Comments on Cultural Naturalism Report: What’s so Objectionable about Objectivism?

(continued from previous comment) John presents a...

2009-06-27T21:43:31.543-04:00

(continued from previous comment)

John presents a really idiotic quote from Rand, asserting that life itself contains value, objectively. Apparently, the fact that this supernaturalistic assertion has been the entire focus of my article has escaped him.

On presenting an argument using the analogy of artificial intelligence, he says:

“The robot's A.I. would

Update (In response to the first 4 comments to thi...

2009-06-27T21:43:06.433-04:00

Update (In response to the first 4 comments to this article) :

This update is to clear up some of the confusion expressed by the objectivists in the comments to this article. In the initial part of the debate, the two objectivists Richard and John Donohue exchange comments motivated by misunderstandings and confusion. These comments were not addressed because I entered the discussion

Due to spamming by objectivists intent more on mak...

2008-11-13T17:23:00.000-05:00

Due to spamming by objectivists intent more on making personal attacks rather than providing rational justification for their ideology, I have closed comments on this post. If you wish to debate/talk to others who do not believe in free-will, you could visit http://atheistnexus.org/group/freewilldne
Ajita

Hi Richard,Our observation of others’ decision-mak...

2008-11-13T13:30:00.000-05:00

Hi Richard,

Our observation of others’ decision-making struggles leaves open the question of whether there’s something contra-causal going on. To determine whether there is or not, we have to understand what’s involved in the decision-making process. Although our understanding of the brain is still in the early stages, there’s no indication thus far in our observations and inductions

Tom wrote:"The appeal to the subjective feeling or...

2008-11-13T03:38:00.000-05:00

Tom wrote:

"The appeal to the subjective feeling or intuition of libertarian free will (which our Objectivists have made several times, e.g., "Free will can be experienced by any normal mind, simply by introspecting and observing one's choices") is unsustainable as good evidence for actually having such a thing (Stephen's 2nd point above)."

This is true but if I experienced free

Here's the correct link for the Murphy and Brown b...

2008-11-12T22:39:00.000-05:00

Here's the correct link for the Murphy and Brown book:

http://www.naturalism.org/murphy.htm

Oops, that should have read Reality and its rivals...

2008-11-12T22:34:00.000-05:00

Oops, that should have read Reality and its rivals.

Stephen, I think your analysis of the free will issue is spot on, but of course you won't likely convince those who think that in order to be really free, and make real choices, we have to have genuine alternative possibilities in the circumstances that obtain at the time of choice.

One reason people

The appeal to the subjective feeling or intuition ...

2008-11-12T17:06:00.000-05:00

The appeal to the subjective feeling or intuition of libertarian free will (which our Objectivists have made several times, e.g., "Free will can be experienced by any normal mind, simply by introspecting and observing one's choices") is unsustainable as good evidence for actually having such a thing (Stephen's 2nd point above). Such an appeal puts them in league with supernaturalist

“Leonard Peikoff writes in his book Objectivism, t...

2008-11-12T15:52:00.000-05:00

“Leonard Peikoff writes in his book Objectivism, the Philosophy of Ayn Rand,
A course of thought or action is 'free,' if it is selected from two or more courses possible under the circumstances.”

If a tennis ball is hit by a racket we tend to think it must take the course it does given it is in the circumstances it is in. I don’t want to argue this is true but want to make the

The full paragraph that you quoted was:"As mention...

2008-11-12T00:56:00.000-05:00

The full paragraph that you quoted was:

"As mentioned more than once (and stated explicitly in the article), you keep missing the point about will. Naturalists do not deny that volition exists. Every past action of ours depended on choices that were made and every future action depends on those that we will. The distinction you have consistently failed to see is that these choices are

My view of free will arises from observing my own ...

2008-11-11T23:32:00.000-05:00
My view of free will arises from observing my own mental actions, and I see the same outward manifestations in other people (including you). It is not a mid 20th century argument.

Perhaps you are quibbling over terminology (compatibilism and all), but in the end you always demand entry into the intellectual void:

"Naturalists do not deny that volition exists.

“You know perfectly well that without life, values...

2008-11-11T21:55:00.000-05:00
“You know perfectly well that without life, values are impossible, unless you subscribe to such nonsense as life after death (a blatant contradiction).”

