|
|
|
Objectivism - A Thumbnail Sketch Let its founder speak first. Asked to specify Objectivism's essentials standing on one foot, Ayn Rand, standing on one foot, said: Writing about this episode later, she went on to say: If you want this translated into simple language, it would read:Neither it can, & so it is. Ayn Rand herself, relative to other philosophers, didn't write "volumes." In terms of quality & import, however, she out-wrote most of them combined & multiplied. Some philosophers (not many) had argued discretely for one or more of the above; she integrated ALL of it & brought esthetics into the mix as well. She argued that facts are facts; that reality is what it is, independent of our feelings or wishes; that human reason is able to grasp what it is; that reason's tools - sense-perception, concept-formation & logic - are, contrary to many philosophers, valid; that these facts have irresistible & demonstrable implications for ethics, politics, economics & art: they enjoin rational self-interest, individual liberty, capitalism & what she called "romantic realism" as part of "man's proper estate" - an "upright posture." Along the way, she demolished several age-old dilemmas & dichotomies. She disposed of the "is/ought" dichotomy - that you can't derive values from facts - by pointing out that an entity's actions are determined by that entity's nature & that a volitional, conceptual entity such as man can derive values, by thought & choice, ONLY from facts. She pointed out that trying to derive values from OTHER sources - such as "divine revelation" or range-of-the-moment whims can lead only to disaster, & in so doing busted the intrinsicist/subjectivist dichotomy. She pointed out that volition is a causal agent, & so resolved the free will/determinism controversy. She pointed out that facts without logic are as useless as logic without facts, & so busted the rationalist/empiricist dichotomy. She pointed out that consciousness is not rendered invalid by the fact that it has organs - that we are not deaf BECAUSE we have ears that can hear - & so busted Kant's noumenal/phenomenal dichotomy. She exposed the lethal incoherence of requiring that we must know EVERYTHING in order to know ANYTHING (see modern physics). She pointed out the logical absurdity of the traditional ethic of self-sacrifice for the sake of others - if I am here to sacrifice for you, & you are here to sacrifice for me, what good does that do either of us? What is the point? She highlighted its logical/practical effect, all too eloquently exemplified during the twentieth century in which she lived: humanity's being divided up into those who make sacrifices & those who receive them; thence, bloodbaths & concentration camps. She pointed out the existential monstrosity of an ethic that says we should act from duty & eschew happiness. "The purpose of morality is to teach you, not to suffer & die, but to enjoy yourself & live." With that, she launched a revolution. Ayn Rand showed that we can not only contemplate the stars, but we can also reach them - in part by dispensing with the notion that we'll find a "God" there. "My philosophy, in essence" she said, "is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, & reason as his only absolute." This site, SOLO HQ - Sense of Life Objectivists Headquarters - is a passionate "Amen!" to that. Discuss this Article (8 messages) |