Objectivist metaphysics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Part of a series on Objectivism |
|
Philosophy Special topics Related Important figures Important groups |
All of Objectivism rests on Objectivist metaphysics and Objectivist epistemology: the study of what is and how we know it. The key tenets of the Objectivist metaphysics are (1) the Primacy of Existence, (2) the Law of Identity ("A is A"), and (3) the Axiom of Consciousness. In addition, (4) the Law of Causality is a corollary of the Law of Identity. The Primacy of Existence states that reality (the universe, that which is) exists independently of human consciousness. The Law of Identity states that anything that exists is qualitatively determinate, that is, has a fixed, finite nature. The Axiom of Consciousness is the proposition that consciousness is irreducible. The Law of Causality states that things act in accordance with their natures. These propositions are all held in Objectivism to be axiomatic. According to Objectivism, the proof of a proposition's being axiomatic is that it is both (a) self-evident and (b) cannot coherently be denied, because any argument against the proposition would have to suppose its truth.
[edit] Meta-Metaphysics: The nature of axioms
Ayn Rand's metaphysics is based on three axioms: the axiom of Existence, the law of Identity, and the axiom of consciousness. Rand defined an axiom as "a statement that identifies the base of knowledge and of any further statement pertaining to that knowledge, a statement necessarily contained in all others whether any particular speaker chooses to identify it or not. An axiom is a proposition that defeats its opponents by the fact that they have to accept it and use it in the process of any attempt to deny it."[1] As Leonard Peikoff noted, Rand's argumentation "is not a proof that the axioms of existence, consciousness, and identity are true. It is proof that they are axioms, that they are at the base of knowledge and thus inescapable."[2] This leaves the question as to how one can determine if the axioms are true. Rand's answer is that the axioms can be validated by using sense perception. One determines that existence exists merely by seeing, smelling, touching, tasting, or hearing something that exists. That our senses are being activated, proves to us that there is something that exists. Validating that consciousness exists rests on sense information as well, by noting that one is aware of sensations. Likewise for validating the law of identity; one validates this by seeing or touching a thing and noting that any entity has particular attributes or characteristics that distinguishes it from other entities, and thereby realizing that that is what makes a thing what it is. This leads one to recognize that a thing cannot be of a nature that is contrary to its nature or it would be something else (or A=A). Rand believed that individuals already hold these axioms implicitly, but that it is helpful to make them explicit to avoid philosophical errors. According to Peikoff, if individuals "[lack] explicit identification of this knowledge [of the axioms], they have no way to adhere to the axioms, consistently and typically fall into some form of contradicting the self-evident, as in the various magical word views, which (implicitly) deny the law of identity" or philosophers "who reject the self-evident as the base of knowledge, and who then repudiate all three of the basic axioms..."[2]
[edit] The Primacy of Existence: "To be aware is to be aware of something."
The Primacy of Existence, otherwise known in philosophy as metaphysical realism, is the premise that says that reality is objective: that the universe exists independently of the mental states (beliefs, desires, etc.) of individual cognizers.[2] This view was also held by Aristotle. Whether or not referring terms have existential import is a controversial topic in logic which, historically, gave rise to attempts at developing a free logic. Rand's metaphysical system treats existential import as axiomatic.
Objectivism distinguishes The Primacy of Existence, which it holds, from the Primacy of Consciousness (the doctrine that consciousness can be prior to existence,) which it opposes. Objectivism rejects the view that one could, in principle, be conscious exclusively and entirely of one's own consciousness. Objectivism holds that consciousness is not possible without the prior existence of entities, external to consciousness, for consciousness to be conscious of ("To be aware is to be aware of something.") The axiomatic observation that "to be aware is to be aware of something" is the basis of the Objectivist opposition to theism and idealism. In so far as they have a specific identity, Objectivism holds that minds, thoughts, desires, intentions and so on exist, but that they do not exist independently, but rather only as consequences of consciousness, which cannot come into existence without the prior existence of external objects for it to be aware of. Because consciousness cannot precede existence, the universe as a whole cannot be the creation of a consciousness, nor be itself mental. (This argument is laid out in Chapter 1 of Leonard Peikoff's Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand[2]).
[edit] The Law of Identity: "Existence is Identity"
Objectivism identifies identity as the essence of existence: "Existence is Identity." The corollary of this is the Law of Identity, which states that everything that exists has an identity, and that whatever has an identity is an existent. In saying this, Objectivism is asserting more than the tautology of self-identity (i.e., "everything is identical to itself"). It is asserting that everything that exists has a specific identity, or nature, which consists of its attributes and the values of those attributes (as Rand wrote, "to be is to be something in particular"). Objectivism holds that all attributes (properties and characteristics) that constitute an existent's identity have specific values, so that each exists in a specific measure or degree; in this respect "identity" also means specificity. Therefore, according to Objectivism, everything that exists has a specific, finite nature. An existent with a specific, finite nature cannot both have and not have the same attribute; and an attribute of a real existent cannot both have and not have a single, specific value. Therefore, everything in reality is non-contradictory; though contradictions may be imagined in the mind, there are no contradictions in the real world.
