[thinktwice]

I seriously doubt that Ayn Rand herself would have considered the proposition that one's nature (in Randian terms, a defined concept), rather than the person, is the agent of human behavior an improvement.

Question -- An improvement to what?

Comment -- Ayn Rand would probably say that one's nature is a subset of one's person -- leaving the person being the agent of one's behavior. The "God made me do it" defense won't work in the real world.

[eastsider]

An improvement to what?

To Aristotle's distinction between a primary substance (in this case, an individual person as agent) and a secondary substance (the specie and genus as nature of a primary substance).

Ayn Rand would probably say that one's nature is a subset of one's person -- leaving the person being the agent of one's behavior.

I'm stunned. To me, the proposition "man is a rational animal" indicates that an individual person belongs to the set man (specie), which in turn belongs to the set animal (genus), not vice versa.