The man
without a purpose is a man who drifts at the mercy of random feelings or
unidentified urges and is capable of any evil, because he is totally out of
control of his own life. In order to be in control of your life, you have to
have a purpose—a productive purpose . . . . The man who has no purpose, but has
to act, acts to destroy others. That is not the same thing as a productive or
creative purpose. | Playboy Interview With Ayn Rand
Unpublished Passages:
PLAYBOY:
Philosophers have offered world systems in the past, often with frightful and
frightening consequences—slavery, inquisitions, purges, etc. Isn't there
something in the very nature of philosophical system-building that leads to
intolerance? Don't world views, because they try to be all-inclusive, because
they are so neat and seemingly simple, attract and encourage fanaticism?
RAND:
Surely you don't mean to say that knowledge and consistency are dangerous, but
ignorance and inconsistency are safe? It is irrationality that leads to
fanaticism, and inconsistency that leads to destruction. Man cannot escape the
fact that he needs a philosophy. The only question is: what kind of philosophy
is it? If one man believes consistently in production, and another man believes
consistently in robbery, the nature and the consequences of that consistency
will not be the same. The atrocities you mentioned were caused by philosophy—by
the wrong kind of philosophy. They were caused by the irrational influence of
what, in a generalized sense, I can call the Platonist school of thought.
After the
Q&A on women's roles and careers, the following exchange occurred, which
Rand chose to delete in the proof stage. She may have realized that she hadn't
fully answered the question, and that to provide a complete explanation briefly
would be difficult or impossible.
(...)
PLAYBOY:
What about discriminate and selective indulgence in other activities—drinking,
for example, or gambling? Are these immoral?
RAND: To
begin with, those are not in the same category as sex. Drinking, as such, is
not immoral, unless a person is a drunkard. Merely taking a drink is hardly a
moral question. It becomes an immorality only when a man drinks to the point
where it stifles and stunts his mind. When a man drinks in order to escape the
responsibility of being conscious, only then is drinking immoral. As to
gambling, I wouldn't say that a person who gambles occasionally is immoral.
That's more a game than a serious concern. But when gambling becomes more than
a casual game, it is immoral because of the premise that motivates it. The
passion for gambling comes from a man's belief that he has no control over his
life, that he is controlled by fate, and, therefore, he wants to reassure
himself that fate or luck is on his side.