Trying again with a Christian

[Tenure]

So, when I joined this forum at the beginning of this month, I had just broken up with my long term girlfriend (18 months), and just for perspective, I'm turning 18 in two months time. So, I'm at school (about to leave) and I'm a teenager. I've only recently turned Objectivist-student, although I've always held the feeling that I should always be the arbiter of my own moral decisions, should always do what I think is right - I just never thought of applying it to myself primarily (what is good for me, rather than what is good just for the sake of being good.

My ex-girlfriend was an Evangelical Christian. She didn't preach, but she was very deeply into her faith and was indoctrinated from a young age. Her father's a Christian-music artist, and so she's always admired the way someone can produce art as well as serve the Lord with their life. The break up happened because she felt she was sacrificing what was important to her - her faith - by being with me, since I outright rejected faith and was no receptor for her talk about prayer. I never openly admonished her, and always let it be, so long as she stayed doing the things that I loved her for: her art, her attitude in the bedroom, her taste in music, her vibrant approach to life.

It all got twisted and confused, basically because she was trying to juggle two things: what she wants and what God wants, and claiming that she could put God above herself, whilst still valuing all the things she wanted to do. From a superficial angle, this shouldn't have mattered to me, but then there's only so long one can go on, trying to love someone when you know that they hold such a bizarre philosophy. It's only made worse when you know that in practice, they're living life in a good manner; they just want to put all the good in the world off their shoulders, and to claim that God is responsible.

Here I stand now, and I've got a decision to make. A very important one. For the last four years, I've held intense feelings for a girl at my school. Everytime I've been with her I've felt like everything was just right, like everything made sense and was good. However, I never made a move. I never made a move because I was a coward, and because I wasn't who I am now. I'm glad I didn't, because she deserves who I am now more than who I was then, and who I was then was... not a pretty sight (mentally and physically ).

With my ex-girlfriend existing as my ex now, I've been free to make a move. Even through my time with my ex, I couldn't stop thinking about this other girl. She was so perfect - attractive, clever, funny, strong (not like those body builder women, eurgh, but with meat on the bone that's more than just fat), determined. What she isn't though is entirely rational. She's far more so than my ex, but she also still holds her evasions to reality - by which I mean Christianity.

I'm left with this conflict then. I... intensely feel strongly for this girl, and I examine why, and I see how she holds all these values I admire. We've held hands and we've kissed and held each other. We're blindingly, blissfully happy together. But when I leave, after a day or so on my own, I can't help but think back to my ex, to feel great pessimism within myself, that it could all just go south.

I don't want that. I'm determined to make it work, because this feeling is just too great to be hampered by an ideological difference. It's something we've both wanted for so long, but it's something at the same time that could potentially be 'wrong'. I feel guilt and regret, as if I'm betraying my conviction to stand by my break-up with my ex, when I could potentially be doing the same thing all over again.

How can one objectively examine their feelings here? We must not act of emotions, but on our rational values - but what do we do when it feels like our values and our emotions are at odds? 'Checking my premises' just isn't working anymroe.

[tps_fan]

While you can concern yourself with several aspects of this newest relationship, I think that you should focus on understanding and applying your own values first. Romance can certainly be complicated and messy, but you (and your girlfriend) will be better off if you are pro-active and straight-forward.

If you find that you have specific concerns that keep coming to mind, then those are the ones that you should talk to her about first. That doesn't mean that you have to "spill your guts." As long as you are honest about what you want and hope for, then you will be being fair and objective. You don't have to settle for the usual false choice of trying to hold back or, on the other hand, throwing caution out.

In the course of learning more about yourself and her, you will get a better idea of what each of your respective values are, and then you can develop your relationship based on common values.

I would be remiss if I didn't say that you are inevitably going to have problems if you wish to live as an Objectivist and at the same time try to have a serious relationship with someone of a religious persuasion. At the same time, I don't think you would benefit from perpetually waiting on romance since you are so young.

[Tenure]

I understand my values well enough, and I learn about what they mean to me everyday (I'm a naturally introvert kind-of-guy, so it's pretty easy). My concerns are centered, in fact, around not being certain what her values are, or whether she really believes me when I say I hold values (Christians generally hold a view that Atheists are just amoral jerks).

