What is Ayn Rand's proof that free will exists? Or any other Objectivist's proof? To say "Ayn Rand defined it" is not an answer, since it is possible to define things that don't exist such as "Martian": extraterrestrial beings originating from the planet Mars ..read more

I fully grant that existence does indeed exist. However, that statement is rather ambiguous, as traditional philosophy makes a distinction between existence and Being -- with the emphasis often placed on one over the other -- because the idea of Being is not present in the empty tautology "existence exists." It is not to say that the concept of "existence" exists, as that would be obvious; but that a thing called existence exists that is not itself and can never be an existent. Because existents exist within existence. "Existence" is therefore synonymous with "universe," as the sum-total of al ..read more

Quote The major line of philosophers rejected Kant's "noumenal" world quite speedily, but they accepted his "phenomenal" world and carried it to its logical consequences: the view of reality as mere appearance; the view of man's conceptual faculty as a mechanism for producing arbitrary "constructs" not derived from experience or facts; the view of rational certainty as impossible, of science as unprovable, of man's mind as impotent--and above all, the equation of morality with selflessness. They rejected the root or cause of Kant's system, but accepted all of its deadly effects.   ..read more

Hi, I'm curious about you're arguments against Robert Sapolsky's "idea of Determinism". I think he has made the strongest case there ever has been for determinism, I myself do not agree with him, as I think he starts at the wrong level. For those not familiar with his works, here's an introduction:    ..read more

For years, I have heard the same people attacking objective reality. First I thought they were arguing in bad faith. That they were lying. But last week in a discussion a problem became visible. What was brought up was that the table in front of us was a table, but the value of the table was in the eyes of the valuer. And as far as they were concerned, the value of the table is part of its identity. If so, part of its identity is based on the observer, as in subjective. Without the subject, the value does not exist, and therefore nothing is independent of the valuer, the particular consciousne ..read more

In a book I'm reading on Charles de Brosses (enlightenment-era thinker, coined fetish in the anthropological context as regards the origins of religious belief), he is described, in part, this way: "Finally, influenced, by materialist tendencies, he investigates how concrete circumstances, the limits of technology, and bodily capacities condition human nature and thought." My first instinct was to oppose this approach to research, but on further thought, I'm not sure I know what I'm talking about here. I'm thinking in particular of Piekoff's quoting of Rand when she said that she bel ..read more

Hey guys, I'm a history scholar who also has a keen interest in philosophy, but I always seem to run into a certain group of people who argue that knowledge is dependent on a metaphysical being, like Yahweh/Christian God. This kind of thinking falls under presuppositional apologetics. It just confuses me a bit because I'm not convinced that knowledge relies solely on the existence of a metaphysical entity. I'm wondering if there are any philosophers out there who can provide some insights into this and explain the reasoning behind such claims.  Thank You ..read more

I know that Ayn Rand does not reduce the consciousness to the brain, but what is the metaphysical status of it in her view? Not reducible to the brain but an emergent property of the brain? Where can I read more on this topic specifically in Objectivism?  ..read more

Objectivist Concept of Truth (2013) Rand wrote in 1966: “Truth is the product of the recognition (i.e., identification) of the facts of reality. Man identifies and integrates the facts of reality by means of concepts. He retains concepts in his mind by means of definitions. He organizes concepts into propositions—and the truth or falsehood of his propositions rests, not only on their relation to the facts he asserts, but also on the truth or falsehood of the definitions of the concepts he uses to assert them, which rests on the truth or falsehood of his designations of essential char ..read more

Hi all! ARI is hosting a Q&A on metaphysics and epistemology at the end of October. We would love to hear from you! Please post a comment here if you would like your question answered.   We cannot guarantee a response to every question, but we will read and consider every submission. The deadline for submissions is Wednesday (10/25). You can also email us your questions at newideal@aynrand.org ..read more