[edit] The Axiom of Consciousness: Consciousness is an irreducible primary.
This axiom states that consciousness is an irreducible primary. It cannot be analyzed in terms of other concepts, and it is pre-supposed by all knowledge. While we can study the attributes of the faculty of consciousness, we cannot further analyze what it "means to be conscious" as such. Rand writes that "consciousness is conscious," affirming both that the thinker is conscious and that he is conscious of something external to himself. She writes, "If nothing exists, there can be no consciousness: a consciousness with nothing to be conscious of is a contradiction in terms" (Atlas Shrugged, p. 1015)[1]. One cannot be self-conscious, without first having been aware of something other than one's own awareness. Rand's axioms of consciousness is different from Descartes' Cogito principle in that Descartes' Cogito is an a priori principle, while Rand's axiom of consciousness is self-evident by being implicit in awareness at all levels, including the starting level of sensory perception.
[edit] The Law of Causality: Entities act according to their nature.
The Law of Causality is a formulation of the axiomatic observation that there are no disembodied events: Every event is an action of an entity, and an entity can only act according to its specific nature. Objectivist philosophy affirms the Law of Causality as a corollary of the Law of Identity. Rand wrote that "the law of causality is the law of identity applied to action."[1] The Law of Causality states that things act in accordance with their natures. The way an object behaves when another object contacts it is simply a function of the specific nature (or "identity") of those objects; if one or both object(s) had a different identity, there would be a different result. "A thing cannot act in contradiction to its nature."[1] The law of causality does not assert that everything has a cause. Indeed, according to Rand, existence itself can have no cause on the account that there would have to be something outside of existence to cause existence. This would be incoherent, according to Rand, because that which does not exist could not do anything whatsoever.
Objectivism opposes other contemporary interpretations of the Law of Causality, such as "Every event is caused by previous event(s)," because such interpretations lead to paradoxes regarding free will, cosmology etc. Contrary to common contemporary assumptions, the Objectivist position is that among those things or actions that are caused, "the causal link does not relate two actions."[2] According to Rand, an "action" is not an entity; rather, entities act. Therefore, an action cannot be the cause of another action, as actions do not exist apart from the entities that produce them. To illustrate the Objectivist position, Peikoff said, "It is not the motion of a billiard ball which produces effects; it is the billiard ball, the entity which does so by a certain means. If one doubts this, one need merely subtitute an egg or soap bubble with the same velocity for the billiard ball; the effects will be quite different."[2]
A further implication of the Objectivist account of causality concerns explanation: since genuine explanation is causal, nature can only be explained in terms of nature (i.e., without reference to the supernatural).
[edit] Mind, Body, Soul
Another Randian stance deserves mention here: Objectivism rejects the mind-body dichotomy, holding that the mind and body are aspects (sets of attributes) of the conscious organism as a single, integral entity. Though this doctrine may sound like a stance in the philosophy of mind — a doctrine concerning the relationship between consciousness (mind) and brain (body) — it is not. Rather, it amounts chiefly to the assertions that (a) conscious organisms have both mental attributes and physical attributes, and (b) both kinds of attributes may participate in determining the causal powers of the conscious organism. Whether attributes of either kind, or their causal powers, can be reductively explained is a question for what Ayn Rand called "the special sciences" rather than philosophy. Objectivism rejects both Marxian materialism and Christian spiritualism (Marxists hold that the material factors have metaphysical priority over consciousness; Christian spiritualists hold that reality is fundamentally spiritual, a view declared heretical by Catholic and Orthodox doctrines.) Objectivism rejects both views: both physical attributes and mental attributes of conscious entities have identifiable (that is, measurable) values. Because existence is identity, both exist, and neither is more real than the other. Though this doctrine may entail the rejection of eliminativism, Objectivism does not include any specific ontological or scientific explanation of the relationship between mind and body in the philosophy of mind. (Harry Binswanger, a prominent Objectivist philosopher, argues in his lecture course, "The Metaphysics of Consciousness," in favor of substance dualism. He rejects not only eliminativism and materialism, but even the property dualism of David Chalmers and the emergentism of John Searle. Binswanger's view is controversial in Objectivist circles. Other Objectivists who have written on philosophy of mind, notably Eyal Mozes and Diana Hsieh, favor Emergentism.[3])
[edit] Notes
- ^ a b c d Rand, Ayn. (1996) Atlas Shrugged. Signet Book; 35th Anniv edition. Appendix. ISBN 0-451-19114-5
- ^ a b c d e f Peikoff, Leonard. Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand, Meridian, 1993, p. 11
- ^ Hsieh, Diana. http://dianahsieh.com/docs/mio.pdf Mind in Objectivism: A Survey of Objectivist Commentary on Philosophy of Mind. Paper posted 11 January 2002.
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
- The Ayn Rand Institute: The Center for the Advancement of Objectivism
- Objectivist Center: Metaphysics
- The Ayn Rand Forum — An online forum for discussing Ayn Rand and Objectivism.