Jenni had some pretty good advice in the chatroom, which was basically to engage her in action. Not to just say that I care about her and what I like about her, but to prove it, by supporting her in her values. So I'm going to sit in on one of her Bible Studies one time (don't worry, it's not as bad as it sounds). Next time she has a korfball match, I'll go along to watch. She likes exercising, so I'll see if she wants to go cycling somewhere. Basically just share the things we both value.

It still remains to convince her that the Theatre is a beacon of truth and a mirror for the world of the audience. One day at a time.

[LaszloWalrus]

Leonard Peikoff has comments on a similar situation:

http://peikoff.com/

(scroll down to the question posted on December 1, 2006)

[aequalsa]

I don't want that. I'm determined to make it work, because this feeling is just too great to be hampered by an ideological difference.

I suggest that you not be afraid to challenge her beliefs, a bit. Don't "beat her over the head with an Atlas Shrugged", as it were, but don't be afraid to let her know who you are and what you believe, either. Especially when it contradicts her own views. In all likelihood, she is interested in those things about you and if she is level headed and rational, might even change her mind over time.

In practice, what I find to be most effective in such circumstances is to simply ask for clarification and detail about a belief you know to be wrong, which they put in front of you. Besides that, only tell them you disagree and the reasons why(and this is key) if they ask you what you think about it, directly. Otherwise just hope that your clarifying and NONACCUSATORY questions will slowly clarify their ideas in their own mind.

And truthfully, this is ideal and far more effective in the longterm, to let people come to the correct ideas on their own. What that does, essentially, is let them borrow your critical thinking skills until they develop their own. My estimation is that many people are honest and good intentioned but simply lack that critical thinking skill set, necessary to properly evaluate claims that might be appealing on an emotional level. If you give them time to let that thinking style rub off on them, the correct conclusions will organically fall into place.

Best Regards,

Gordon

[Tenure]

That's actually a style of debate that's really grown on me recently - clarifying your premises/terms. It's about the most non-accusatory way to debate, but it's also the most interesting too. You forgo any intellectual prancing about, and get straight to the meat of the issue.

We were talking about this stuff last night. We were talking about sex, and she was saying how she has two groups of friends: the kind that have pretty promiscuous sex and the kind that won't even move beyond kissing on the lips (no tongues, teeth, strawberries placed precariously between the lips, etc). I was basically just saying to her that I find guilt to be a strange concept, when you're talking about sex, and that the only kind of guilt I can feel these days, is when I evade reality. I used that as a springboard to talk about why avoiding thinking is bad, why thinking is actually quite easy - and why Philosophy isn't all that confusing, it's just designed to be to keep Philosophers employed - the meaning of the statement, 'I would die for you, but I won't live for you'.

It was kind-of fun, kind of scary, as I had to be very democratic in putting Objectivism into my own words, without sounding boring, and without just quoting Rand or Peikoff.

Anyone reading this thread and in a similar situation - don't be afraid to try this approach of just talking. Remember: Objectivism is about the happiness in one's life, about the glory of ones mind, and how you should live with your mind to achieve happiness. These are ideas that are great in and of themselves, and you'll find if someone is worth talking to, they'll actually hold these values to some degree anyway.

She and I, we talked about this stuff, and we're pretty happy to have talked about it. We know where we stand, and I explained to her why all this stuff only makes me appreciate her more, for what she is - strong, selfish (she admits so, though calls it a lowly 'human instinct'), sexy, determined - instead of what she isn't - an Objectivist.

Anyway, I'm going off to one of her Youth Group meetings next week or the week after, to hang out. It's supposed to be Christian orientated, but she says they usually end up just playing pool and watching TV. So that's cool. The fact is that I'm being there to show my support for her, to show her how one can accept something like that, without it being sacrifice.

-

[MisterSwig]

If you truly love this woman and care about her, I think your primary goal should be to de-religionize her. Religion is a vicious plague upon the mind. The longer you let it eat away at her, the shorter your happiness with her will be. You are already suffering in this relationship, as evidenced by your initial post. Imagine what it will be like in a year, five years, ten years. How much evading will you be doing then? Personally, I think going to the "Christian" meeting is a big mistake, especially if you are doing it to "support" her. She doesn't need you to support her mindless religious activities; she needs someone to convert her to rational self-interest.

