Peikoff - The Good - Rationality As The Primary Virtue Flashcards

(59 cards)

1
Q

What are the principles of human survival?

What objects must man hold as values if he is to preserve his life, and what virtues must he practice in order to achieve them?

A

The faculty of reason is man’s basic tool of survival.

==> The primary choice is to exercise this faculty or not.

==> If life is the standard, therefore, the basic moral principle is obvious.

==> It tells us the proper evaluation of reason.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

According to AR, there are 3 basic values “which together are the means to and the realization of one’s ultimate value …”

A

“To live, man must hold three things as the supreme and ruling values of his life: REASON — PURPOSE — SELF-ESTEEM.”

==> Reason — as his only tool of knowledge.

==> Purpose — as his choice of the happiness which that tool must proceed to achieve.

==> Self-esteem — as his inviolate certainty that his mind is competent to think and his person is worthy of happiness, which means: WORTHY OF LIVING.

***These 3 values imply and require all of man’s virtues.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

The last two of these I will defer until the next chapter.

The greatest of them, however, which makes the others possible, is the first:

A

Epistemology tells us that reason is VALID — It is man’s means of knowledge.

Ethics draws the practical conclusion — IF one chooses to live, ONE MUST HOLD REASON AS A VALUE.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

To value reason is the opposite NOT ONLY of rejecting it, but also of accepting it dutifully.

In regard to the mind, the Objectivist is NOT …

A

Disinterested or grudging.

He does NOT say: “I myself would rather be irrational, but, since A is A, I agree not to hold contradictions.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

On the contrary, grasping the VITAL role of consciousness, …

A

He awards reason the FUNDAMENTAL PLACE in his PERSONAL value structure.

==> He is the man who cherishes his means of survival, who recoils from the prospect of subverting it, who is uplifted by the spectacle of DRY OBJECTIVITY.

***”The noblest act you have ever performed is the act of your mind in the process of grasping that two and two make four.” — She did not intent the statement as hyperbole.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

The magnificent fire in AR’s ethics — her inspiring affirmations of man the hero, creative work, selfish joy, individual liberty — all of it is a DERIVATIVE.

The root is …

A

The primary MORAL estimate of Objectivism — ITS ESTIMATE OF REASON.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Every moral value entails a lifelong course of virtue.

Virtue is …

A

THE ACTION BY WHICH ONE GAINS AND KEEPS A VALUE.

==> The action in this instance is the virtue that develops, preserves, and applies the faculty of reason, thereby making possible every other human value — RATIONALITY.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Rationality, according to AR, is …

A

The recognition and acceptance of reason as one’s ONLY source of knowledge — one’s ONLY judge of values and one’s ONLY guide to action.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

This means the application of reason to every aspect of one’s life and concerns:

A

It means choosing and validating one’s opinions, one’s decisions, one’s work, one’s love, in accordance with the normal requirements of a COGNITIVE PROCESS — The requirements of LOGIC, OBJECTIVITY, INTEGRATION.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Put negatively, the virtue means …

A

NEVER PLACING ANY CONSIDERATION ABOVE ONE’S PERCEPTION OF REALITY.

==> Never attempting to get away with a contradiction, a mystic fantasy, or an indulgence in context-dropping.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Rationality means the acceptance of reason as a principle of human survival and …

A

AS AN ABSOLUTE.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Animals exercise their faculty of consciousness automatically.

Man does not.

“For an animal, the question of survival is primarily physical — for man, …

A

PRIMARILY EPISTEMOLOGICAL.”

==> Rationality, accordingly, is the PRIMARY OBLIGATION OF MAN — all the others are derivatives of it.

==> If man needs to choose his actions by reference to principles, this virtue names the ROOT PRINCIPLE.

==> Indeed, it underlies the very need of moral principles.

==> To act on principle is ITSELF an expression of rationality — it is a form of being governed by one’s CONCEPTUAL FACULTY.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

By the same token, there is only one PRIMARY VICE, which is the root of all other human evils:

A

IRRATIONALITY.

