2 ms·
The thing that I felt came through in this article (or maybe it's just my biases) was the hollowness of engaging in relationships purely for one's own selfish e
by bigstrat2003 2y ago
The thing that I felt came through in this article (or maybe it's just my biases) was the hollowness of engaging in relationships purely for one's own selfish ends. Sooner or later (as happened to these people), the selfish desires don't line up any more, and the relationships get torn apart. Contrary to Rand, I don't think that love is inherently selfish (quite the opposite in fact), and it seems to me that love based on altruism is much more stable (and more praiseworthy) than love based on what the other person can do for me.
But then again I would say that, so it's hard to tell if that actually is something I took away from the article or if it's just confirmation bias at play.
- ahartmetz 2y agoIMO: In the end, everything we do is out of inner motivation, and love is no exception, so: all selfish. But that is not to be taken too literally - being unselfish can feel good, too, and is therefore "selfish". Rand's recognizing moral character or whatever as the base of love seems completely random, not how any of that works. We're smart animals! Biological creatures. We need to reproduce. It gets messy.