In a world where everything changes and living organisms evolve subject to speciation what/where is the firm, absolute reality Miss Rand refers to?
Things exist, they have certain properties and not others at any particular moment, they act in certain ways and not others at any particular moment. That they change is but proof that reality is absolute.
In precise philosophical terms, the first two Axioms followed by objectivists cover this:
-
The Axiom of Existence
-
The Axiom of Identity.
y_feldblum summed it up - but in specific terms:
#1) Existence is - if there is no existence, we aren’t here, so wtf are we doing talking about existence?
#2) A thing that exists exists as itself. A rock is a rock, not a tree. A river is not a solar system. Objects have intrinsic properties to which they must adhere. Otherwise, you could not walk down the sidewalk for fear that the sidewalk would turn into a hungry lion.
Rand distinctly dislikes any philosophical premise that disagrees with #1 and #2, and quite practically so. If #1 and #2 were not true, then the only way you could deal with reality would be by curling up under a blanket in the corner of your room for the rest of your life, with your fingers in your ears screaming LA LA LA LA LA to block out the insanity.
In a world where everything changes and living organisms evolve subject to speciation what/where is the firm, absolute reality Miss Rand refers to?
What do you mean by “change”? and why do you see this as contradictory to identity?
In a world where everything changes and living organisms evolve subject to speciation what/where is the firm, absolute reality Miss Rand refers to?
The world where everything changes and living organisms evolve subject to speciation, the wind blows and the rain falls. Firm, absolute does not mean immutable, static. It’s gonna rain, so you absolutely better learn to deal with it.
In precise philosophical terms, the first two Axioms followed by objectivists cover this:
What do you mean, followed?
In a world where everything changes and living organisms evolve subject to speciation what/where is the firm, absolute reality Miss Rand refers to?
Yes, things change, but not randomly or unpredictably. Anything that is has particular properties that make it distinguishable from anything else. Moreover, when something changes, these changes are constrained by its potential - what it can become. You don’t observe chaos of unclear, constantly and randomly changing flux, do you? On the contrary, you observe the Universe comprised of things that can be studied, along with the laws that drive any changes in them.
What do you mean by “change”? and why do you see this as contradictory to identity?
I’m suggesting that Miss Rand conflates the idea of the absolute with objective reality illicitly. Perhaps she meant that objective reality is necessary, or the metaphysically given, but do those metaphysical properties of reality equate to absolute? I’m suggesting that Miss Rand began with her conclusions and tried to argue back to true premises when she cut off any access to an absolute separate from empirical reality. How is the idea of being absolute congruent with the notion of objective reality? In what context is this the case?
In precise philosophical terms, the first two Axioms followed by objectivists cover this:
The Axiom of Existence
The Axiom of Identity.
But I can subscribe to these axioms without imputing the characteristic of being absolute to things or objective reality as a whole; in fact I don’t know what it means to do so.
But I can subscribe to these axioms without imputing the characteristic of being absolute to things or objective reality as a whole; in fact I don’t know what it means to do so.
No actually you can’t, because A is A. It means things exist, you exist, and you know it.
No actually you can’t, because A is A. It means things exist, you exist, and you know it.
Nonsense: there exists something, I don’t know what it is. Things are designated conventionally, identity is nominally real.
Nonsense: there exists something, I don’t know what it is. Things are designated conventionally, identity is nominally real.
Why don’t you know what it is? Do you not trust your senses or your ability to reason from the data accumulated by them?
The world where everything changes and living organisms evolve subject to speciation, the wind blows and the rain falls. Firm, absolute does not mean immutable, static. It’s gonna rain, so you absolutely better learn to deal with it.
By absolute I take to mean perdurable through time. Perhaps Miss Rand is referring to the universe as a whole ala Spinoza.
Which of your observations of reality, specifically, lead you to the conclusion that your observations are of unreality?
Why don’t you know what it is? Do you not trust your senses or your ability to reason from the data accumulated by them?
What re the axioms of existence and identity imply that objective reality is absolute? What does this even mean?
What do you mean, followed?
Yes, things change, but not randomly or unpredictably. Anything that is has particular properties that make it distinguishable from anything else. Moreover, when something changes, these changes are constrained by its potential - what it can become. You don’t observe chaos of unclear, constantly and randomly changing flux, do you? On the contrary, you observe the Universe comprised of things that can be studied, along with the laws that drive any changes in them.
How is change congruent with being absolute (which I take to mean perdurable through time)? How is an ever changing absolute world anything but an incoherent idea?
By absolute I take to mean perdurable through time. Perhaps Miss Rand is referring to the universe as a whole ala Spinoza.
I suggest that you start over, find a passage from the writings of Ayn Rand, and ask about that. I don’t know how to address the general level of misunderstanding and confusion that you have regarding what Rand actually said. I recommend that you not try to “interpret” her writings, and instead you try to read and understand them.
Things exist, they have certain properties and not others at any particular moment, they act in certain ways and not others at any particular moment. That they change is but proof that reality is absolute.
What do you mean by absolute in this context?
I suggest that you start over, find a passage from the writings of Ayn Rand, and ask about that. I don’t know how to address the general level of misunderstanding and confusion that you have regarding what Rand actually said. I recommend that you not try to “interpret” her writings, and instead you try to read and understand them.
from Galt’s speech:
“Reality is an absolute, existence is an absolute; a speck of dust is an absolute and so is a human life. Whether you live or diie is an absolute. Whether you have a piece of bread or not, is an absolute. Whether you eat your bread or see it vanish into a looter’s stomach, is an absolute.”
What does Miss Rand mean by absolute here?
What do you mean by absolute in this context?
Existing and having identity independently of anyone’s wishes.
from Galt’s speech:
“Reality is an absolute, existence is an absolute; a speck of dust is an absolute and so is a human life. Whether you live or diie is an absolute. Whether you have a piece of bread or not, is an absolute. Whether you eat your bread or see it vanish into a looter’s stomach, is an absolute.”
What does Miss Rand mean by absolute here?
It means it–whatever it is-- exists regardless of anyones knowledge or opinion of it. It means a thing is what it is, regardless of anyone’s knowledge of that fact or not. It means A is A. It means things can’t magically transform into other things without a rational causal relationship. I could restate the same thing a million different ways and it would still answer your question–which, by the way, is an example of an absolute principle-- so I don’t don’t understand why you can’t grasp this.