Self-Sacrifice and happiness are two topic that Ayn Rand argues about in a very objective and intellectual style, but because of the way she misinterpreted selfishness was wrong, the explanation of self-sacrifice was misleading. Rand fails to see the point of how society views happiness and fails to convey it.
Rand argues that the society defines selfishness as it’s the “synonym of evil” or “brutes who tramples over piles of corpses to achieve their own ends.”(7). Even though this is not the case at all this is subjective and the interpretation is biased, one cannot disregard the part where she said “brutes who tramples over”. This is in fact a great way of to show how people in the society see the term selfishness but considering the fact
…show more content…
Still in order for this to happen, one should be a very generous person or simply being a grown person and having a family to look after would change the way people think about selfish happiness. I doubt that individual with a family can be a fully selfish person which only becomes happy for themselves. Normally and generally a mother or a grandfather would be happy to see their youngsters’ wellbeing and to simply see them happy would make them happy as well. A full supporter of self-sacrifices would be living without being alive. Basically you would have no soul and simply stop being human. So without having to sacrifice yourself one cloud very well be happy in their life.
Just like Ayn Rand argues in her book Atlas Shrugged “Self-Sacrifice? But it is precisely the self that cannot and must not be sacrifice” (36).This beautifully sad but one cannot still go overboard with this. Having a family to support or anyone for this matter would enable one to sacrifice themselves or be selfish at times. So for someone to happy you don’t necessarily have to sacrifice yourself but how do define happiness and how can you say that you are truly