[Lecture Three] Understanding Objectivism
by Dr. Leonard Peikoff
Total Time: 2 hours, 25 minutes
Course summary: In this course, Dr. Peikoff explores the proper methodology for understanding Objectivism, and philosophy more generally. The end goal in grasping any complex set of ideas, he notes, is to keep them tied to reality. This course features lecture material by Dr. Peikoff as well as exercises and demonstrations from the live audience. The main methodological topics covered are the need for concretization, the role of definitions in concept formation, the understanding of hierarchy, reduction of concepts to the perceptual level, and the role of context in epistemology. Peikoff also presents essential material on the main cognitive and methodological mistakes that can be made in attempting to understand Objectivism, namely empiricism and rationalism. The course concludes with a discussion of the importance of moral judgment. Read more »
In this lecture: Focusing on the Objectivist virtue of honesty and the importance of principles in a rational life, Dr. Peikoff continues his demonstration of the method of chewing ideas and integrating them into one’s own context. He emphasizes the importance of finding the balance between specificity and generality, setting the correct context, the need for a hierarchical approach, and the proper understanding of what a principle is.
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 important dual nature of all the Objectivist virtues? |
| Describe the nature of empiricism in regard to attempting to understand a concept such as honesty. What are its characteristic signs? What does it specifically lack? |
| What does Dr. Peikoff mean when he criticizes the example chewing of honesty as having “inadequate context”? |
| How can one use the devil’s advocacy approach without becoming too polemical? |
| Explain the role of hierarchy in explaining how you understand a topic given the interrelatedness of all philosophic principles? What is a characteristic way that this approach is violated? |
| Why does the need for acting on principle precede fully understanding any of the Objectivist virtues? |
| What are the two roots of the concept principle? |
| What would a specific proof of any of the Objectivist virtues require? How could you ground them in reality so that they have “truck-like” clarity? |
| Explain in brief the spiral theory of knowledge as it applies to chewing and understanding ideas. |
Q&A Guide
Below is a list of questions from the audience taken from this lecture, along with (approximate) time stamps.
| 1:59:26 | Since I’m an empiricist, I never seem to get to the argument stage. I mean, I can’t even get a structure to scrutinize. What should I do? |
| 2:02:34 | What is this seminar you keep referring to? |
| 2:03:02 | What is the distance between integrity and honesty? |
| 2:04:04 | Someone asks if you will be going to some function. You reply that you can’t afford it. The issue is dropped. The person who asked you before believes that you can’t afford it financially, and you know he thinks that. But, in fact, you can’t afford the time or the effort and you prefer not to explain further. The person who asked you does not pursue the issue, although, if he did, you would explain further. Is this dishonesty? |
| 2:08:17 | Even after last week I still don’t see the difference between the existence/non-existence alternative for living organisms on the one hand vs. inanimate objects on the other. Nor do I see how either reduction or emotion is relevant. But who cares? Why not just say: “Value is that which man seeks to gain and/or keep. Man’s fundamental alternative is life or death, therefore life is man’s standard of value.” What’s the point of forming a concept of value that pertains to non-human entities? |
| 2:11:36 | Where is the fullest discussion of the virtue of honesty in the Objectivist literature? |
| 2:12:29 | What would be the difference between a lie and exaggerating the truth? |
| 2:13:24 | If there is no fundamental alternative for inanimate matter, where does life come from? |
| 2:16:08 | On what kinds of issues is it proper for your knowledge to be purely deductive? |
| 2:17:27 | In the process of concretizing moral virtues, isn’t it crucial to see and be convinced of the relationship of a virtue to my own personal happiness, nor merely to my own personal morality and goodness? |
| 2:18:51 | How does the point about the hierarchical error differ from the fallacy of begging the question? |
| 2:19:51 | You’ve demonstrated that it isn’t self-evident how to validate the virtue of honesty. However, is there some sense in which it is self-evident to be honest? When I encounter a liar I never think “poor fellow, he’s never heard of the Objectivist proof.” |
| 2:23:35 | Please answer: Why Pac-Man? |