[Lecture Three] Advanced Seminars on Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand
by Dr. Leonard Peikoff
Total Time: 1 hour, 54 minutes
Course summary: In this course, Dr. Peikoff presented material from his then-new book, Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand. The manuscript had its earliest roots in Peikoff’s comprehensive 1976 lecture course on Objectivism. As he worked on the material for publication, he discovered new connections and implications of major ideas in the philosophy as well as new insights on its integrated, hierarchical structure. Peikoff used these seminars to discuss what he learned in the process and to demonstrate how it would allow students of Objectivism to gain a new understanding of the philosophy. Read more »
In this lecture: In this lecture, Dr. Peikoff explains why there is an “in-between” step from metaphysics to epistemology. He explains the nature of sense perception and the validation of perceptual level awareness.
Q&A Guide
Below is a list of questions from the audience taken from this lecture, along with (approximate) time stamps.
| 2:27 | How do you relate the primacy of consciousness and subjectivism? Is one metaphysical? Is one epistemology? And is there a crucial relation between them? |
| 7:40 | Are physics and science synonymous? |
| 52:20 | Would it be appropriate to say that ethics covers the third axiom, existence and consciousness? |
| 54:52 | Is it correct to say that you can’t talk about the identity of consciousness without talking about the relationship of consciousness to existence? |
| 1:02:56 | There are hundreds of arguments against the senses, some of which stump me. Is it enough to say “I know this must be wrong because he’s relying on his senses too”? |
| 1:08:06 | [Question related to the ultimate attributes of matter.] |
| 1:09:59 | The universe is an irreducible primary? |
| 1:11:25 | Page 67: Why not redefine objectivity as adherence in both perception and conception? |
| 1:19:02 | Suppose we put a brain inside a beaker and stimulate it just as it would be by the light waves in reality, resulting in the same experiences achieved through the senses. Could you say that it is perceiving apples and so on? |
| 1:21:48 | Does the importance of condensation imply guidance? |
| 1:23:29 | Do you perceive that object in reality by perceiving their actions on you? |
| 1:27:53 | Could a case be made that “consciousness has identity” be saved for the end? |
| 1:29:48 | Isn’t there a difference between the argument that the senses are invalid and the argument that the senses are unreliable? |
| 1:34:26 | Page 77: Could you contrast your statement “a complex past mental content of yours is implicit and operative in your present visual awareness” with the modern claim that perception is theory laden? |
| 1:47:06 | What is the positive reason for including “the perceptual level as the given”? |
| 1:50:25 | Would you say that perceptions are always direct? What about afterimages? |