This is actually quite useful, and it’s how I got to the political views I have today. I started out very liberal, having been raised by liberals. I realized that this was a problem for the reasons in the OP, and also that I was biased by my need to identify with the group. To break myself out of these thought patterns, I read The Fountainhead with as open and accepting a mind as possible. It didn’t contain much in the way of rational argument, but it shook up my belief system enough that I no longer feel the same tribal attachment to any political party. This in turn let me form an opinion on each issue based on evidence, and I now hold some opinions that would be called “liberal” and others that would be called “conservative”.
Can’t say I’m surprised, since I was about to mention my own reaction to Atlas Shrugged. I have continuously, near-obsessively dissected the book (both in terms of the rationality of its arguments and the quality of writing it contains)… and I still find my views changing, or at least my initial reactions changing, the more of it I read. It’s a very odd experience. I have no idea what would have happened if I’d started reading it younger (I’m 28) and less aware of the way that politics and business proceed in the real world.
With that said, I think the effect is a net positive. I now see more of the stuff that Objectivists object to in the everyday world—it grabs my attention much more to hear somebody say something like “well, he really needed the job”—but it doesn’t seem to have interfered with my ability to analyze the situation (for example, when multiple candidates are sufficiently qualified and no other differences are significant, it is the most productive thing to give a job to the qualified person who needs it most). Picking apart the places where Rand is wrong, or at least fails to make a convincing argument, has both equipped me to argue against those viewpoints when expressed by others, and has heightened my ability to see the places where she’s right.
Bringing this back on topic, though, I’m not sure how parallel the scenarios (reading a book by choice but with the conscious intention of exploring the author’s ideas and biases vs. picking up biases by accident from a teacher) really are. Part of that may be that I do not automatically associate a book with the personhood of the author, the way I associate a class with the personhood of the teacher (indeed, I have to constantly consciously remind myself of Rand’s own experiences to even begin to comprehend some of her arguments; I have never had to similarly remind myself more than once when dealing with a person in the flesh). I certainly internalize lessons and viewpoints much more in person than I do from a text.
Relatedly, I need to get myself to some presentations and/or workshops on rationality, as I’m new and still find many of the concepts that I am trying to learn are… slippery, in a way that things I learned from a “real person” almost never are. Of course, the fact that I’m trying to become more rational, while I am in no way trying to become Objectivist, may make a big difference. Too many axes for the data that I have, I think, though further analysis may show otherwise.
This is actually quite useful, and it’s how I got to the political views I have today. I started out very liberal, having been raised by liberals. I realized that this was a problem for the reasons in the OP, and also that I was biased by my need to identify with the group. To break myself out of these thought patterns, I read The Fountainhead with as open and accepting a mind as possible. It didn’t contain much in the way of rational argument, but it shook up my belief system enough that I no longer feel the same tribal attachment to any political party. This in turn let me form an opinion on each issue based on evidence, and I now hold some opinions that would be called “liberal” and others that would be called “conservative”.
Oddly enough, the book that prompted my post was Atlas Shrugged :)
Can’t say I’m surprised, since I was about to mention my own reaction to Atlas Shrugged. I have continuously, near-obsessively dissected the book (both in terms of the rationality of its arguments and the quality of writing it contains)… and I still find my views changing, or at least my initial reactions changing, the more of it I read. It’s a very odd experience. I have no idea what would have happened if I’d started reading it younger (I’m 28) and less aware of the way that politics and business proceed in the real world.
With that said, I think the effect is a net positive. I now see more of the stuff that Objectivists object to in the everyday world—it grabs my attention much more to hear somebody say something like “well, he really needed the job”—but it doesn’t seem to have interfered with my ability to analyze the situation (for example, when multiple candidates are sufficiently qualified and no other differences are significant, it is the most productive thing to give a job to the qualified person who needs it most). Picking apart the places where Rand is wrong, or at least fails to make a convincing argument, has both equipped me to argue against those viewpoints when expressed by others, and has heightened my ability to see the places where she’s right.
Bringing this back on topic, though, I’m not sure how parallel the scenarios (reading a book by choice but with the conscious intention of exploring the author’s ideas and biases vs. picking up biases by accident from a teacher) really are. Part of that may be that I do not automatically associate a book with the personhood of the author, the way I associate a class with the personhood of the teacher (indeed, I have to constantly consciously remind myself of Rand’s own experiences to even begin to comprehend some of her arguments; I have never had to similarly remind myself more than once when dealing with a person in the flesh). I certainly internalize lessons and viewpoints much more in person than I do from a text.
Relatedly, I need to get myself to some presentations and/or workshops on rationality, as I’m new and still find many of the concepts that I am trying to learn are… slippery, in a way that things I learned from a “real person” almost never are. Of course, the fact that I’m trying to become more rational, while I am in no way trying to become Objectivist, may make a big difference. Too many axes for the data that I have, I think, though further analysis may show otherwise.