==> This is the deliberate suspension of consciousness — the refusal to see, to think, to know — either as a general policy, because one regards awareness as too demanding, or in regard to some specific point, because the FACTS conflict with one’s FEELINGS.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Vice, in the Objectivist view, is NOT a rewarding policy:

A

It is unconsciousness — willful, self-induced unconsciousness, while one continues to move around and function.

==> To a conscious organism no course of behavior can be more dangerous.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

The above is a generalized overview — Now let me consider certain aspects of rationality in greater detail:

To begin with, …

A

One cannot follow reason UNLESS ONE EXERCISES IT.

==> Rationality demands CONTINUAL MENTAL ACTIVITY — a regular, daily process of functioning on the CONCEPTUAL LEVEL OF CONSCIOUSNESS.

==> This involves much more than merely FORMING enough concepts to be able to speak or read a book.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

In AR’s description, it involves …

A

“An actively sustained process of IDENTIFYING one’s impressions in conceptual terms, of INTEGRATING every event and every observation into a CONCEPTUAL CONTEXT, of GRASPING relationships, similarities, differences in one’s perceptual material — and of ABSTRACTING them into new concepts, of drawing inferences, of making deductions, or reaching conclusions, of asking new questions and discovering new answers — and expanding one’s knowledge into an ever-growing sum.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

A man does not qualify as rational if he walks around in a daze but once in a while, when someone mentions a fact, he wakes up long enough to say “I ll accept that”, then relapses again.

A

Rationality requires the SYSTEMATIC USE OF ONE’S INTELLIGENCE.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

AR’s novels abound in instructive examples of this aspect of virtue.

Consider, for instance, Howard Roark’s encounter with the Dean at the beginning of “The Fountainhead”.

A

The Dean tells him that men must always revere tradition.

==> Roark regards this viewpoint as senseless, but he does NOT ignore it.

==> Roark is not a psychologist, nor does the field interest him much — but he does deal with men, he knows that there are many like the Dean, and he is on the premise of UNDERSTANDING WHAT HE DEALS WITH.

==> So he identifies the meaning of the event in terms available to him.

==> There is something here opposite to the way I function, he thinks, some form of behavior I do not grasp — “the principle behind the Dean”, he calls it — and he files this observation in his subconscious with the implicit order to himself — BE ON THE LOOKOUT FOR ANY DATA RELEVANT TO THIS PROBLEM.

==> Thereafter, when such information becomes available, he recognizes and integrates it.

==> In the end, Roark reaches the concept of the “second-hander” — and of the opposite kind of man, whom he represents.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Whatever the heroes in AR’s novels deal with, including work, romance, art, people, politics, and philosophy, …

A

THEY SEEK TO UNDERSTAND IT — by connecting the new to what they already know and by discovering what they do not yet know.

==> They are men and women who like and practice the process of cognition.

==> This is why they are usually efficacious and happy individuals, who achieve their values.

==> Their commitment to THOUGHT leads them to sustained growth of KNOWLEDGE, which maximizes the possibility of successful ACTION.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

In citing the Roark example, I do not mean to suggest that rationality has to involve the discovery of new ideas.

A

The exercise of reason applies within the sphere of each man’s knowledge, concerns, and ability.

==> The point is not that one must become a genius or even an intellectual.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Contrary to a widespread fallacy, reason is a faculty …

A

Of HUMAN BEINGS not of “supermen”.

==> The moral point here is to ALWAYS TO GROW MENTALLY, to increase one’s knowledge and expand the power of one’s consciousness to the extent one can — whatever one’s profession or the degree of one’s intelligence.

==> MENTAL GROWTH is possible on some scale to every person with an intact brain.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

It requires the expenditure of effort, however, the effort of …

A

INITIATING AND MAINTAINING A STATE OF FULL CONSCIOUSNESS.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Effort does NOT mean pain or duty, but its does mean …

A

STRUGGLE, because conceptual knowledge is a VOLITIONAL ATTAINMENT that involves the risk of error arid the need of continual, scrupulous MENTAL WORK.