Think long-range. She might be good in bed. But are you going to be intellectually happy with someone who believes in religious fairytales? If not, then your immediate goal should be to debunk those fairytales and cure her mind.

[The Wrath]

I am married to a Catholic woman, and find that her religion has absolutely no effect on our relationship whatsoever. The only minor inconvenience that it causes is that it takes an hour or so out of my Sunday every week.

[turboimpala]

I am married to a Catholic woman, and find that her religion has absolutely no effect on our relationship whatsoever. The only minor inconvenience that it causes is that it takes an hour or so out of my Sunday every week.

I assume this means you go to church with her on Sunday.

Does she know you're an Athiest?

Do the other people at the church know you're an Athiest?

Do you read and sing along with everyone or just stand there?

Are you comfortable in the church or do you get frustrated listening to what they say?

I'm just curious.

Thanks.

[The Wrath]

I assume this means you go to church with her on Sunday.

Yup.

Does she know you're an Athiest?

Yup.

Do the other people at the church know you're an Athiest?

We have only been there twice, so no one knows who we are. But, if the topic is broached with anyone, I will not hesitate to tell them what I am.

Do you read and sing along with everyone or just stand there?

I pretty much just stand there. I do listen to the sermons, however. The one this week was actually not bad at all...it was all about parenting, and he didn't bring religion into it until the very end. The rest was pretty practical advice.

Are you comfortable in the church or do you get frustrated listening to what they say?

If we were in a Catholic church, I'd be more comfortable, because it's at least dignified. For some reason, my Catholic wife likes going to the type of church where they sing contemporary music and constantly make motions with their hands and arms, as though raising their hands into the air will bring them closer to Jeebus. Then again...pretty much the only reason she likes going to church is because she likes the music.

So, to answer your question, I can't help but looking out at the crowd and thinking what stupid, mindless sheep that many of them are, after seeing the way that they behave. To that extent, it irritates me, but it's a small price to pay. Thankfully, my wife does not act like that.

Edited June 11, 2007 by Moose

[KendallJ]

I'm determined to make it work, because this feeling is just too great to be hampered by an ideological difference.

hmmm... This is an interesting way of putting it. If there is any premise you should check, it's this one. Dont' you think that sounds a bit like a mind-body split. Feelings too great to be hampered by ideology? You're accepting the premise that ideas and emotions can't be integrated aren't you?

Tenure, you're 18, and half of dating at your age is to learn by concretizing, trying things and integrating them back into what you know, basically, learning from your mistakes. I'm not sure anyone can give you direct guidance as to what to do because we don't have all the context, and it is the context that is most crucial and which you have to evalute.

But if you want some ideas about how to think about it, then I can give you my perspective, which has come from making more than my share of mistakes, and learning from them. At least maybe give you a framework to think about it. I fully expect that if you're really that emotionally wrapped up in the girl, then there little thinking about it that will sway you significantly (at least that's the way I woudl have felt at 17), but you asked.

I think the search for 100% compatibility is a tough standard. The trick then is knowing what is important, and what is not. What you can compromise on and what you shouldn't. Additionally, at such an age, it's sometimes difficult to judge what is really fundamental in another person, since you haven't really fully formed values, and also haven't been challenged with tough choices where your values really get reflected.

Only in the last couple of years have I really delved enough into the Objectivist ethics to really feel like I understand what virtue is and how it ties to actions, and frankly it takes some time to fully integrate your emotions with your intellectual analysis of virtue so some of this may not make sense and it may even feel like you'd want to go in an opposite direction. Fully understandable.

Here's 3 basic frameworks by which to think about what you've got.

