On Altruism, Sacrifice And Humility
Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2025 12:06 am
Ayn Rand said that altruism is evil and that it leads to tyranny. She was confusing misuses of the value for the value itself. Anything that has appeal to people - and that includes things that carry moral appeal - stand to be used for wrong. That Stalin appealed to the legitimate value of altruism to create a totalitarian order does not damn altruism; it damns Stalin. I've been involved with the most successful altruistic organization in the world - the Salvation Army. There is nothing tyrannical or corrupt about that organization.
She also claimed that sacrifice is evil and something that only a thief or a tyrant would want. Certainly there are situations in which this is the case. When brave, honest people sacrifice their lives for arrogance and incompetence of their leaders, this is not a rightful sacrifice. However there are situations when sacrifice is for the good. I sacrificed my freedom to raise my daughter, and I do not regret that choice.
In situations involving sacrifice, the question to ask is what is being sacrificed and for what. It makes sense to sacrifice an inferior quality for a superior quality. It does not make sense to sacrifice a superior quality for an inferior quality. I would sacrifice for love; I would not sacrifice for Nazism or Islamism. I would sacrifice for my family; I would not sacrifice for Catherine McKinnon or Michael Murphy. I would sacrifice for Thomas Jefferson; I would not sacrifice for Saddam Hussein.
With humility, we see described as arrogance all sorts of things that aren't. Students who take school seriously are seen as arrogant. No, they are kids who rightfully value learning. Women who want to be loved are seen as arrogant. No, they come from the understandable position of wanting to be appreciated for the colossal effort they put into being their best.
The claim frequently made about serious students is that they "think they're better than everyone else." What qualifies these people to speak for everyone - 8 billion people, most of them nothing like themselves? Of whatever arrogance the serious student is guilty, theirs is far greater, and it is a much more destructive kind of arrogance. The pride of the serious student, when channeled correctly, results in all sorts of contributions that benefit the world in all sorts of ways. Whereas nothing of any kind of good is owed to this attitude.
I once heard a professor say that there is good arrogance, which he defined as the belief that you can figure things out, and bad arrogance, which he defined as oppression. Probably the most destructive kind of arrogance was practiced by the Spanish, who destroyed the magnificent Aztec, Inca and Moore empires without contributing much of anything to mankind. The most constructive kind of arrogance is practiced by the Americans and the Jews, who made vast contributions to the world without killing nearly as many people as the Spanish or the Muslims. Probably the most humble populations in the world are the Chinese and the Hindu, who never engaged in large-scale colonialism and imperialism even though they were in a position to do so.
Sometimes having a healthy amount of pride is for the better. It takes pride to stand by one's contributions to the world. It takes pride to innovate. It takes pride to attempt difficult tasks.
Like altruism and sacrifice, humility is a value that stands to be used for wrong. Attacked here are the world's best contributors. So we see Muslims accusing Americans and Jews of arrogance when they have produced nothing comparable to what was produced by the Americans and the Jews. We see abusive, mean-spirited women accusing the prettier women of arrogance when the woman attacked has no ill will toward them and is in many cases even willing to go out of her way to help them. We see inner-city kids accusing better students of arrogance and in this way destroying their best minds, rendering themselves non-competitive.
All of these values, like any values, lend to being used for wrong. And in all cases it is important to scrutinize the person appealing to these values. Anything with appeal to people can be used for wrong. That includes things that carry moral appeal. And much wrong stands to be made in pursuit of these values when such are not adequately addressed.
She also claimed that sacrifice is evil and something that only a thief or a tyrant would want. Certainly there are situations in which this is the case. When brave, honest people sacrifice their lives for arrogance and incompetence of their leaders, this is not a rightful sacrifice. However there are situations when sacrifice is for the good. I sacrificed my freedom to raise my daughter, and I do not regret that choice.
In situations involving sacrifice, the question to ask is what is being sacrificed and for what. It makes sense to sacrifice an inferior quality for a superior quality. It does not make sense to sacrifice a superior quality for an inferior quality. I would sacrifice for love; I would not sacrifice for Nazism or Islamism. I would sacrifice for my family; I would not sacrifice for Catherine McKinnon or Michael Murphy. I would sacrifice for Thomas Jefferson; I would not sacrifice for Saddam Hussein.
With humility, we see described as arrogance all sorts of things that aren't. Students who take school seriously are seen as arrogant. No, they are kids who rightfully value learning. Women who want to be loved are seen as arrogant. No, they come from the understandable position of wanting to be appreciated for the colossal effort they put into being their best.
The claim frequently made about serious students is that they "think they're better than everyone else." What qualifies these people to speak for everyone - 8 billion people, most of them nothing like themselves? Of whatever arrogance the serious student is guilty, theirs is far greater, and it is a much more destructive kind of arrogance. The pride of the serious student, when channeled correctly, results in all sorts of contributions that benefit the world in all sorts of ways. Whereas nothing of any kind of good is owed to this attitude.
I once heard a professor say that there is good arrogance, which he defined as the belief that you can figure things out, and bad arrogance, which he defined as oppression. Probably the most destructive kind of arrogance was practiced by the Spanish, who destroyed the magnificent Aztec, Inca and Moore empires without contributing much of anything to mankind. The most constructive kind of arrogance is practiced by the Americans and the Jews, who made vast contributions to the world without killing nearly as many people as the Spanish or the Muslims. Probably the most humble populations in the world are the Chinese and the Hindu, who never engaged in large-scale colonialism and imperialism even though they were in a position to do so.
Sometimes having a healthy amount of pride is for the better. It takes pride to stand by one's contributions to the world. It takes pride to innovate. It takes pride to attempt difficult tasks.
Like altruism and sacrifice, humility is a value that stands to be used for wrong. Attacked here are the world's best contributors. So we see Muslims accusing Americans and Jews of arrogance when they have produced nothing comparable to what was produced by the Americans and the Jews. We see abusive, mean-spirited women accusing the prettier women of arrogance when the woman attacked has no ill will toward them and is in many cases even willing to go out of her way to help them. We see inner-city kids accusing better students of arrogance and in this way destroying their best minds, rendering themselves non-competitive.
All of these values, like any values, lend to being used for wrong. And in all cases it is important to scrutinize the person appealing to these values. Anything with appeal to people can be used for wrong. That includes things that carry moral appeal. And much wrong stands to be made in pursuit of these values when such are not adequately addressed.