Why does an Epistemology of reason necessarily lead to an ethics of self-interest and egoism?

[Xray]

Were you asserting that the scientific method is "trial and error" method wrapped fancily in foil?

No.

Human ancestors should be likened to children and since Man has matured quite a bit, that method will simply not do anymore. We'd show them greater gratitude by taking it a step further than by emulating them.

I was not suggesting we emulate our ancestors merely pointed out how much trial and error lay at the root of knowledge when it came to man's physical survival.

Sadly, it seems that the original query already got lost.

The initial query can be answered clearly with a "No".

For a rational assessment of reality (I assume this is what is meant by "Epistemology of reason") does not necessarily lead to a specific kind of ethics.

This has has already been addressed here:

Btw, Nate is correct; a given conception of reason will not lead us, through a string of deductive syllogisms, to a logically necessitated egoism. I don't know where this argument supposedly came from. I don't recall reading anything about it before in the O'ist literature.

I don't think Nate's focus was so much on a string of deductive syllogisms in this context, but that he was more in general doubt about the idea of a specific epistemological theory necessarily leading to a specific kind of ethics.

I don't know where this argument supposedly came from. I don't recall reading anything about it before in the O'ist literature.

Still, something in Rand's work seems to have given Nate this impression.

Nate: if you happen to read this, could you please provide some examples from Rand's work where you think this is the case. TIA.

No reply from Nate.

Unless he replies to me, I'm out of this topic.

Looks like thread starter Nate is out of this discussion.

Edited May 10, 2011 by Xray