1. Character before chemistry (or make sure the chemistry you're attracted to is tied to character)

2. Admiration of virtue and values as the basic core of a relationship

3. The concept of visibility as critical. That is you must be admired for the things you wish to be admire for.

1. I'm not saying that chemistry (i.e. all those behavior things that attract you to a person) isn't important. What we are really attracted to initially in a person is their "sense of life." But some of what makes up chemistry is easily mutable, and some of it is more stable. The part that is more stable is more closely tied to values and virtues. If you can, ask yourself if you can tell that behaviors have value judgements behind them, or if they are value-less, or if they show contradictions. Find the chemistry that you believe flows out of character and that is the chemistry that is likely to be more stable. Additionally I think some elements of chemistry can be "learned", so even if you don't feel chemistry in a particular area look for character traits that are still there.

As an example you indicated that she admitted she was "selfish (she admits so, though calls it a lowly 'human instinct')". OK, try to see the cause and effect between her selfishness to all those little behaviors that you love about her. Now recognize the admitted contradiction she has. That contradiction can resolve itself in one of three ways: a. she'll continue to hodl the view and eventually try to remove all of the behaviors tied to it (in other words, that part of her "sense of life" will fade), b. She'll change the view to one that is more congruent with her actual behavior (i.e. the chemistry will stay, and she'll be at peace) or c. she won't resolve it, and while she will continue to be selfish, she may develop feelings of guilt about it (chemistry may or may not stay...). You have to figure out what "chemistry" is at risk, and whether that is a big deal for you or not. Look for chemistry that you can tie to well held values that you believe will be stable.

2. This is the fundamental. You each have to be able to find virtues and values in the other that you can admire. It is not necessary I think to value every single thing about another person, but certainly what you do value must outweigh (by more than just 51/49) what you don't. Additionly, you must try to assess what values within the other person are in conflict and which one is more likely to win out. I think of this in the most traditional terms, and I'd go to the Objectivist virtues. What you've listed to me, really aren't virtues or values so you might want to think about recasting your evaluation. Clever, funny, sexy, strong. Those really aren't virtues, or values. It's mostly chemistry. Dig a little deeper. Ask yourself, what is it that she is trying to seek or gain, and what is she doing to get it. Try to think of it in essential terms, (i.e. what are the top 3 things...). It will also try to help you figure out what her real "sense of life" is.

And remember it is a two way street. That is what sets up a virtuous investment cycle in a relationship. It is what motivates you to create values within yourself that she will admire, and her admiration of which motivates her to do the same and vice versa. It is what motivates you to create chemistry that might not exist yet, and to preserve it where it does and is important to the relationship.

3. This is the toughest thing to understand and learn and I'm not sure I've even fully mastered the concept. It is not merely sufficient that you have found something that you can admire and value in her, and vice versa. But at the core, you have to be admired for the things which you wish to be admire for, and vice versa. If not, then even if you can find something in her to admire, and respect, she won't feel as though she is admired on essentials. She will feel "invisible" in the relationship.

Suppose, hypothetically of course, that your girlfriend is not a strong Christian, but strongly believes in charitable work. She believes that a significant amount of time should be spent doing it, and that an amount of humility along with it is part of being a good person. She believes that working hard to earn a lot of money is ok, if you end up giving that money away. You on the other hand believe in the Objectivist concepts of productivity, pride, and hence ambition, so you value your career and wish to attain high levels of acheivment within that, including earning the money that you so rightly earn from your works. Further lets say that each fo you are able to find something about the other in these respects to admire. Maybe she admires your intelligence as you apply it to your job, maybe she admires your work ethic. Now if the virtues you choose to practice are core to you, and incredibly important, will it be acceptable to you if she does not value you for them directly or even if you know that they go against something she might think is important, but maybe only ancilary virtues to that one defining virtue? The answer is, it will ultimately feel you leaving a bit empty, a bit "invisible". This is the one that requires the most self-esteem and honesty to really assess, and frankly probably doesn't even come into play until you know the person well. It requires you to have enough self esteem to really answer whether or not you're getting what you need out of the relationship, and enough honesty to determine whether or not your are providing your partner with what she needs in the relationship (regardless of how much you do admire her).

___

So maybe try actually writing this down. What are the 3 virtues you most admire in her? What are the 3 virtues you most want to be admired for? And then vice versa, and confirm them with her. What are the 3 virtues she admires in you? What are the one she wants to be admired for? See how they match up? Write down the "sense of life" behaviors that you most love about her. Try to match them up with the virtues, and vice versa.

