[Lecture Six] Philosophy of Education
by Dr. Leonard Peikoff
Total Time: 59 minutes
Course summary: In this lecture series, Dr. Leonard Peikoff explores the nature of education, why contemporary schools do not achieve it, and what the proper basis is. In it, he discusses why education must be conceptual, the principles of proper instruction, and the essential content of a proper education. Read more »
In this lecture: This is a Q&A session on Objectivism.
Q&A Guide
Below is a list of questions from the audience taken from this lecture, along with (approximate) time stamps.
| 0:18 | Suppose a statistical study were to show that some phenomenon has a 10% relationship to the existence of some prior circumstance. What is the epistemological status of the relationship? Isn’t it reasonable to assume that some aspect of a causal link has been discovered? |
| 2:55 | Why don’t animals have rights? Why should human lives be regarded as more important than animals? |
| 5:55 | Apropos patents and copyrights, what about photocopying articles or books for research purposes instead of purchasing the entire book? How do you justify libraries that let people read the book for free? How do you justify used book stores that resell the author’s books? Aren’t all those things in violation of the principle of copyright? |
| 9:30 | An intrinsicist would teach factual knowledge in no particular order and wouldn’t teach thinking methods. However, a rationalist would teach thinking methods and would be concerned with order, for example Plato. And yet rationalism rests on intrinsicism. And yet, if taken separately, they seem to lead to different educational philosophies. Would you please comment? |
| 11:47 | Two qualities may be mutually exclusive, for example “same” and “different,” but neither seems to be the positive or negative. Does the onus of proof rule apply to such concepts? |
| 15:57 | Ayn Rand wrote an article expressing her disapproval of women who aspire to the presidency of the United States. Is this view an essential part of Objectivism? |
| 19:37 | I would like to know where you draw the line in business in dealing with dishonest customers. For example, would you do business with the corrupt government of a Latin America country? |
| 21:53 | If one has been unable to find a serious, long-term romantic partner, is it acceptable to seek various aspects of the value derivable from the ideal relationship, i.e., intellectual stimulation, companionship, compatibility, personality, common recreational interests, physical attraction, and interaction, from more than one person? Given that it may be optimal to find all of this in one partner, isn’t it better to obtain it from several people than not at all? |
| 24:47 | Could you differentiate between the Objectivist principle that any compromise between good and evil is immoral, and the Greek emphasis on sophrosyne or moderation, such as Aristotle’s virtue of the Golden Mean? |
| 26:46 | Is it immoral of an American to choose to compete against athletes or musicians or chess players from the U.S.S.R. or other communist societies? |
| 28:23 | What is the Objectivist definition of happiness? |
| 29:36 | Should there be a legal adult age for drinking, voting, the military, etc.? |
| 30:50 | How long are parents legally responsible for their children? |
| 30:56 | Ayn Rand’s definition of values specifies “act.” What so you call something that someone wants to gain or keep but does not act to gain or keep? If you want something, but are waiting for the right time to act, is this thing not a value until the person takes action? |
| 33:12 | Do you believe Immanuel Kant was aware that his philosophy was evil? If so, was he not a real life example of the seemingly impossible character of Ellsworth Toohey? |
| 35:00 | Do you believe that Ayn Rand’s ideas could have arisen only after the American and Industrial Revolutions had been attacked? |
| 36:58 | Why are American schools so much worse than the schools in other countries, given that America had a better philosophic system to start with? |
| 39:13 | Since what we value is ideas and since words are merely symbols for them, can their be a time when a word has been so corrupted that it might be useful to abandon the word and replace it so that people would focus on the ideas instead of the myths the word has evoked? For example, shouldn’t we get rid of the words “capitalism” and “selfishness”? |
| 41:19 | I’m a doctoral student in management in a private university that is dominated by left wing professors. How can I survive? Should I voice my opinions or keep a low profile? |
| 42:52 | In your disclaimer at the beginning of your first lecture, you said that Ayn Rand has not reviewed all of what you present and also reminded us of your fallibility. Do you mean to imply that she was infallible? |
| 43:23 | Did you mean to imply that Objectivism is, as she defined it, right or wrong? I view you and others as having the duty of adding to and, if necessary, correcting the existing ideas of Objectivism. Do you agree? |
| 46:29 | Can you say anything about future advances in Objectivism, as to their direction and subject matter? |
| 48:21 | Did you gain anything of value from your university philosophy courses beside a degree? |
| 48:57 | Did any of your classmates in the 1950s see the value of Objectivism? |
| 49:06 | What is the present state in the development of the Atlas Shrugged motion picture? |
| 51:08 | When are you going to publish Ayn Rand’s unpublished nonfiction? |
| 52:14 | By what process and with what timing do you envision the publication of a book presenting Objectivism fully? |
| 53:18 | Why is epistemology important and what are you going to do about it? |
| 55:30 | How have you developed yourself into such an outstanding teacher? |