George Adams CPA MBA

There seems to be substantial evidence in favor of Chomsky's conjecture (I don't think he claimed any actual proof) that human brains have a built in faculty for language. Children of course soak up language like a sponge. If there really is a universal grammar it's almost certainly genetic. The gold standard for empirical research into genetics has always been so-called twin studies, in which the impact of genes is teased out by studying two genetically identical people. The gold standard for linguistics (at least one of them) is the study of so-called "feral children." These are literally wild children who have never been socialized and grow up surrounded only by nature not people. Feral children seem to develop basic concepts Rand would have acknowledged such as "food" or "fire is hot." So this begs the question: according to Objectivism which comes first - language or concepts? I would say people develop concepts based on their real world experiences and the evidence of their senses. Then these concepts are mapped into the language they are taught. Children learn the words for food or fire. Feral kids are not taught any language but still have concepts. I agree completely with Rand's view they we are not born as robots or pre-taught machines. We have fundamental freedom which begins with the freedom to think.

Necrovore, Yes, and it is available here: https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Enemies_of_Excellence.html?id=cl7oEAAAQBAJ Also attaching two (2) screenshots from the aforementioned link.

Stephen, Thank you for your comments. Yes I do admire some aspects of Kant's thought while paying decent respect to Rand's serious concerns. Surely we can all agree on Kant's motto: Sapere Aude! Individuals are indeed ends in themselves. There really is no such thing as a team or group and it seems that both Kant and Rand share a celebration of individualism. While I admire Rand's reverence for reason we must be careful. As Kant said, there are limits to reason. These limits have become clearer in the 20th century and here are two key points: (1) Kurt Godel's Incompleteness Theorem's showed that some propositions in math can neither be proved nor disproved. The piercing eyes of Math have a blind spot. (2) Quantum Mechanics, especially Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, shows that there are limits to knowledge at the physical level. Kant was far ahead of his time and operated mostly from insight and intuition in articulating the view that we should not make a God of reason, even though reason is the best tool we have to understand the world.

Peter, Yes, Rand hated Kant. But Kant’s idea of universality for any proposed action makes sense and accords with Objectivism. I prefer original thinking over doctrinal purity, “substance over form.” Kant saved us from the empiricism of David Hume. Kant’s idea of built in concepts is parallel to Noam Chomsky’s idea of a universal grammar built into human brains. To clarify, I despise Chomsky’s political views.

Inviting you to read, and teach, my new book, about Objective Economics and Political Economy, inspired by Ayn Rand, The Enemies of Excellence. The Enemies of Excellence - The Timely and Timeless REFUTATION of DEI! https://theenemiesofexcellence.com/