I won't try to analyze it for you. Your job. YOu make the best decision based upon what you know, and well, if it doesn't work you, then you take an honest assessment of why, learn from it and try again. Welcome to life!

Edited June 12, 2007 by KendallJ

[~Sophia~]

1. Character before chemistry (or make sure the chemistry you're attracted to is tied to character)

2. Admiration of virtue and values as the basic core of a relationship

3. The concept of visibility as critical. That is you must be admired for the things you wish to be admire for.

Great post, KendallJ. You are not allowed to go on vacations!

[JASKN]

Great stuff to chew on, Kendall; nice post!

Thanks for sharing.

[KendallJ]

Thanks guys. I wish I could say, that I have it mastered. Unfortunately I probably lead with the intellectual analysis, and find myself still lacking in the ability to put it into practice, but that is life, isn't it. The point is to learn, and improve and make better decisions based upon your learning, that is to integrate mind and body more closely.

Actually, the trip was when I got the time to really chew on #2, and #3, a lot. With the help of some art to help me concretize it, and also the help of a good friend, to help me internalize it.

Edited June 12, 2007 by KendallJ

[KendallJ]

1. Character before chemistry (or make sure the chemistry you're attracted to is tied to character)

2. Admiration of virtue and values as the basic core of a relationship

3. The concept of visibility as critical. That is you must be admired for the things you wish to be admire for.

Just as an aside, if you want a recommendation for a piece of artwork that concretizes the topic and highlights the interplay of these three frameworks, I highly recommend a movie called The Painted Veil. It is the story of a woman who for practical reasons marries a man she doesn't love. She doesn't love him because she places chemistry above character, and thinks he lacks it. He is a virtuous man, and rejects those behaviors which are not tied to character (but this does not mean he lacks chemistry). He wishes to be admired for his virtue, but because she does not, he develops feelings of invisibility, resulting in resentfulness and even vendictiveness toward her, resulting in a vicious cycle of feelings of invisibility in her. It is the story of how they resolve this conflict. Excellent stuff! Watch the theatrical trailer (the one after you enter the site).

Sorry to highjack the thread. Now back to our regularly scheduled program.

Edited June 12, 2007 by KendallJ

[Tenure]

...

Wow.

Thanks KendallJ. I've got a lot to think about now. That last one is really true, at the moment - the invisibility thing. She likes me cause I'm 'weird'. I think she means the fact that well... I have this idea about being creative. It's that you shouldn't be afraid to come up with something stupid. The trick to creating something good is to not try and attack it from a holistic way - that is, aiming straight for the finish - but you should instead approach just getting from that state of no-creativity to creativity. You have to just start going with something, trying an idea, no matter how stupid it might be, and just following it with 100% of your energy. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. You move on. Naturally, then, I tend to keep this thing ticking over in my mind, and I often come out with very... bizarre comments. I think that's what she means when says she likes that I'm 'weird'.

But still... I don't really like that. I don't like it when people are kind of like, "Oh Rory, you're crazy. You're so quirky." It's not what I want to be valued for. I want to be valued for my bravery when I face a difficult choice and my love of theatre. I can't think of the stuff I want to be valued for right now, so I've obviously got more thinking to do. It's just that, I see her, and I hold her, and I love it. But I look in her eyes, and she's kind of staring just... without anything really. She doesn't seem that affected until I do something 'weird'.

And that stuff about being, "Clever, funny, sexy, strong", those are values to me. I mean that she can be really clever when she wants. And when I say sexy I mean... I mean that thing you're saying about chemistry. I mean yeah, I find her physically good looking, but it also comes from the fact that... I dunno, it's kind of like, I look at her, think about who she is, and she suddenly becomes even more attractive.

I dunno. I've got a lot of introspection to do.

Thanks for the help.

[KendallJ]

Well now see Rory, I've already caused you to think about something that you hadn't before.

