Matthew

Thanks Gary, I will read this. Sincerely, Matthew W. Yucha

Greetings; Does anyone know of research that investigates Ayn Rand's economic theories? Specifically, I have been looking for supporting research on inflation as described in chapter 12, "Egalitarianism and Inflation" from "Philosophy: Who Needs It". Many thanks, Matthew W. Yucha

Greetings; OK thanks all - I am beginning to understand the relationship of units to concept formation. Thinking in terms of numbers and variables is indeed easier. An example concept formation: I perceive three existents: the number 5, the number 4, and a cat. Isolation would be to separate the units "4" and "5" from "cat". Integration would be to unite "4" and "5" under a definition, say "arithmetical value" and then assign a word to the definition: "number". For any future existent I perceive, I can again isolate it by observing it's attributes (this new existent happens to be a "6") and then integrate it under my already formed concept "number". If I encounter yet another existent, say a "dog" and isolate it incorrectly so that it leads me to integrate it under the concept of "number" - this would be a contradiction. What is still confusing me about units is the following statement: "The concept of unit is a bridge between metaphysics and epistemology: units do not exist qua units, what exists are things, but units are things viewed by a consciousness in certain existing relationships" -- Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, p.7 This is what has given me the idea that units exist only in consciousness. Sincerely, Matthew

Thank you all for this information. In summary: Entities are specific types of existents. Concepts are units - the antecedent components are units themselves (this is an abstraction). Units are not necessarily concepts if the antecedent components are precepts. Is there ever a case where a concept is made up of units and precepts? Or must perceptions always be “boxed” into a unit before the percept can be used as a conceptual component? Is it proper to say that the identity of an existent exist in man’s consciousness as a unit? Many thanks, Matthew

Greetings; I am having trouble understanding units. I have read Rand’s description several times in “Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology” and would greatly appreciate any comments or corrections to my concept of unit: A unit is a (partial?) capture of the identity of an existent in man’s consciousness. Units must refer to a perceived concrete. Units can refer to existents other than physical concretes such as length. The relationship between a unit and attributes is composition: units are composed of attributes in various measurable quantities. The relationship between antecedent units and a concept is aggregation. Questions Does a unit always refer to an instance of a concrete or can it be a generalization too? For example: a book vs. a particular book, Color vs. a particular shade of blue, weight vs. 100 pounds (or is 100 an attribute of a unit “collection of pounds”). Does measurement omission apply to units as well as concepts? Is a unit a concept as well?