Very interesting. Forgive me, but I am a philosophical novice. I believe what Smith is getting at is the idea of balance. What I have come to learn so far is that, when it comes to applying philosophy, you kinda have to strap things down and hang on for dear life. You are constantly questioning and examining your beliefs and the world. Smith makes the claim that Rand has the solution in living for one’s self, but, like with many frameworks, there isn’t a solid right to just apply without consideration. The way I try to live is philosophically mediating between my pursuit of wisdom, my connections with others(family, friends, strangers), and the fulfillment of my self.

Aristotle’s teleological idea that humanity’s purpose is to gain understanding is brought up by Smith. This purpose argument may expand wider than how Smith applied it here. If we are supposed to understand and comprehend, then wouldn’t it be not just, a metaphysical understanding, but an ethical one that we must find as well.

I think Smith had a valid response to altruism, but personally would it not be better to live both ways?