[Lecture Two] Objectivism Through Induction
by Dr. Leonard Peikoff
Total Time: 1 hour, 32 minutes
Course summary: In this course, Dr. Peikoff demonstrates how to grasp philosophic ideas and principles in the same way that they were discovered—through induction from the facts of reality. Working through a process of generalizing from observed facts, Peikoff shows how a student can come to grasp and validate key ideas in Objectivist philosophy. Key concepts covered in the course include the idea of objectivity in both knowledge and values, egoism, reason as man’s means of survival, and the metaphysical status of sex. Read more »
In this lecture: This lecture examines the facts of first-hand observation that lead to the conclusion that reason is man’s basic means of survival. Dr. Peikoff breaks the induction down into three stages and contrasts the kinds of factual material necessary to make the induction with the misleading, rationalistic, and unwarranted ideas that might be used.
Study Guide
This material is designed to help you digest the lecture content. You can also download below a PDF study guide for the entire course.
| Identify three factual pieces of knowledge one would have to have already grasped to begin inducing the “means of survival.” |
| Why is it important to reduce a concept like “reason” back down to the facts before attempting to induce a proposition that contains it? |
| What is the connection between the three steps or stages of induction of this principle? |
| How directly observable should the facts be for inductions of principles like this that are closer to the perceptual level? |
| Is there a necessary order to the kinds of observable facts that one lists when enumerating items for an induction? Why or why not? |
| Explain the methodological value of contrast when it comes to the process of induction. |
| How does the contrast point fit in relative to the genus method? |
| What differentiates identifying reason as man’s means of survival with the similar point about reason being man’s only means of knowledge? |
Q&A Guide
Below is a list of questions from the audience taken from this lecture, along with (approximate) time stamps.
| 1:12:57 | Apropos the point that Ayn Rand couldn’t have reached “reason as man’s means of survival” without the Industrial Revolution, what do you do if there exists little to no concrete instances of certain things, if there’s a lack of data? Would this prevent inductions from being made? What about the role of art in man’s life? Does art as a projection of what’s possible provide the inductive data in a way needed to project how life ought to be? If there is a lack, say, of virtuous men or a just society—a complete lack of data with which to proceed—does art provide man a projection of data with which to work, sort of a substitute data set? |
| 1:18:04 | Did I understand you to say that induction will not be a good means of showing others the validity of Objectivism? Or is it just that you shouldn’t use induction in a polemical situation? What is the best method of showing non-Objectivists the power and validity of Objectivism? |
| 1:20:41 | Until the 17th-century, the best understanding of causality was along the lines of Aristotle’s idea that causality was true for the most part. Doesn’t this show that a great deal of abstract scientific knowledge is necessary fully to understand causality? In general, would you comment on the need or lack of need of scientific knowledge to inductively understand Objectivism? |
| 1:28:08 | I was interested in the way you contrasted the lower animals with man at a reasonably civilized state. Is it necessary for us when we’re doing this to go back to something that is not quite as clear, by way of a contrast? |