login about faq

In society, especially in an extrovert-focused society such as the US, the benefits (or corresponding penalties) of social status or lack thereof are probably too great to be completely ignored by a rational individual.

My question is, should an Objectivist in that context care about his or her position in society when it can have a huge impact on his/her ability to get jobs, relate to others and find romantic partners?

asked May 14 '13 at 01:18

MarcT's gravatar image

MarcT
7016

edited May 14 '13 at 09:22

Greg%20Perkins's gravatar image

Greg Perkins ♦♦
1002425618


Howard Roark and Peter Keating are either-or. One can't be both. Objectivism also disputes any claim that the life of Howard Roark is a lifetime of pain and misery without ever finding happiness. It one objects that Roark's world is fiction and "real life isn't like that," then one should consider the Objectivist view of the role of art in man's life, especially romantic realism -- along with the role of ideas in general and the reality of the commitment needed to fight for better ideas in a less-than-ideal world. Unless one is living in a dictatorship, there is always a chance for a rational life in an irrational society.

answered May 17 '13 at 22:12

Ideas%20for%20Life's gravatar image

Ideas for Life ♦
467718

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Share This Page:

Tags:

×76
×32
×12

Asked: May 14 '13 at 01:18

Seen: 712 times

Last updated: May 17 '13 at 22:12