Don’t be deceived into blaming a pistol, when the blame should be on the one who pulled the trigger. Money is no more evil than a loaded firearm that can be used in virtue or nefariously. However, it is not intrinsically so. Thus, money can create a benevolent man; in which a crony capitalist will use it solely to enrich themselves through the exertion of others. Nonetheless, if money is used appropriately; it can provide one with cardinal needs; and, just as guns defend people and fire is used to prepare food; money, a mere tool can provide those objectives. But, “if the source is corrupt, you have damned your own existence” (Rand, pg.412, 1996). Nonetheless, those of which can become destructive; if by whom has a moral deficit; desire to
…show more content…
Moreover, money’s influence also depends on one’s cultural indoctrination. In certain cultures, money is the pinnacle of society where it defines one’s virtue. Meanwhile, some cultures put honor and reputation above it. As society modernize, “culture sunk into materialism; where men have lost all spiritual values in pursuits of material production” (Rand, pg. 133, 1996). Thus, it is worshiped and idolize by the vulnerable at heart as some God, or some achievement which sacrifices innocence and compromises integrity for ennoblement. Furthermore, “happiness is the successful state of life; pain is the agent of death” (Rand, pg. 1014, 1996). “But neither life nor happiness can be achieved by the pursuit of irrational whims” (rand, pg. 1014, 1996). However, money is an economic good which is recognized by myriads of business that provide services and products for its exchange. Also, it invigorates self-esteem, offers financial freedom, and provides access to better facilities inclusive with luxuries, prestige and privileges. Nonetheless, it influences an ambiance for industriousness and integrity or it is a doctrine for crime, greed and corruption. This induces an interminable discourse on whether money is the root of all evil. Yet, money was invented by one’s imagination; and moral and immoral desires existed before it. Still, is money itself evil? No! It has no cognition, cognizance or morality; other than the person who clenches it in the seat of their palm. It is simply a tool that produces nothing other than enabling gratification for those who desire it. Moreover, “it will satisfy one’s desire but, it will not provide one with desires’ (Rand, pg. 411, 1996). Francisco, while at a wedding later championed the argument as the mystified aristocrats in Atlas
Moreover, money’s influence also depends on one’s cultural indoctrination. In certain cultures, money is the pinnacle of society where it defines one’s virtue. Meanwhile, some cultures put honor and reputation above it. As society modernize, “culture sunk into materialism; where men have lost all spiritual values in pursuits of material production” (Rand, pg. 133, 1996). Thus, it is worshiped and idolize by the vulnerable at heart as some God, or some achievement which sacrifices innocence and compromises integrity for ennoblement. Furthermore, “happiness is the successful state of life; pain is the agent of death” (Rand, pg. 1014, 1996). “But neither life nor happiness can be achieved by the pursuit of irrational whims” (rand, pg. 1014, 1996). However, money is an economic good which is recognized by myriads of business that provide services and products for its exchange. Also, it invigorates self-esteem, offers financial freedom, and provides access to better facilities inclusive with luxuries, prestige and privileges. Nonetheless, it influences an ambiance for industriousness and integrity or it is a doctrine for crime, greed and corruption. This induces an interminable discourse on whether money is the root of all evil. Yet, money was invented by one’s imagination; and moral and immoral desires existed before it. Still, is money itself evil? No! It has no cognition, cognizance or morality; other than the person who clenches it in the seat of their palm. It is simply a tool that produces nothing other than enabling gratification for those who desire it. Moreover, “it will satisfy one’s desire but, it will not provide one with desires’ (Rand, pg. 411, 1996). Francisco, while at a wedding later championed the argument as the mystified aristocrats in Atlas