course can make the actual judgment calls, all we can do is offer some things to think about.

[Wolf DeVoon]

Er -- second opinion, slightly different diagnosis: clam up about Objectivism for a while. The strikers in Galt's Gulch did not advertise themselves to be targeted by second-handers. I've written at length that family is the ultimate tyranny. It is extremely difficult to see yourself as a separate person, mostly unrelated to your family mentally and spiritually. Objectivists are a minority group. Extremely small group, unpopular with almost everybody you are likely to encounter.

W.

Edited January 27, 2007 by Wolf DeVoon

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Laure,

I second your recommendations. The are very good in presenting a positive side of Rand.

I take issue with your information about the motives of Jeff's mother. The only information Jeff provided here was "I hear my mom start her explanation of Objectivism with the story of Rand's affair." As I remember, none of his other posts have advanced beyond this.

You wrote, "Your mother has bought into the worst possible twisting of the Brandens' depictions of Rand."

I do not see how "worst possible twisting of the Brandens' depictions" can be concluded from "story of Rand's affair." Do you have any other information about the thoughts of Jeff's mother that leads you to that conclusion?

From what Jeff has stated, his mother is a Christian and opposes polyamory on principle. Her issue appears to be the polyamory (because it is against God's commandments) and probably the atheism, not any detail provided by the Brandens other than the affair.

Michael

EDIT: Wolf, that's actually pretty good advice, especially if things get impossible.

[Laure]

Michael, I may be making unwarranted assumptions about Jeff's mother's views. I was assuming that she bought into the negative characterizations of Rand that appear in the press from time to time. (Authoritarian, paranoid, insane, etc, etc) If it's mostly a fear of atheism, well, the best thing is to just demonstrate by your actions that lack of religion does not equate to lack of morality.

It's funny, when I was a high schooler getting into Rand, my mother's concern upon hearing that she was an atheist was, "She's not a communist, is she?" She was very relieved to learn that Rand was anti-communist. I remember later watching her Donahue Show appearances with my mom, who actually got quite a kick out of them!

My dad was upset to learn that I was an atheist, but he didn't try to argue it with me; he was just upset that I'm going to Hell. :hmm:

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Laure,

I just finished living 2 years with my parents after a 32 year absence. (Now I am with Kat.) The atheism is still something that bothers my mother a lot.

Michael

[Kat]

Jeff, from what I understand your mother and sister are deeply religious and your father is less religious. I think that may be at the heart of it. Religious people tend to equate faith with morality. You may want to read a book by C.S. Lewis called Why I am a Christian (or something similar). I'm sure your mom would be happy seeing you read the book, and I am convinced that you have enough intellectual ammunition to shoot his whole crappy theory of morality is impossible without faith full of holes.

I am certainly not telling you argue with your mother about religion, but to see her perspective as a Christian. Your mom may be focusing on the affair to prove to you that atheism is immoral in an effort to bring you back to the flock. Of course, I am simply speculating here, but some Christians tend to be very threatened by atheists and think we are all a bunch of hedonists and satanists. I used to hear that kind of stuff in Sunday school as a kid.

I know you are studying Objectivism for your own selfish reasons. You certainly seem more interested in understanding the philosophy of Objectivism, which holds valuable lessons in critical thinking, acting in your own self-interest, finding your own happiness and understanding morality based on reason rather than faith. That is more important than the affair.

btw - Does she judge everyone by their sex life or only Rand? If Ayn Rand were a man, do you think an affair would matter to her? Does she talk the same way about Bill Clinton, etc.?

Kat

[Danneskjold]

My mother sees some type of extreme cruelty in the way that the affair was done. It is her perspective that it was flaunted in front of Rand's husband and was an overall painful experience for him.

[Laure]

Well, unless the "Journals of Frank O'Connor" come to light some time, we'll never know. I would just say that it was an unusual situation, and that they were unusual people. He did stay married to her, and I would think if he was terribly hurt he would have left her.

[sjw]

My mother sees some type of extreme cruelty in the way that the affair was done. It is her perspective that it was flaunted in front of Rand's husband and was an overall painful experience for him.

Ironic...

[Philip Coates]

And that's a perfectly reasonable conclusion for her to draw...it would be true of 99% of all husbands and close marital relationships. (What happened in this one, we weren't there. We've got reports from people who weren't him.)

[Victor Pross]

Everybody seems to think that monogamous relationships are a law of nature and that by infringing these codes must invariably invite trouble. So should we include monogamous relationships among the axioms or just simply join hands with conservative Christians? The point of the affair is that no deception took place—it was out in the open. Rand would not have conducted a clandestine affair based on lies and deception. She didn’t!

Edited January 27, 2007 by Victor Pross

[Danneskjold]

Would a person staying with a non-monogamous partner while they are monogamous be in their rational self-interest? Sex is physically an act that involves mind and body, strong feelings, and ownership of both. Is this not disrupted by non-monogamous relationships? Can a person have meaningful sex in that way? If it is meaningful is it as meaningful as it should be?

Edit: And in your case Victor, I would suggest asking Angie about whether or not you should include monogamity amongst the axioms.

Edited January 27, 2007 by Jeff Kremer