jbgotmar

128
More oxford books @ www.OxfordeBook.com
FROM NOVELIST TO PHILOSOPHER, 1944–1957
and why they said it and what error they made and where they went off
the rails,” she told Paterson. Rand was also concerned that Paterson had
brought up the issue of God, and was immediately suspicious that “you
believe that unless I accept God, I will have betrayed the cause of individualism.”
75 In response Paterson gave little quarter, sending a second
critical missive to her friend. She did not think Rand knew what she was
talking about when it came to reason or argumentation: “I suggest that
you are confusing logical necessity with an assumed necessity of actually
following a logical sequence from a given premise, whether in thought
or in words or in action, and also with the fact that an act has its own
consequences.” And she rejected Rand’s claim to originality, telling her,
“if you should hold a theory which has already been thought out . . . I will
use the word already existent for the thing.” 76
But as it turned out, Rand was right about Paterson and God. Paterson
did think that belief in God was essential to individualism, arguing, “but
if you do start with a statement of atheism, you won’t have any basis for
human rights.” This was the same criticism that Lane and the FEE readers
had made. Rand’s theory of natural rights was based on fi at, on her
stating it must be so. But in a world where rights were constantly challenged
by despotic governments and violent crime, a more solid grounding
was imperative. Paterson concluded her letter with another snide
remark. Rand had written about Thaddeus Ashby, her new “adopted
son,” whom she characterized as a replica of herself. Paterson was sharp:
“I don’t know what would be interesting about a ‘replica’ of oneself.
Would your replica write The Fountainhead again? It sounds kind of
silly to me. However, it’s your own business.” 77 Intellectual differences,
compounded by personal pride, began to snowball as the relationship
between the two women deteriorated.
Before reaching the edge both Rand and Paterson pulled back. Rand
had not yet responded to the latest blast when she received another letter
from Paterson, this one friendly and happy and gossipy. Paterson
had been invited to Maryland to meet several DuPont executives, and
the meeting’s success had buoyed her outlook. Rand wisely decided not
to respond to the longer letter, for the two women would see each other
soon in New York. It would be easier to iron out differences and resolve
the communication problem in person. Both probably sensed the fragility
of their connection, for in raising the issue of Rand’s atheism Paterson
Fore more urdu books visit www.4Urdu.com