• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

1 Follower

About intrinsicist

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Peikoff’s argument is a proof by contradiction: since you are already pre-committed to remaining in reality in the very act of debating the issue, any conclusion which denies that premise is self-contradictory. Since choosing to die implies a contradiction, it cannot be rationally justified, and therefore cannot be morally justified. No one can exit the realm of morality guiltlessly.1 Peikoff unfortunately continues from this point to argue in favor of suicide: On the one hand he says the commitment to life is axiomatic,
  2. - Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology (bold emphasis mine) “Epistemic universals” Rand denies metaphysical universals quite explicitly, as quoted above. She believes everything in reality is concrete and particular, that there is in reality no “manness” in man which applies universally for all men at all times, but rather the concept “man” is merely man’s way of organizing the concretes seen around him into a mental grouping. “The metaphysical referent of man’s concepts is … the
  3. The contrary answer focuses on the ideas of "rational" and "interest", but it neglects the concept of "self". What is the "self" in which you are interested? Is this "self" one which has a rational mind, a moral code, and a sense of justice, where one would refuse to commit an injustice as an inherently immoral and irrational act? If the "self" you are attempting to preserve is this, then abnegating that self and committing such an act, is not in your rational interest. This is roughly how I would explain Ayn Rand's statement about "metaphysical self-preservation" and "spiritual suicide".
  4. I'd be curious to hear what are your criticisms of Objectivism, if you'd be willing to share your thoughts.
  5. If it's permitted I'd like to give some extended quotations from this essay, which I think is one of Ayn Rand's greatest: “The Inexplicable Personal Alchemy,” Return of the Primitive: The Anti-Industrial Revolution, 122
  6. I've always held the benevolent universe premise as a total conviction, but I have also found it hard to formulate the proof. Here is the only argument in Objectivist literature that I've come across: “The Ethics of Emergencies,” The Virtue of Selfishness, 48 Here are some thoughts of mine: The benevolent universe premise states in essence that the universe is amenable to man's mind and volition. If you take the contrary, what does that imply? It implies that either the universe is not amenable to man's mind - whether it's positing the fallibility of logic,