Catholic Randians and Prudential Judgments

Great Post.  Read the whole thing.  This has been on my mind for the last couple of weeks.

Eduardo Peñalver: "I think it is fair to hold political figures to some standard of plausibility in the empirical assertions underlying their prudential judgments.  And where their empirical claims are utterly lacking in empirical foundation, then it is fair to say that they are likely lying when they claim that their prudential judgments represent an effort to conform their reasoning to certain moral principles." 

"In trying to interpret Ryan’s motives, we have a couple of choices. On the one hand, we can say that he’s trying to help the poorest, notwithstanding any empirical evidence that his plan will do that. On the other hand, we can say that he’s implementing Rand’s anti-Christian objectivist philosophy, which he has credited with motivating him to enter public service. [He's either blinded to empirical reality by his ideological commitments and actually believes we make the help the poor by handing money to the rich and cutting health care for the poor, or he's intending to do what his plan straightforwardly seems designed to do -- reduce state-imposed burdens on the rich and let the poor fend for themselves.] It seems to me that, given the evidence about his admiration for Rand, the most plausible interpretation is the latter. There’s no question that his plan, if implemented, would dismantle two of the pillars of the post-War welfare state (Medicare and Medicaid) while putting more money in the pockets of the wealthy. But if Ryan’s purpose is to move us closer to the objectivist ideal espoused by Rand, then it seems to me that he is beyond the boundaries of legitimate prudential disagreement. He is applying principles that directly contradict those of Catholic social teaching."