Jordan Peterson thoughts on Ayn Rand

Ayn Rand great mind or just simplifying maneuvers

If moral involved, not art but propaganda?

So Ayn Rand has tried to simplyfy the complex to the simple. But does she have wrong starting premise? I dont know, I'm just trying to find the best ideas that work practically.

The thruth is though hard to find, but the truth in itself is simple. So at least she tries, and it does sound pretty logical considering she is right on her first premis. There are a lot of people who tries to make themself out to be smarter than Ayn Rand, but hardly give anny good argument or give some other result. Just says that she wasnt a great mind or something of that sort. Well I don't know. It is often above my head, but at least I try to find the persons who has the best reasoning. I can see Jordans Point, or his subjective thought about Ayns literature, but I dont know if it's has any value actually. Perhaps I'm a bit harsch, but he has to give something more to counter Ayn's premise. Like 12 Rules for life is not nearly is nothing to compare with.

Jordan gets the question what he thinks of Objectivism and the philosophies of Ayn Rand. But it seems to me he has not read the other stuff except the fiction books, am I right?

”Well I like the emphasis on the individual responsibility you know. I think that’s very important. I like also, although this is still more the fiction element,. I I think she was actually more powerful as a fiction writer than as a philosopher. And that's not that's not a denigrating comment. Because I don't believe that philosophy is a higher calling than fiction, they're there they have their own domains.” [. . .]

“I don't regard Ayn Rand as a great mind. I don't I don't think that her take on things was sufficiently differentiated and sophisticated.” – Jordan B. Peterson, (Ayn Rand, a Good Philosopher? 2017)

Not a great mind? I think both Jordan and Ayn have fantastic minds.

Jordan points out that goals do not work over time in a movie. That the story is everything, not the goal.

”Well that just doesn’t work over time. Story is everything. And a story is something that you can’t contrive it, it has to manifest itself in some sense. A story has its internal logic and own arc. And if you are aiming it at a moral statement then it’s not art, it’s propaganda. And it will fall flat. Frozen was a good example that has propagandistic right from the end to the beginning as far as I was concern. It was the right propaganda for the time but no one will watch it in 20 years. Whereas they will be watching the little mermaid for example, the beauty and the beast forever because they are perfect. Pinocchio is pretty much perfect, it gets a little moralistic from time to time..” – Jordan B. Peterson, (49.00, 12 Rules for Life - An Antidote to Chaos, 2017)

Jordan thinks that Ayn Rand portrays people in different bodies, but similar people in her novels and they are voices according to her political views, and even if she does a hero story, she is not Dostoevsky.

”She’s not Dostoevsky cause what Dostoevsky did, he was the greatest novelist that ever lived as far as I’m concerned. Head and shoulders above anyone else I can think of. He didn’t know the answer when he started writing. And so he’d have one character stand for one set of principles and ideas and another character stand for another and he would develop those to the fullest extent and put them in a battlefield where he made both characters as powerful representatives of those positions as he possibly could and then he’d watch the outcome. And you are taken along with that, it’s amazing. And that’s what a good piece of art does. A good story, a good movie, a good painting for that matter, it's more complex with paintings but the artist pulls you past where you are. Even where he is. Artists can’t tell you what the hell they’re up to, you know, they don’t know. The can maybe guess but actually what they are doing when they produce a piece of art is figuring out what they’re up to. And that’s when you know that they are actually artists. They are moving beyond themselves.” – Jordan B. Peterson, (52.00, 12 Rules for Life - An Antidote to Chaos, 2017)

Okay, let start with a quote from Ayns book The Romantic Manifesto. Is an ideal man moral, yes.

"Since my purpose is the presentation of an ideal man, I had to define and present the conditions which make him possible and which his existence requires. Since man’s character is the product of his premises, I had to define the kind of premises and values that create the character of an ideal man and motivate his actions; which means that I had to define and present a rational code of ethics. Since man acts among and deals with other men, I had to present the kind of social system that makes it possible for ideal men to exist and to function—a free, productive, rational system, which demands and rewards the best in every man, great or average, and which is, obviously, laissez-faire capitalism." Ayn Rand “The Goal of My Writing,” The Romantic Manifesto, revised edition (New York: Signet, 1975), 163–64. 

Here comes Jordan Petersons thought about it.It is interesting absolutely.

”This is one of the weaknesses of the Rationalist argument I think. Is that we have to use Heuristic to operate in the world. Heuristics are simplifying maneuvers, and there is no option. You have to use heuristic and the reason for that is there is a lot more world than there is of you. And so you take this incredible complex reality and you simplify it. Now the simplification has to have merit and what makes them have merit is a topic for a very lengthy discussion. But to produce those simplifications, you have to use heuristic. You have to use cognitive shortcuts. And it looks to me like narrative is a heuristic. And the reason that we need to tell stories and that we probably need to have our ethics grounded in stories is you can't make a list of rules how to tell you how to live. Rules don't cefice, but you can tell stories that lay out broad principles, and those are heuristic principles.