Thanks KendallJ. I've got a lot to think about now. That last one is really true, at the moment - the invisibility thing. She likes me cause I'm 'weird'. I think she means the fact that well... I have this idea about being creative. It's that you shouldn't be afraid to come up with something stupid. The trick to creating something good is to not try and attack it from a holistic way - that is, aiming straight for the finish - but you should instead approach just getting from that state of no-creativity to creativity. You have to just start going with something, trying an idea, no matter how stupid it might be, and just following it with 100% of your energy. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. You move on. Naturally, then, I tend to keep this thing ticking over in my mind, and I often come out with very... bizarre comments. I think that's what she means when says she likes that I'm 'weird'.

But still... I don't really like that. I don't like it when people are kind of like, "Oh Rory, you're crazy. You're so quirky." It's not what I want to be valued for. I want to be valued for my bravery when I face a difficult choice and my love of theatre. I can't think of the stuff I want to be valued for right now, so I've obviously got more thinking to do. It's just that, I see her, and I hold her, and I love it. But I look in her eyes, and she's kind of staring just... without anything really. She doesn't seem that affected until I do something 'weird'.

Well, there are many possibilities. It may be that she really does like you for somethign more, but can't articulate it well. Most people when asked what they like about someone come up with less than articulate answers. Maybe you should try to explore the feeling, "What do you mean I'm weird?", "What kind of weirdness do you like?", "Give me an example."

And that stuff about being, "Clever, funny, sexy, strong", those are values to me. I mean that she can be really clever when she wants. And when I say sexy I mean... I mean that thing you're saying about chemistry. I mean yeah, I find her physically good looking, but it also comes from the fact that... I dunno, it's kind of like, I look at her, think about who she is, and she suddenly becomes even more attractive.

You've hit the nail on the head, as to why those behaviors are not values. Her cleverness is not automatic. It is driven by some motivation. It will be "on" when she wants something, and maybe "off" when she doesn't. The predictor to when you'll see her at her best, is to look at what she values, and what she does to obtain those values. That will tell you more about her fundamentally, than just saying that she is a clever person in general. Also, it will be more helpful if you learn to value and admire the kinds of virtues that bring out her cleverness rather than just her cleverness. Right? You admire the cause, not just the effect. If you do that, the effect will be there. If you only admire the effect, you might later learn that it comes from the wrong causes, and wonder why it later disappears. I admire strong women, but I've learned after a while that so-called "strength" may have healthy causes, and unhealthy causes. It pays to admire the causes, and not just the strength to be better sure of what you've got.

That is what I meant about learning to integrate your emotions more closely with virtue.

Thanks for the help.

Any time. Selfish really. I was trying to work on the problem myself, and this helped me articulate it for myself.

[Tenure]

Ok, I understand the integrating emotions with values now.

Something I found a bit odd though:

Her cleverness is not automatic. It is driven by some motivation. It will be "on" when she wants something, and maybe "off" when she doesn't.

Perhaps this is a whole different topic, but I thought no virtue was automatic? I thought that was a fundamental of Objectivism: we hold virtues and pursue them in our lives, because they are good things and they are good things because they're productive and life-sustaining. I'm not too sure what she values then, if those things aren't values. Although, then again, they seem like effects of values. It's trying to find those values...

Hmmm.... Ok. I can't ask her straight out, "So, what do you value in your life?", perhaps just because I'm not too good with conversation. There's that line I like in House, when the girl asks him why he's arguing with her about why she should abort her rape-baby, but won't talk about the actual rape, "Because it's the kind of conversation I'm good at". It seems that this pops up a lot in Objectivism, concerning relationships, that you can somehow just gain this knowledge of someone.

Maybe it's just her, or maybe it's just because everyone I meet is always so ambiguous about what they value, that I find it really difficult to actually talk about that sort of thing with someone, because it just sounds too... intellectual... for a normal conversation. But then I like that stuff.

Meh, just meandering off there. I just think that, if I were to name exactly what I like about her, and were to tell her, she wouldn't believe me. I tell her she's beautiful, she thinks she's ugly. I tell her she has great resilience to get what she wants in life, she thinks it's evil.

Women are insane.

Edited June 12, 2007 by Tenure

[Inspector]

Women are insane.

No, but maybe you haven't met a sane one yet...

