I read most of her books and was on my way to becone an objectivist.

And 20 years later I conclude that both logics and experience dictate that she had this one wrong.

John Steinbeck got it right, IMO, in East of Eden.

And he was just as much as a thinker as Ayn was.

In fact I think he understood human nature way better than her.

Ayn also lacked a proper understanding of money.

She adored the gold standard, if I remember correctly, but should have embraced monetary freedom.

This is what John wrote:

Steinbeck monster evil

"I believe there are monsters born in the world to human parents. Some you can see, misshapen and horrible, with huge heads or tiny bodies; some are born with no arms, no legs, some with three arms, some with tails or mouths in odd places. They are accidents and no one's fault, as used to be thought. Once they were considered the visible punishment for concealed sins.

And just as there are physical monsters, can there not be mental or psychic monsters born? The face and body may be perfect, but if a twisted gene or a malformed egg can produce physical monsters, may not the same process produce a malformed soul?"

These poor souls are IMO the exceptions.