The thing is that the most fundamental stories seem to have a religious core, I’m not exactly sure why that is although I think it probably has to do with something I referred to earlier which is the idea that you are as a soul, you are the thing that transforms potential into actuality. That seems to be the grounding concept in some sense.There something divine about that. Out of that arises a sequence of stories that are shaped to cross perhaps evolutionary history. And inside that our more articulated ethic exists. I don't see a way out of that because you cannot make an exhaustive list of rules that enables ethical movement forward. And you need to do that if you had a purely rational way of the way human cognition functions, something like that.” – Jordan Peterson, (THE WEAKNESS of AYN RAND'S Rationalism)

Returning Lobster [Youtube channel], (june 2021). Jordan Peterson on THE WEAKNESS of AYN RAND'S Rationalism. Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4OidBLJ6-w

”I don't really disapprove of Ayn Rand. I liked reading her novels." - Jordan Peterson

”The problem with Ayn Rand as a literary figure is that all her heroes are the same people. And they’re completely Heroic. And the whole of her villains are the same people, the same persons, just in different bodies and they are almost completely reprehensible. And so one of the hallmarks of high quality literature is that the battle between good and evil isn't just thought out between the good guys and the bad guys. Like at a cultural level, that would be an identity political issue and that it’s not the good guy as an individual who’s like the next messiah. In Ayn Rand it would be the capitalist messiah. And then the evil reprehensible satanic figure and all of the good traits are embodied in one and all of the bad traits of the other.

In really sophisticated literature I would say even the Villain have good qualities. Villains are way more interesting when they are also interestingly good.

Jordan brings up Fyodor Dostoevsky, Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov as good examples of high quality literature.

Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment is a good example of that. And all of Dostoevsky's villains for that matter, because they have deeply admiral qualities. 

Ivan for example who’s not exactly a villain but he’s certainly atheistic, which puts him at odds with Dostoevky and the brothers Karamazov, Ivan has everything going for him. He’s good looking, he’s dashing, he’s young, he’s brave, he’s got military training, he’s clear headed, he’s a hell of a villain, he’s a great villain. In Ayn Rand it’s just too formulated in my estimation, and starts to verge on the ideological. She was primarily motivated by making a political point rather than by writing literature by my estimation. Having said that I would also say I got great pleasure in reading Ayn Rand’s books. So I don’t precisely disapprove of her, she just isn't a top rate philosopher and also not a top rate literary figure. And those are the reasons. She’s a little bit too propagandistic and her character are too unidimensional.” - Jordan Peterson

I tried reading Crime and Punishment a long time ago, but coulnt not find it interesting. I'll give The Brothers Karamazov a new chance, just ordered it.

Yes, Ayn Rand tries to make a point in her literature, and she's pretty clear about it. Why make it too complicated? I'm still a fan of Jordan Peterson since he's a sharp guy and I always values his opinions. But Ayn seems to me a bit sharper still.

We appreciate Jordan being honest with us. Thank you. The words below is from a resent interview done at the beginning of 2022. The comments are unrelated to Ayn Rand though.

 ”You aim to climp up hill to the highest peak you can possibly envision. And that’s better than happiness.” – Jordan Peterson, (How To Become The Person You’ve Always Wanted To Be | E113, (1.00.00, 2022))

 Jordan Peterson gets the question. Why do you do what you do?

”To see what will happen. Some programs you cannot predict, right. You can not predict how they are going to end. You have to run them. Well I believe that truth will save the world. I believe that. So you speak truthfully and you watch what happens. And you take your consequences. And maybe you hope and have some faith that in the final analysis things will work out in your favor. Perhaps they will, perhaps they wont.”[. . .] ”It’s a decision you know. Will truth, beauty  and love save the world? Well you can find out.” – Jordan Peterson, (How To Become The Person You’ve Always Wanted To Be | E113, (1.03.00, 2022))

References:

ManOfAllCreation [Youtube channel], (nov. 2017). Ayn Rand, a Good Philosopher? | Jordan Peterson. Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9aHYj93xJY

The Rubin Report [Youtube channel], (nov. 2017). 12 Rules for Life - An Antidote to Chaos & Live Q&A | Jordan Peterson | POLITICS | Rubin Report. Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJJClhqGq_M

Ayn Rand “The Goal of My Writing,” The Romantic Manifesto, revised edition (New York: Signet, 1975), p.163–64. 

Returning Lobster [Youtube channel], (june 2021). Jordan Peterson on THE WEAKNESS of AYN RAND'S Rationalism. Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4OidBLJ6-w

Ayn Rand Institure [Youtube channel], (july 2018). Philosophy Discussion at Ayn Rand Conference (OCON). Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOU7-33BMY4 . (40.00)

Philoeidos [Youtube channel], (june 2017). Jordan Peterson enjoyed Ayn Rand?. Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofVqp-RMDpE

The Diary Of A CEO [Youtube channel], (jan. 2022). Jordan Peterson: How To Become The Person You’ve Always Wanted To Be | E113. Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uLDin9A9pc