[Lecture Four] Moral Virtue

by Dr. Leonard Peikoff

Total Time: 1 hour, 43 minutes

Course summary: This course features an extended discussion of three issues in moral virtue that Dr. Leonard Peikoff learned about in writing his treatise on Objectivism. He reviews the virtues of justice and independence as well as the chief vice, the initiation of force, and applies new insights about their derivation, validation, and application. Read more »

In this lecture: This is a dedicated question and answer session with Dr. Peikoff.

Questions about this audio? Click here.

Q&A Guide

Below is a list of questions from the audience taken from this lecture, along with (approximate) time stamps.

2:26	Please define “moralizing.”
3:15	Is it ethically wrong to buy the product of a Western firm that is produced wholly or in part in a communist country if that product is better and priced equally to anything produced in the West?
4:15	In the context of Miss Rand’s definition of art and her statement that art converts man’s metaphysical abstractions into the equivalent of concretes, into specific entities open to direct perception, would a painting or sculpture that does not resemble a concrete in reality—e.g., a painting that is solid red or so-called free-form sculpture—be considered art?
6:05	What is your outline, if any, for any political action?
7:56	How would you answer the question that the choice to live is arbitrary and that, therefore, the whole Objectivist ethics is arbitrary?
9:17	There is a concerted attack on the right of Americans to keep and bear arms. Can you suggest a few brief principles upon which one can base an argument against this movement?
10:53	Which virtues would a man not need on a desert island? And, if so, why?
12:23	Would you discuss love in relation to justice?
13:50	What is the proper defense for freedom of speech in the Rushdie case? Does the purchase of his book sanction the right of freedom of speech or his ideas?
15:59	Did I understand you correctly that you would favor the wiping of Iran off the face of the Earth? If so, would you take care to relocate and compensate those Iranians who had not initiated any force? Who would pay for wiping out the military?
20:42	Was America morally right to supply Stalin with arms during World War II?
21:39	In your chapter on art, when you discuss music, will you be adding anything new to what Ayn Rand already said?
25:35	I believe Harry Binswanger once said that the Arabs have no right to the oil under their feet. Do you agree? Well then, would an enterprising sheik have the right to go to the U.S. and start drilling for oil in Death Valley and Yellowstone Park?
27:21	To what extent does the error of equating a concept with a definition lead to rationalism?
33:42	In discussions on the issue of abortion, why don’t rights begin at conception? Or, rather: explain when they do begin and why.
36:52	What modifications would you make to your lectures on moral principles as you delivered the material in 1987 now that you’ve rewritten the chapter on virtues?
47:27	Don’t you believe that even if the paper you attacked was wrong, couldn’t it be an honest error?
56:42	Can you give an example of how differences in degrees of evil are evaluated? For example, how would you compare the moral status of the average 1980s American academic Marxist to the moral status of Stalinists?
58:21	I understand the evil of sanctioning evil and the evil of sanctioning the sanctioners. What I am having trouble with is determining where to draw the line. Here are there concrete examples: Is it okay to speak at the local Republican Party and, if so, why? Is it okay to debate socialists? Is it alright to speak at the American Medical Association?
1:01:46	Does tolerance necessarily involve skepticism?
1:01:53	What then is the proper term to use in denoting an understanding and considerate approach to those with opposing views?
1:04:03	Why do you call someone who may not yet understand the issues involved an “anti-Objectivist” rather than “someone who may just be learning”?
1:05:45	Does a person have to agree with every detail of every one of your sentences in “Fact and Value”?
1:08:10	Are you saying that if I don’t agree totally, that you would prefer that I stop contributing to ARI, attending TJS, and calling myself an Objectivist?
1:09:36	What is the moral difference between your promotional signing of The Ominous Parallels at Laissez Faire Books and David Kelley’s speech at a Libertarian dinner?
1:10:50	Some Objectivists have trouble understanding Ayn Rand’s statement that “every ‘is’ implies an ‘ought’.” They claim this is invalid, taking it to mean that every minute fact, such as the number of blades of grass in a field, must be relevant to one’s life. Could you explain the error of this?
1:14:46	Given your statement that you will not be speaking at the Ford Hall Forum next spring, will there be another Objectivist?
1:15:15	What is the difference between the concepts “matter” and “existence”?
1:16:27	Are there any further writings by Miss Rand on the esthetics of painting and sculpture that will be published at a later date?
1:17:21	Do you have any news about the Atlas Shrugged movie project?
1:20:49	How is force involved in fraud?
1:22:10	How do you make the statement that “a man who is under force literally can’t think at all”?
1:23:39	Could you explain more fully what is a “stolen concept”?
1:24:50	What is your opinion of the power of subpoena…
1:26:00	What are the titles of chapters 9-13 [of Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand]?
1:27:50	When I contemplate the kind of desert Ayn Rand received from Branden, my soul aches. I consider Miss Rand to have been the greatest person in history and the most able to live a happy, efficacious life. Even so, it took her some time to spot Branden’s “Trojan horse” type of soul. How do you guard yourself against similar types of second-handed power lusters and flock gatherers, with their cloaks of priesthood, inner circles, and pecking orders? Can you point out some tips or principles for fraud busting?
1:32:22	Is it contrary to Objectivist principles to read Nathaniel Branden’s book Judgment Day and have you read the book?
1:34:40	In the Q&A session of “Certainty and Happiness,” you painted a bleak picture of the future, based on events and subsequent reactions to the Rushdie book. Based on this and horror stories from doctors, lawyers, etc., what is your motivation to continue your work and under what circumstances does one throw in the towel?