[Lecture Ten] The Philosophy of Objectivism
by Dr. Leonard Peikoff
Total Time: 2 hours, 35 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: In this lecture, Dr. Peikoff examines the full implementation of a social system that upholds and protects individual rights, namely capitalism. He demonstrates that capitalism is the only moral social system and the only one rooted in the objective view of values. By explaining that capitalism is the only system that features objective law and understands the proper distinction between political and economic power, Peikoff demonstrates how capitalism is the only system that opposes all forms of statism and collectivism. Ayn Rand participates in this lecture’s question and answer session.
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.
| What is the relationship between morality and economics via politics? |
| How does capitalism rest upon the ethics of egoism? |
| Why does the understanding of the objectivity of values lead to capitalism as a social system? |
| What are the two types of objective values? What are contemporary examples? |
| Explain the two senses of the idea of objective law. |
| What differentiates economic and political power? |
| How does the pyramid ability explain how everyone benefits from freedom? |
| Why do intellectuals today always come to anti-capitalist positions? |
| How does statism rest on false moral views; on false epistemological views? Give a few examples of statist policies and their underlying roots. |
| Why is anarchism incompatible with individualism? Why is it incompatible with the mind? |
| How does the mixed economy encourage pragmatism and compromise? |
Q&A Guide
Below is a list of questions from the audience taken from this lecture, along with (approximate) time stamps.
| 1:43:15 | What proof do you have for your Socratic-like position that if a person is consciously holding an idea at one particular time, he cannot act contrary to that idea at the time? For example, I take it that your position would disallow a person holding to the belief that murder is immoral while in the act of murdering someone. |
| 1:47:25 | You broke down the meaning of “individualism” to three aspects: metaphysical, ethical, and political. Of what significance in the context of a discussion of rights is the epistemological fact that man can only gain knowledge and exercise reason individually? Isn’t that crucial, too? |
| 1:48:50 | Does the concept that man must be free need proof? Can it merely be asserted as self-evident, that freedom is a requirement of man’s mind and therefore his life? |
| 1:51:17 | In an unorganized society of men, wouldn’t it still be wrong for anyone to initiate force, since it would be anti-life? Why wouldn’t this mean that such an initiation was a violation of rights, even if the society was unorganized? |
| 1:54:04 | Is blackmail, in which the threat is to reveal the truth, a form of force? |
| 1:55:46 | Would it be morally permissible for a court of law in a free society to demand compulsory testimony? |
| 1:58:34 | Do you think vigilantism is appropriate against New York muggers? |
| 2:00:12 | Is the legal state of marriage desirable and/or necessary to a love relationship, and should it properly be licensed by the state? If not properly state-controlled, what sort of commitment would be appropriate? |
| 2:02:43 | Is it within the proper confines of the government to dictate the terms of the marriage contract? Shouldn’t the two partners have the right to a tailor-made contract honored by the government? |
| 2:07:32 | Is a single, moral, world government a valid and tenable ideal? |
| 2:09:24 | You claim in one sense that a law can be objective as long as it is clearly defined. But can you really clearly define something totally at variance with the facts? |
| 2:11:15 | You seem to be attacking the use of the term “subjective values” and substituting the “philosophically/socially objective value” concept for the terminology of von Mises. Are you actually taking issue with his argument or just his terminology? |
| 2:13:07 | What happened to the New Left? With every other trend in their favor, why haven’t they been more successful? |
| 2:15:34 | Modern judicial theorists hold that justice is a purely practical concept and has no purpose other than preventing or discouraging future crime. Does Objectivism hold that there are any practical reason for punishing criminals other than prevention? Does Objectivism believe in retributive justice as opposed to prevention or rehabilitation? |
| 2:19:32 | Apart from basic moral premises, is it really ever proper to talk about an “Objectivist position” on an issue? Shouldn’t one’s own mind and reasoning process be the sole determinant of one’s stand on any given issue? (Time and again through the course you have referred to the “Objectivist position” on this or that.) |
| 2:26:27 | Ayn Rand on the “exact opposite” error: asking for positions on the narrowest concrete, e.g., “What’s the Objectivist position on a given movie?” |
| 2:29:10 | Do you judge the present political and economic situation with Carter as president as worse than the FDR regime, with its terrible socialist and communist activities and sympathies? |
| 2:30:47 | Is the dilemma of the scholar, regarding last week’s question on the scholar’s acceptance of government funds for original research, similar to the dilemma of the artist with respect to government grants? If so, to what extent? |
| 2:31:15 | Specifically, is nonprofit live theater funded by government grants in accordance with Objectivist economic-political theory? |
| 2:33:29 | Is today’s public television a valid method of arts funding? |
| 2:34:51 | When a person collects unemployment benefits it is charged against some particular employer whose rate of compulsory contribution to the state then automatically increases. Does Objectivism view the collection of unemployment benefits the same as receiving scholarships? |