From Aristotle to modern times, the faculty of human reason has been the subject of contrasting representations in literature. In Crime and Punishment, for example, Fyodor Dostoyevsky highlights the tragic outcome of Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov's obsession with rationalization; ultimately, the protagonist rejects his intellect and embraces religious faith. With The Fountainhead, Ayn Rand presents an opposing point of view: human reason is the foundation of success and happiness. The fictional world of the novel includes the few who use their capacity for rational thought and the masses who, according to Howard Roark, do not want reason on their side. Although Roark never doubts the power of rationality, Dominique Francon and Gail Wynand partially give in to the reign of absurdity, and Ellsworth Monkton Toohey and his lackey Peter Keating represent the forces of total irrationality. This range of attitudes serves to dramatize the philosophy set out in The Fountainhead, or the essential difference between the former like Roark and the latter like Keating. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the Original EssayThe society of The Fountainhead is remarkably opposed to truth and reason. The New York Banner is most successful when it ignores logical evidence in favor of emotionally charged content. For example, the Banner attempted to help two individuals, a struggling young scientist and a pregnant maid: “One story was illustrated with scientific diagrams; the other, of the image of a young girl with a loose mouth, wearing a tragic expression and disheveled clothes. » (408). The logically articulated plea brings in less than ten dollars in aid, while the lurid images of the pregnant maid bring in more than a thousand dollars. Wynand shows this disparity to his team because he wants to demonstrate what influences readers the most: pure emotions and instinctive thinking. The content of the Banner is “without any necessity for any intermediate process of reason, like food injected through the rectum, requiring no digestion” (409). The fact that the young scientist is far more likely to have a significant and beneficial impact on society is irrelevant; Rational decision making requires conscious effort that people are not willing to make. But irrationality has much deeper roots than simple mental lethargy and irresponsibility, especially for members of New York's elite. It’s a great escape from reality. People like Peter Keating depend on others for their existence, because their self-confidence depends entirely on their public image. When Keating meets Guy Francon, they get along wonderfully precisely because they do not assess each other on the basis of rational criteria, as evidenced by Francon's attitude towards Keating: "Approval, as well as this half- wise smile, gave him a greatness that he did not have he had to earn; blind admiration would have been precarious; deserved admiration would have been a responsibility; undeserved admiration was precious” (53). Admiration is undeserved, that is to say without reason. Keating subconsciously knows that he prefers not to be judged on his professional abilities or personal integrity, but rather on his ability to expropriate the work of others and affirm without question every statement Francon makes. Keating doesn't want to look in the metaphorical mirror and see his incompetence and dishonesty. Rather, he wants to have his cake and eat it too - he craves the admiration that genius and sincerity deserve, but does not wishact accordingly. Characters who subscribe to the perversion of rationality can be divided into two groups: those who understand the implications of their actions, and those who do not. Keating blindly embraces irrationality without understanding that it makes him a hollow man; Public adulation never translates into true self-respect and happiness. In contrast, Ellsworth Monkton Toohey understands exactly how he manipulates reality and its implications. His use of irrationality, however, is a means to a different end, one far more sinister than wealth and fame. Toohey sees reason as the only threat to his quest for power. Only individuals with an independent and uncorrupted mind can successfully foil his plan to completely control public opinion and the masses. He writes in "One Small Voice" that he would rather be kind than fair, and merciful than fair. Determining what is right and just requires the faculty of reason, which Toohey opposes. Instead, Toohey asks people to be kind and merciful, and to trust their hearts, not their minds: “Anatomically – and perhaps otherwise – the heart is our most precious organ. The brain is a superstition” (304). Without any reason to guide them, the public is easily manipulated, allowing collectivist propaganda in the form of "One Small Voice" to exert great influence in shaping public opinion. By making reason useless, Toohey wants to crush capable men; he wants a world flattened to the lowest common denominator, a world of mediocre men and insignificant relationships. The Council of American Builders shows its progress in this direction; meetings are apathetic, without rational purpose. The Council of American Writers also reflects Toohey's goals. President Lois Cook writes in a stream-of-consciousness style that has no deep meaning, sounding more like gibberish than literature. Toohey knows that with the death of reason will come a new world order, in which he is perfectly prepared to take control. Compared to other architects and most of his potential clients, Roark's respect for reason is impeccable. He hires his workers not based on their last name or appearance, but on their abilities: “[I]f a man worked well, he needed nothing else to win the goodwill of his employer : it was granted to him, not as a gift, but as a debt” (309). Competence for the position is the only logical criterion in hiring, and therefore the only reason taken into account by Roark. Roark also applies his intelligence to the design of buildings such as the Heller House, which spring organically from the environment, with form that supports function, instead of irrationally imposing an arbitrary classical or gothic look. Roark also understands that no compromise can exist between reason and anti-reason: the result is always the latter - the abortion of a building, of a life. Similar to Roark, Dominique recognizes the virtue of rationality. But she finds herself unable to bear the expression of beauty amidst ugliness – the work of a pure and uncompromising spirit in a world of chaotic hypocrisy. She eloquently states her position at the Stoddard Temple trial: "When you see a man throwing pearls without even receiving a pork chop in return, it is not against the pig that you feel indignation. It is against the man who valued his pearls so little. that he was ready to throw them into the mud” (356). Dominique prefers to destroy any true artistic success rather than see it misunderstood and despised. She prefers to sink her statue in the ocean.