==> The men of virtue are the men who CHOOSE to practice and welcome this kind of struggle ON PRINCIPLE, as a lifelong commitment.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Their opposites are the …

A

ANTI-EFFORT mentalities, who seek to coast through life, hoping that knowledge and values will SOMEHOW materialize without labor or cost whenever one wishes for them.

25
This attitude represents the subversion of virtue AT THE ROOT.
It is resentment of the fact that virtue is NECESSARY. ==> The best symbol here is the Garden of Eden before the Fall, which the Judeo-Christian tradition regards as paradise. ==> Such a projection ELEVATES MENTAL STAGNATION TO THE STATUS OF IDEAL. ==> No long-range action is required of Adam and Eve, no work, no plan, no focus — they need merely lie around, munch fruit, and follow orders.
26
The mental practice that underlies the anti-effort attitude is the act of ...
EVASION — of blanking out some fact of reality which one dislikes. ==> This act constitutes the ESSENCE of irrationality and, therefore, of evil. ==> Evasion is the Objectivist equivalent of a MORTAL SIN. ==> It is the only such sin that we recognize, because it is what makes possible every other form of moral corruption.
27
No one seeks to evade the total of reality. Evaders believe that the practice is safe because ...
They feel they can LOCALIZE IT. Ultimately, however, they cannot.
28
The reason is that everything in reality is INTERCONNECTED. In logic, therefore, to sustain an evasion on any single point, one would be forced gradually ...
To expand and to keep expanding the scope of one’s blindness.
29
For example, suppose that you decide to evade only in regard to the issue of God’s existence, which you want to accept without evidence — In regard, to everything else, you say, you will follow reason.
What, in pattern, will happen to your mental processes thereafter? Can you remain rational in dealing with the rest of metaphysics, including such topics as the eternity of universe, the absolutism of Identity, and the impossibility of miracles? ==> Any of these topics, squarely faced, threatens to expose and upset your evasion. What about your thinking in regard to epistemology, including your view of the arbitrary and the issue of faith vs reason? What about ethics and God’s supposed moral commandments? What about God’s reputed political views — eg pornography, prayer in the schools, abortion? What about the clash between Genesis and the theory of evolution? ==> If you tried consistently to protect only your SINGLE STARTING EVASION, turning aside methodically from everything that might threaten it, directly or indirectly, that SINGLE EVASION would leap you step by step to ONE ULTIMATE RESULT: ==> TOTAL NONPERCEPTION.
30
The above is the negative expression of a principle discussed in ch.4:
Man’s need of INTEGRATION. ==> Just as every IDEA has a relationship to one’s other IDEAS, and none can be accepted until it is seen to be an element of a SINGLE COGNITIVE WHOLE — so every FACT has a relationship to other FACTS, ==> and NONE CAN BE EVADED without tearing apart and destroying that kind of whole.
31
In actuality, our discussion of a methodically consistent evader is merely a pedagogical device:
An evader is NOT concerned with consistency — he does NOT seek to protect his evasion by identifying conscientiously the implications of new cognitive material. ==> If THAT were his policy, he would NOT be evading.
32
The evader’s method is ...
Not to follow his evasion logically, wherever it leads, BUT TO IGNORE LOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS. ==> His method is to deal with ideas and facts PIECEMEAL — accepting or rejecting disconnected bits of content at random, by reference to FEELING.
33
The evader does want the “safety” of localizing his evasions, and he practices the ONLY method there is of achieving such localization:
NOT KNOWING HIS EVASIONS’ IMPLICATIONS. ==> This means that he discards the PRINCIPLE OF INTEGRATION.
34
By its nature, evasion is a form of ...
