From: merritt@macro.bu.edu (Sean Merritt)
Newsgroups: alt.philosophy.objectivism
Subject: Re: Premises of "objectivism?"
Date: 5 Jan 93 15:56:01 GMT
	<MERRITT.93Jan4125207@macro.bu.edu> <lewchuk.726183011@therien>
Organization: Boston University Physics Department
In-reply-to: lewchuk@cs.UAlberta.CA's message of 4 Jan 93 21:30:11 GMT


#In article <lewchuk.726183011@therien> lewchuk@cs.UAlberta.CA (Michael Lewchuk) writes:

 
 >merritt@macro.bu.edu (Sean Merritt) writes:
  
 &In article <C0CB8s.8Jz@SSD.intel.com> pandit@ssd.intel.com (Milind Pandit) writes:

    &  I believe from "Atlas Shrugged" that the fundamental axiom of
    &  Objectivism is Aristotle's statement, "Existence exists."  In other
    &  words, there is an objective reality independent of human perceptions
    &  of it.

   >By this do you mean that what the human mind precieves as red is only
   >an approximation of the `true' redness in Plato's world of forms?
   >And do such absolutes exist? So that even abstarct ideas and concepts
   >can be ultimatly `true' (although not provable within an axiomatic
   >system of logic)?
   >-sjm >--

#   I would think there would be several fundamental axioms.  I'd say these ones
#   are required.  Does anyone have the full list of fundamental axioms?

Yes, someone please post them.
What is this list then?

#   1.  An objective reality exists.

This is a big leap of faith. I am willing to say it does exist, but
the ability of humans to fully know this objective reality I strongly
doubt. You are doomed to a subjective view of `truth', although
it is noble and correct(IMHO) to strive to know objective reality
more closely(as close as humanly possible).


#   2.  This objective reality operates under a set of laws and thus "we"
#       (sentients) can manipulate it accordingly by cause and effect.

I would say we are the one's that are manipulated. I don't say
there isn't freedom of will or action but I place a heavier
statistical weight on that environment called `objective reality'.


#   3.  Sentients exist and perceive objective reality in some way which
#       we will call "subjective reality".  Sentients can also form concepts
#       and draw logical conclusions.  It is assumed that concepts formed will
#       be based on subjective reality.

Again I would assign a statistical weight to each individuals
subjective reality the sum of these weights being something less
than unity because even collectively we are incapable of knowing
objective reality.

#   4.  Subjective reality functions best when it is as closely tied to
#       objective reality as possible.  That is, a person (sentient) must be able to
#       capture as much of objective reality as possible from subjective reality.
#       That is, the closer subjective reality is to objective reality, the larger
#       the intersection of the set of logical conclusions drawn from objective
#       reality and the conclusions drawn from subjective reality is.

Too much emphasis on function not enough on form. We are striving
to do the impossible, the important thing is the struggle not
the results. No one result should be considered superior if
compared to other results reached in earnest.
  
# 5.  Concepts which are measured in relatives ("red", "green") are best
#       used when related to objective measurements (such as light wavelength).
#       Thus, in some sense, perceived quality must be objectively quantifyable.
#       That is, it doesn't matter if my "red" isn't your "red" as long as we can
#       each perceive a certain light wavelength as the color it is, no matter
#       what we call it.
#       Since the crux of this is dealing with "reality", one would assume that
#       some social norms of perception of quality would evolve over time (like
#       telling red from yellow and social definition of "red" and "yellow").
#       The notion of what really "is" yellow is irrelevant as long as "you" and
#       "I" can communicate about "yellow".  Since we are non-telepathic, the
#       best we can do with communication is either direct example or analogy or
#       subjective description.  If the individual is really interested in knowing
#       the "real" color of a "yellow" canary, the individual should go and see
#       the "yellow" canary.  Otherwise it is assumed that the simple subjective
#       description "yellow" suffices.
 
When you resort to physics, or other hard sciences the inaccuracies of 
perception, are either known explicitly or well estimated. They do exist
so you are accepting a result that has an intrinsic subjective content
before you cognate.(Some hold the view that the act of cognition
introduces these, the result is still the same: Flawed). 
The observation of the wavelenghts of light is directly limited
by the uncertainty principle.{ delta Energy = Hbar *  delta omega} 
(Hbar = Plancks constant divided by 2*pi)

"Red is RED" , yet I cannot ever truly know the full extent of "redness".

#  6.  The fundamental objective is to act in a way which best suits your
#       intent.  That is, the "goal" is to perform what you want to do in as
#       good a way as possible given the information that you have.

Ah, but was is "Good"? (What is "Red"?)

#   Note that Objectivism is not a "moral code" or "code of "good" behavior".  It
#   is a "code of practicality" if anything: its purpose is to establish a set of
#   principles by which "reality" can be dealt with in an "efficient" a manner
#   as possible (that is, that you can achieve your goals in as good a manner
#   as possible).  "Reality" is all of reality -- person/object interaction,
#   person/person interaction, person/group interaction, etc.

Objectivism attempts to provide an Epistemology whatever else it is.
This basis of knowledge is thought to have it's roots in Cognition.
Cognitive Science was not yet born when Objectivism was formulated.
I offer that it is crtically flawed in the light of what already
know from this still infant science.

Hint: "You are NOT born as a "Blank Slate". 


-sjm


--
Sean J. Merritt		         | "Every revolt is a cry of innocence    
Dept of Physics Boston University|  and an appeal to the essence of being."
merritt@macro.bu.edu             | Albert Camus, The Rebel
Newsgroups: alt.philosophy.objectivism