Robert_Bumbalough Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Greetings from Robert Bumbalough in Mesquite Texas. Please forgive me for starting a new topic. I could not find a current thread specifically about this issue. Moderator, if desired, please relocate this thread to a better place. Thanks.It is my hope all are prospering and in good health. The expertise in Objectivist philosophy on this board prompts me to ask you the following question.On pages 98-101 of Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology Expanded 2nd Edition, Meridian Penguin Books, April 1990, Leonard Peikoff demonstrate how the Objectivist theory of concepts defangs and neuters the Analytic-Synthetic Dichotomy. By a fine example of reasoning Peikoff notes the following:I)Metaphysically, and entity is: all of the things which it is. Each of its characteristics has the same metaphysical status: each constitutes a part of the entity's identity.II)Epistemologically, all the characteristics of the entities subsumed under a concept are discovered by the same basic method: by observation of these entities. III)... a concept subsumes and includes all the characteristics of its referents, known and not-yet-known.IV)....a concept is an open-end classification which includes the yet-to-be discovered characteristics of a given group of existents. All of man's knowledge rest on that fact.V)Whatever is true of the entity, is meant by the concept. VI)It follows that there are no grounds on which to distinguish “analytic” from “synthetic” propositions. Whether on state that “A man is a rational animal” or that “A man has only two eyes” - in both cases, the predicated characteristics are true of man and are, therefore, included in the concept “man”. The meaning of the first statement is: “A certain type of entity , including all its characteristics (among which are rationality and animality) is: a rational animal.” The meaning of the second is: “A certain type of entity, including all of its characteristics (among which is the possession of only two eyes) has: only two eyes.” Each of these statements is an instance of the Law of Identity; each is a “tautology”: to deny eityer is to contradict the meaning of the concept “man,” and thus to endorse a self-contradiction.My question is what are the counter arguments used by those opposed to Ojectivism to assert the ASD? and how are those counters disposed?Robert Bumbalough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonfly Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Greetings from Robert Bumbalough in Mesquite Texas. Please forgive me for starting a new topic. I could not find a current thread specifically about this issue.Look here. It's a 34 page thread. Happy reading! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert_Bumbalough Posted July 28, 2008 Author Share Posted July 28, 2008 Greetings from Robert Bumbalough in Mesquite Texas. Please forgive me for starting a new topic. I could not find a current thread specifically about this issue.Look here. It's a 34 page thread. Happy reading!Thank you very much for helping me.Best and GoodRobert Bumbalough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 Robert,Where are my manners?Welcome to OL!I hope you enjoy it here.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now