Objectivism and Magic

By Owen Christensen

Famously, Objectivism, the philosophy of Ayn Rand, champions reality and reason as absolutes – and thus, fiercely opposes any form of supernaturalism, mysticism – and magic.

In her writings, Rand herself often uses the term “magic” to contrast her own views from those of mystics who advocate a universe free from the constraints of the laws of identity and causality.

For example, “Dropping below the level of a savage, who believes that the magic words he utters have the power to alter reality, they believe that reality can be altered by the power of the words they do not utter – and their magic tool is the blank-out, the pretense that nothing can come into existence past the voodoo of their refusal to identify it”[1] – or: “The intellectuals and the so-called idealists were determined to make socialism work. How? By that magic means of all irrationalists: somehow”[2] – or: “Credit is not […] a magic piece of paper that reverses cause and effect, and transforms consumption into a source of production”[3].

Here, the concept of magic means a supernatural property or action that can make things act outside, against, and in contradiction to their nature. For instance, it is “the magic words” that alter the nature of reality, the “magic means” of “somehow” that will make socialism work, and “the magic piece of paper” that reverses the nature of production and consumption.

However, since things are what they are and can only act in accordance with their nature, any property or action which permits things to act outside, against, and in contradiction to their nature is a contradiction itself: either something acts in accordance with its nature or it does not. Words refer to specific concepts which, in turn, refer to specific facts; they cannot alter the nature of reality. “Somehow” refers to a vague, non-specific means or set of actions to achieve a goal; it is not a formula to live by or to desperately make socialism work (since it can’t). Credit refers to an unconsumed good to be repaid; it is not a piece of paper that violates cause and effect and reverses production and consumption.

As such, the concept of magic is an invalid concept: it refers to nothing that has ever happened or will ever happen in reality – and although a majority of people use it in the same way they use the invalid concepts of God, elf, unicorn, or ghost in various conversations, it is fundamentally a meaningless term (unless it is used in a philosophical context to describe a mystical approach).

Now, what if I told you that, in fact, there is a concept of magic fully compatible with the laws of nature, one that does not refer to mystical fantasies, but facts that have and will – hopefully – happen in the future?