[Lecture Four] The Philosophy of Objectivism

by Dr. Leonard Peikoff

Total Time: 2 hours, 42 minutes

Course summary: This twelve lecture course presents the entire theoretical structure and key ideas of Objectivism. It covers all the major branches of philosophy and how Objectivism answers the essential questions in those areas. Ayn Rand attended the lectures and participated in a majority of the question and answer sessions after the lectures. Peikoff later used this material as the basis of his definitive book on Objectivism. Read more »

In this lecture: Dr. Peikoff explains how human consciousness moves from the perceptual to the abstract level through the creation of concepts. Through an exploration of the metaphysical status of sensory qualities, the nature of the unit perspective in human cognition, and the use of definitions and conceptual names, Peikoff describes the process of concept formation.

Questions about this audio? Click here.

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.

How does the Objectivist answer to the question of the metaphysical status of sensory qualities answer an old philosophic problem. Explain using a specific sensory form.

What are some of the unique features of the conceptual level of consciousness?

What is the unit perspective so important in thinking?

What is the role of words in concept formation?

How does the quantitative relationship of concretes play a role in concepts?

What does it mean to engage in abstraction?

Explain each of the important elements of the Objectivist definition of a concept.

How is concept formation related to the idea of algebra?

What is a concept of consciousness?

Define what a floating abstraction is, and give at least a few unique examples.

What is the role of a definition in forming a concept?

What is the rule of fundamentality?

Q&A Guide

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

1:50:20	Does the fact of free will necessarily imply that that factor dominates every essential aspect of human beings?
1:51:56	Last week you said that environment can affect the ease of cognition, but not the commitment to know. But won’t a man’s commitment to know be affected by the success he derives from the effort? If a child is raised in an environment where every attempt to understand meets failure, on what grounds could he maintain a commitment to know?
1:56:03	How can one choose to focus, since selecting being in or out of focus implies that you are already in focus?
1:58:16	If man’s primary choice is to focus his mind or not, must he not have to have conceptual knowledge of his mind and its potential to be in full focus before he can make a choice?
1:59:29	You seem to imply that one could be in-focus without focusing on any particular thing. That sounds like a content-less consciousness. Could you elaborate?
2:00:54	Is it really possible for a normal, awake person not to think? Can one literally blank out one’s mind, that is, choose not to be conscious? Maybe something’s wrong with me: I’ve tried, but I can’t stop thinking.
2:04:34	Does a man deserve moral condemnation for emotions that are the result of wrong premises? Is he to despise himself for emotions that disclose wrong premises?
2:10:55	All axioms are known only by direct sensory perception. And the existence of consciousness is one fundamental axiom. But are we aware of our consciousness by direct sensory experience?
2:11:32	Is it self-evident that introspection is a valid means of knowledge?
2:13:09	Other than the works of Ayn Rand, would you provide us with a list of books worth reading on the various areas we are covering in this course?
2:14:12	After lecture 2, you referred us to dictionaries for definitions. Can you recommend a good dictionary?
2:15:55	Do you object to students making copies of their notes on the high points of your lectures for distribution or sale to friends?
2:16:51	If metaphysics is equivalent to the bottom floors of the skyscraper of philosophy on which all of the other sections rest, and if metaphysics contains the axioms on which all the rest of man’s actions depend, then why do you maintain that epistemology and not metaphysics is the most important section of philosophy?
2:19:45	What’s a “Korzybski”?
2:21:01	Where does a person’s IQ fit in an epistemological context? Can two people with different IQs reach the same conceptual conclusions?
2:25:13	What are the units that are isolated and united to form the concept of “time”?
2:26:46	You state that an expanding context of knowledge invalidates definitions, not concepts. Might not an expanding context therefore also invalidate previously valid concepts?
2:28:14	Did you say all knowledge is based on former knowledge? How can this be is we all start tabula rasa?
2:28:43	Why do you say that a definition must be formed in the context of all the knowledge available to man as opposed to the knowledge forming and using the definition?
2:31:26	Since insane men are still considered men, would you modify the definition of man to read “a potentially rational animal”?
2:33:27	What is the epistemological status of the Objectivist theory of concepts? Is it axiomatic? Is it self-evident? Have you proved it or is it a base for proof or what?
2:37:38	How does genus in a definition apply to primaries? What larger group do they belong to? Such as the “universe” or “existence.”
2:40:01	Do you think there’s any validity to the notion of “visual thinking,” thinking in images rather than words?
2:40:12	Is the relationship between mathematics and concept formation, as formed by Miss Rand, similar to Bertrand Russell’s attempt to establish a mathematical relationship to logic? If so, how valid is the study of symbolic logic?