[KendallJ]

Something I found a bit odd though:

Perhaps this is a whole different topic, but I thought no virtue was automatic? I thought that was a fundamental of Objectivism: we hold virtues and pursue them in our lives, because they are good things and they are good things because they're productive and life-sustaining. I'm not too sure what she values then, if those things aren't values. Although, then again, they seem like effects of values. It's trying to find those values...

No virtues aren't automatic. I was referring to her cleverness, not as a virtue, but as a behvaior, that which you might call chemistry or that makes up her "sense of life". If that is somewhat derived from virtues, then that by implication is not automatic either.

And just because she holds something as a virtue now does not mean she will later, but that is part of looking at how her whole philosophical system is integrated and which virtues/values are more strongly held than others.

[Tenure]

No, but maybe you haven't met a sane one yet...

I was being tongue in cheek.

KendallJ: So I've got to step in and save her from a destructive philosophical system before it's too late?

[~Sophia~]

Just as an aside, if you want a recommendation for a piece of artwork that concretizes the topic and highlights the interplay of these three frameworks, I highly recommend a movie called The Painted Veil. It is the story of a woman who for practical reasons marries a man she doesn't love. She doesn't love him because she places chemistry above character, and thinks he lacks it. He is a virtuous man, and rejects those behaviors which are not tied to character (but this does not mean he lacks chemistry). He wishes to be admired for his virtue, but because she does not, he develops feelings of invisibility, resulting in resentfulness and even vendictiveness toward her, resulting in a vicious cycle of feelings of invisibility in her. It is the story of how they resolve this conflict. Excellent stuff! Watch the theatrical trailer (the one after you enter the site).

(more spoilers)

I watched this movie two days ago and greatly enjoyed it. The resentfulness/vendictiveness was also a result of hurting him through her having an affair, no? He also was not completely without fault but yes, in the end, she falls in love with her husband for the right reasons. Too bad the story ended the way it did (did it have to for artistic reasons? I am not so sure.)

[KendallJ]

KendallJ: So I've got to step in and save her from a destructive philosophical system before it's too late?

I'm not sure what comment of mine you're referring to, but I think we think too highly of our abilities to "convert" other people. The fact is we are all self-made people; we're not saved by others. She's a person. She's not a damsel in distress. Start treating her like she needs saving and you'll likely turn her off more than anything.

I haven't thought this trough too much, but it seems that some of the desire to change people is because of split between emotions and thoughts. That is, we continue to feel romantic emotions for a person who we know is not what we want or need, and desire to make them into what we can truly admire. But if emotions and truly integrated to intellect, then that senario doesn't happen. Either a. they are the type of person you want, and thus you feel romantic feelings for them, and they don't need changing, or b. they aren't the type of person you can admire, and you DONT feel romantic feelings toward them, and hence no desire to change them.

I think the best you can do is to be the most virtuous person you can be, admire her for the qualities that are good to you, and let her know why you admire her, and hope that her admiration for you motivates her to understand you, and question herself.

(more spoilers)

I watched this movie two days ago and greatly enjoyed it. The resentfulness/vendictiveness was also a result of hurting him through her having an affair, no? He also was not completely without fault but yes, in the end, she falls in love with her husband for the right reasons. Too bad the story ended the way it did (did it have to for artistic reasons? I am not so sure.)

Exactly. The affair was a way of concretizing her placing of chemistry over character as well. When I say he was virtuous, it does not mean that he was perfect.

I hated the tragic ending. I think it was completely unnecessary.

Edited June 12, 2007 by KendallJ

[Tenure]

Gah, tried to skip past any spoilers. Just saw the words "tragic ending" out the corner of my eye. Now I know the film ends badly. Bah. Still want to see it.

You're right, I think the problem in situations like this, and for me in general, is this mind/body split. You know how Dagny can't leave her railroads behind, even though she intellectually realises that she shouldn't keep supporting them? It's like that for me, in life in general. I might have very high principles in theory, but in practice, emotions cloud everything up and shut down all reasoning or want to reason.

[KendallJ]

I might have very high principles in theory, but in practice, emotions cloud everything up and shut down all reasoning or want to reason.

Oh, to be 17 again.

Actually, it really doesn't get much easier. You just graduate to more difficult levels of decisions and still feel at times like you haven't got it mastered.