Did you even read the line just after the one you quoted me saying? Here it is:

“Naturalism does not argue that values are outside of life; in fact the argument is that values are subjectively dependent on individual

John wrote, quoting Rand:"It is only an ultimate g...

2008-11-11T19:19:00.000-05:00
John wrote, quoting Rand:
"It is only an ultimate goal, and end in itself, that makes the existence of values possible. Metaphysically, life is the only phenomenon that is an end in itself: a value gained and kept by a constant process of action. Epistemologically, the concept of “value” is genetically dependent upon and derived from the antecedent concept of “life.” To speak of “value” as

"You told us the brains of people only operate tho...

2008-11-11T14:51:00.000-05:00
"You told us the brains of people only operate though happenstance and emotion, not will or moral judgement"

Wrong again. I said values are emotional states and therefore subjective. Nature itself has an objective reality that can only be truly addressed by empirical reasoning. Science and empiricism replaces the need for an "outside observer" by testability, replicability and

Empirical evidence presupposes, demands, an observ...

2008-11-11T14:44:00.000-05:00
Empirical evidence presupposes, demands, an observer of the world outside of himself and his emotions who establishes the truth of the evidence by an effort of focus, observation, discrimination and valuation. You told us the brains of people only operate though happenstance and emotion, not will or moral judgement. Speaking for myself, I therefore am speechless.

All I can hear echoing

In all these arguments you both have presented I a...

2008-11-11T12:48:00.000-05:00
In all these arguments you both have presented I am yet to see any empirical statements. All your arguments break down to a gut feeling; one that free-will exists and the other that values are objective.

Since you ignore my repeated attempts to invoke empiricism, let me ignore your mumbo-jumbo and just address the Rand quote that you (John) presented:

"It is only an ultimate

An appropriate quotation, John.I have long taught ...

2008-11-11T11:51:00.000-05:00
An appropriate quotation, John.

I have long taught (using easier language suitable for senior high students) that the conceptual faculty requires, and could not function without volition. To form a concept, one must begin by recognizing 1) a concrete's relationship to other, less related, concretes; and 2) the essential commonalities among the concretes of interest. That means one MUST

Hiya Richard, yes I find this corner of the argume...

2008-11-11T11:24:00.000-05:00
Hiya Richard, yes I find this corner of the argument interesting as one of the more bold ways for POC people to attempt to get from the inside to the outside.

Your identification of the preponderance of rationalization strikes to the core. When you see it, you wonder what it is they are attempting to get around. In this case, the attempt might be to slough off judgment and any normative

Good 'unpacking', as you tarry, Mr. Donahue.John, ...

2008-11-11T09:47:00.000-05:00
Good 'unpacking', as you tarry, Mr. Donahue.

John, ajita kamal wrote to me (note my bolding):
"2. If you just had googled "naturalistic fallacy", you will understand that it is not a "bizzare claim" and is in fact one of the best established tenets of scientific philosophy.

His use of "If" above is a presumption of choice. (Human volition is why language has

If Miss Rand were alive she wouldn't say a word. S...

2008-11-11T06:08:00.000-05:00
If Miss Rand were alive she wouldn't say a word. She'd just flick her cigarette at you and walk away.

I'll tarry a moment.

First of all, as Richard has noted, there are many outright errors in this piece regarding Rand's position and thought. Many. So many that the construction of a "straw man" is not even attained.
Second, Naturalism is a dishonest philosophy.

I

1. Despite your attempts to defend the metaphorica...

2008-11-11T03:09:00.000-05:00
1. Despite your attempts to defend the metaphorical mind and soul, you have not offered any empirical defense of a real free-will. Even if the former two exist in any possible form be it real, imagined, material, "substantive" or anything in-between, there is no reason why they should be free and non-deterministic. In fact, all the real SCIENCE points to a deterministic mind (metaphorical or "

"Flaw 1: Rand’s belief and assigned importance to ...

2008-11-10T20:20:00.000-05:00
"Flaw 1: Rand’s belief and assigned importance to a non-material soul and free-will makes her philosophy non-naturalistic. No matter how much reason she uses from that premise on, it remains an ideological philosophy and not a naturalistic philosophy."

So when you have a thought, is it material or is it somewhat like a computer image? The image on disk is a string of