NONINTEGRATION. ==> It is the most lethal form ==> THE WILLFUL DISINTEGRATION OF MENTAL CONTENTS. ==> A man in this condition no longer has the means to determine consistency or contradiction, truth or falsehood. ==> In his consciousness, all conceptual content is reduced to the capricious, the baseless, the arbitrary. ==> NO CONCLUSION QUALIFIES AS KNOWLEDGE in a mind that rejects the requirements of cognition.
35
Thus, the real evader, like the hypothetical one I mentioned first, reaches only one end and one kind of “safety”:
ALL-ENCOMPASSING BLINDNESS. ==> This is the explanation of AR’s statement that “a concession to the irrational invalidates one’s consciousness”.
36
The mind can no more tolerate “a little irrationality” than the body can tolerate “a little malignancy”.
Both evils, once introduced, START TO CONSUME ANY HEALTHIER ELEMENTS.
37
Every virtue, according to Objectivism, has 2 aspects:
1. Intellectual. | 2. Existential.
38
Since man is a unity made of mind and body, every virtue ...
Has an application in BOTH REALMS. ==> Each involves a CERTAIN PROCESS OF CONSCIOUSNESS and, as its expression in reality, a CERTAIN COURSE OF PHYSICAL ACTION.
39
The existential side of rationality is the policy of ...
ACTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH ONE’S RATIONAL CONCLUSIONS. ==> There is no point in using one’s mind if the knowledge one gains thereby is NOT ONE’S GUIDE IN ACTION.
40
This aspect of rationality subsumes several obligations. It requires that one choose not only his abstract values but also ...
His specific goals by a process of rational thought — as against choosing some goal by an act of WHIM while dropping the full context of one’s knowledge and of one’s other goals. ==> It requires that one knows what his motives are — as against DRIFTING through a day or A LIFE, pushed, one knows not where, by unidentified impulse. ==> It requires that one choose the means to his ends by reference to EXPLICITLY DEFINED PRINCIPLES, both moral and scientific — as against trying to build a bridge, a newscast, a marriage, or world peace by the aid of concrete-bound habit, undigested slogans, or “the seat of one’s pants.” ==> And it requires that one then ENACT THE MEANS, accepting the law of causality in FULL — as against seeking EFFECTS WITHOUT CAUSES or CAUSES WITHOUT EFFECTS.
41
This last issue needs elaboration. To seek effects without causes means ...
To desire a certain object, perhaps a perfectly legitimate one, but take no action to gain it. ==> The individual in such a case relies on the fact that he WANTS or PREYS for the effect. ==> If one asks him: “But how will it ever be achieved?” ==> His answer, often merely implicit, is an EVASION: “Somehow.”
42
If a man wants a certain effect, it is his responsibility to DISCOVER and ENACT the necessary cause:
If he wants a fulfilling love affair, for instance, he cannot sit in his lonely apartment pining for a soulmate “SOMEHOW” to materialize. ==> He must define what SPECIFICALLY he seeks in a woman and then start looking ACTIVELY for her. ==> Or if a woman wants a career as a writer, she cannot forever put off writing waiting for inspiration “somehow” to strike. She must finds the MEANS to create her inspiration and then pick up a pen. ==> The same principle applies to the desire of wealth, happiness, FREEDOM, or any other value.
43
It is NOT enough to say: “X is a good thing. I want it.”
Since neither God nor society can perform a miracle, the policy of Christian “hope” is the OPPOSITE OF VIRTUE. ==> Like EVERY LIVING THING, a human being, if he is to gain his ends, MUST TOIL AND SPIN.
44
A particularly irrational variant of the above vice is the attempt to ...
REVERSE cause and effect.
45
In this case, the individual wishes for an unearned effect, but ONLY as a senseless means to an end:
He hopes that the EFFECT, SOMEHOW, will provide him with the CAUSE which he refused to enact or achieve. ==> “You want unearned love, as if love, the effect, could give you personal value, the cause. You want unearned admiration, as if admiration, the effect, could give you virtue, the cause. You want unearned wealth, as if wealth, the effect, could give you ability, the cause.
46
In all such cases, the individual does NOT actually want the ostensible object of his quest, such as love or money. He wants ...
The MEANING of the object. ==> He wants the PRETENSE that he has achieved its cause, while EVADING the fact that he hasn’t and that he never intends to achieve it.
