Editing 1277: Ayn Random

This comic is a satirization of {{w|Objectivism}}, a philosophy developed by {{w|Ayn Rand}}. Objectivism is a moral system which promotes the institution of complete, unregulated Lassez-Faire capitalism (capitalism with no regulation or governmental intervention of any kind). A core claim of Objectivism is that it is a perfectly fair way of distributing resources. Depending on how one defines fairness, Objectivism is not fair -- since those who have been externally elevated to an advantageous position (e.g. via nepotism) will be able to acquire more resources with the same level of effort as another person who does not benefit from similar advantages. In the comic, this juxtaposition between the claim that Objectivism is fair, and the unfairness seen in its practical implementation, is satirized in the form of an Ayn Random number generator (a pun on Rand's name) whose creator claims is perfectly fair but demonstrably is not.

A major ethical quandary Objectivists face is what is to be done about this unfairness; if Objectivism really is the perfect system for resource distribution, then why are resources distributed unequally under Objectivism? How one answers that question depends on a certain assumption -- that being, whether all humans are essentially equal in value (the accepted moral position in the West, c. 2024) or not. Some Objectivists disagree with the assertion of total human equality, concluding that if, under a hyper-aggressive survival-of-the-fittest system, people do not acquire equal levels of resources, then peoples' intrinsic values must be different. In the comic, this particular position is satirized with White Hat's cry of "Well, maybe those numbers are just intrinsically better!"

 

 

The title text identifies a group of people whose names match the {{w|regular expression}} <code>[https://www.debuggex.com/r/WsWV5ZSh8NTQL_JZ <nowiki>/(\b[plurandy]+\b ?){2}/i</nowiki>]</code>. A step-by-step explanation of the expression:

*\b is a word boundary, matching anywhere there is a 'word character' next to a non-word character—punctuation, digit, spacing, etc.

Overall, it matches two words separated by a space, composed entirely of the letters in [plurandy], which is what all the names listed have in common. This could suggest that those letters are, to quote White Hat, intrinsically better.

| style=white-space:nowrap | {{w|Ayn Rand}} || Author, best known for her novels ''{{w|The Fountainhead}}'' and ''{{w|Atlas Shrugged}}''.  

| style=white-space:nowrap | {{w|Paul Ryan}} || US politician known to have been influenced by the writings of Ayn Rand.

| style=white-space:nowrap | {{w|Rand Paul}} || US politician, also influenced by Ayn Rand's writings.

| style=white-space:nowrap | {{w|Alan Alda}} || Actor, best known for the role of Hawkeye Pierce in the TV series ''{{w|M*A*S*H (TV series)|M*A*S*H}}''. Also played Arnold Vinick, a fiscally-conservative Republican presidential candidate, in ''{{w|The West Wing}}''.  

| style=white-space:nowrap | {{w|Duran Duran}} || New Wave/Rock band, named after the mad scientist antagonist in cult film ''{{w|Barbarella (film)|Barbarella}}'', who wishes to bring warfare back to civilization.

Since the primary virtue in Objectivist ethics is rationality (or, at least, "rationality" as defined by Rand: her critics argue that the conclusions she reached do not actually derive inevitably from her premises and that additional, unstated assumptions are necessary to make the system work), the implication may be that the random number generator favors rational numbers (numbers that can be written as a fraction, i.e. a quotient p/q). On the other hand, given computers cannot store data of unlimited length, it is impossible for '''any''' real world computer random number generator to produce an irrational number in any of the usual integer or floating point representations—so probably not. (Although a computer could encode irrationals or generate them randomly if it uses another representation, one of the standard algebraic number representations, for instance.)  Alternately, an Objectivist might argue that if the intent of the comic is to attack or mock Objectivism, then the comic inadvertently satirizes itself via the "rationality" interpretation.