An objection to Objectivism
Yesterday (12-15)jame464 wrote an interesting comment. He/she immediately go negative points and I wrote an answer. However, I thought that this would be an important topic for discussion. So, here is jame464 comment and my reply. I'd be interested what other Gulchers have to say.
jame464: Objectivism logics is flawed from the perspective of its principles because it relies on reason as the ultimate means for man to determine reality. This is entirely subjective because you cannot reason to fundamental absolutes such as are we here by purpose or accident. I believe that a philosophy that says "existence exists" has holes in the bottom of the pale where it contains all its principles and corollaries and postulates and theories, etc.
herb7734: It seems to me that you are saying that we cannot reason until we know everything. That is a problem in the realm of epistemology which remains open-ended until such time as we do know everything. But, failure to know-all does not preclude one's ability to use reason particularly because of the very statement that you make. What do you propose instead?
jame464: Objectivism logics is flawed from the perspective of its principles because it relies on reason as the ultimate means for man to determine reality. This is entirely subjective because you cannot reason to fundamental absolutes such as are we here by purpose or accident. I believe that a philosophy that says "existence exists" has holes in the bottom of the pale where it contains all its principles and corollaries and postulates and theories, etc.
herb7734: It seems to me that you are saying that we cannot reason until we know everything. That is a problem in the realm of epistemology which remains open-ended until such time as we do know everything. But, failure to know-all does not preclude one's ability to use reason particularly because of the very statement that you make. What do you propose instead?
