Rand and Empirical Responsibility 14 - 0 views
aynrandcontrahumannature.blogspot.com/...pirical-responsibility-14.html
objectivism criticalthinking


-
If Rand's statement was meant as a definition, she is guilty of equivocation; for she does not always stick to that particular usage.
-
Whether such esteem is based on a reliance of one's power to think is an assertion about matters of fact that requires evidence.
- ...3 more annotations...
-
This statement packs three assertions, any one of which could easily be dismissed on empirical grounds. It assumes that, in order to be capable of love, one must be (1) rational, (2) selfish and (3) a man of self-esteem. Does Rand provide any evidence of these assertions? No. Indeed, they are hardly plausible. If Rand's view was true, we would have to conclude that most people are incapable of love. Would any sane person actually believe such a thing?
-
Rand's tendency to redefine terms, not merely for herself, but for others, constitutes an egregious intellectual vice. She is, in effect, putting words in other people mouths and then condemning them on that basis.
-
""Self-esteem is reliance on one's power to think." It's not clear whether this is meant as a definition or as a statement of fact. Objectivists often confuse the one with the other. A definition merely defines how a term is used. One may define one's terms as one pleases, but once a definition is granted, one needs to stay consistent to the usuage. If Rand's statement was meant as a definition, she is guilty of equivocation; for she does not always stick to that particular usage."