47
The converse error is to seek causes without effects. This means:
Taking a certain action while ignoring the consequences. (Alcoholics, drug addicts) The same phenomenon exists in many other forms — eg people who regularly want more favors from the government, while ignoring that the escalation of controls this involves. Many of these people do not want dictatorship, any more than the alcoholic wants the d.t.’s.
48
The policy of evading causality — whether one wishes somehow to gain or to escape an effect — is a form of ...
Placing an “I wish” above an “It is.” ==> In this respect, it is like the other forms of irrationality. ==> The only alternative to the acceptance of reason is EMOTIONALISM. ==> This brings me to the topic of virtue and emotion.
49
In epistemology, we concluded that emotions are not tools of cognition. The corollary in ethics is that ...
EMOTIONS ARE NOT GUIDES TO ACTION.
50
AR defines “whim” as ...
“A desire experienced by a person who does not care to discover its cause.” ==> Such a person does not wish to introspect or to analyze. ==> He does not seek to identify the premises that underlie his desire OR to determine whether these premises conform to reality. ==> He simply WANTS a certain item. ==> He wants it BECAUSE he wants it. ***This is what AR calls “whim-worship”.
51
Whim-worship is to ethics what ...
Mysticism is to epistemology. ==> These 2 practices are invalid for the same reason and lead to the same destructive results.
52
The proper approach in this issue is not reason vs emotion, but ...
REASON FIRST, AND THEN EMOTION.
53
This approach, as we have seen, leads to the ...
Harmony of reason and emotion — the normal state of a rational man. ==> His feelings, accordingly, are the OPPOSITE OF WHIMS — They are consequences of rational, explicitly identified value-judgements. ==> A man with this kind of psychology and self-knowledge does NOT repress his desires. ==> He is EAGER TO FEEL and to give his feelings FULL REALITY in the hours and choices of his life. ==> To him, such a policy is a FORM OF EXPRESSING IN ACTION THE JUDGEMENT OF HIS MIND.
54
The desires of the rational man are STRONGER than those of a whim-worshiper. The reason is ...
That the rational man experiences his values in UNDILUTED FORM. ==> Since he has identified and integrated his mental contents, EVERY ASPECT of them contributes to his CERTAINTY. ==> NOTHING IN HIS PREMISES OR PSYCHOLOGY TAMES THE FIRE OF HIS PASSION.
55
If a man wants to eat his cake and have it, too, he is necessarily ...
TORN, UNSURE OF HIS DIRECTION, SELF-DOUBTFUL. ==> The very contradiction MUTES THE INTENSITY with which he can desire either side of it.
56
But if a man wants something with the UNBREACHED DEDICATION of a person who knows his own mind and knows that his desire is in full accordance with reality, ...
Then he WANTS it.
57
In ethics, as in epistemology, there is no dichotomy between reason and emotion.
Once again, the truth is: THINK, AND YOU SHALL FEEL.
58
I must add that anyone, for perfectly innocent reasons, may in some issue experience a clash between emotions and ideas. The rational course then is ...
To defer action on the issue UNTIL THE CLASH HAS BEEN RESOLVED. ==> First, one should discover WHERE ONE’S ERROR LIES and CORRECT IT — THEN ONE CAN ACT — assuming time permits such deliberation. ==> If it doesn’t, then the person in conflict HAS TO ACT WITHOUT FULL SELF-KNOWLEDGE. ==> In such a case, he must be guided by his mind, ie, by his best CONSCIOUS JUDGEMENT of what is consonant with reality, EVEN IF HIS EMOTIONS PROTEST. ==> When the crisis is over, he can inquire into the source of his emotional dissent and REESTABLISH MENTAL HARMONY.
59
This completes our first discussion of virtue. The decline in the West, someone once observed, can be symbolized by the fact that ...
The term “virtue” — which comes from “vir”, Latin for “man” — has been turned UPSIDE DOWN across the centuries. ==> It has been evolved from meaning “manliness” in a man to meaning “chastity” in a woman. ==> Objectivism restores the term’s original sense. We mean by “virtue” the kind of action appropriate to a human being. THE ACTION IS RATIONALITY.