Beyond Objectivism - Introduction
1. Knowledge of Particulars
2. Measurement
3. Retaliation
4. About Force
by Reginald Firehammer
Objectivism, as a philosophical system, is the most complete and most consistent philosophy there is. It is the first large advance in philosophy since Locke. But, philosophy, like the sciences, is never complete.
Objectivism’s Shortcomings
Objectivism’s shortcomings are not things that are, “wrong,” but things which are incomplete.
There are some minor things wrong in objectivism, but they are wrong only because they are the best answers possible to certain questions within limits of Objectivism’s incompleteness. They are mistakes, but mistakes made while moving intellectually in the right direction.
If Objectivism is to be faulted, its only fault is its tendendency to inhibit new philosophical development. This is understandable. In one fell swoop Objectivism solves most of the major philosophical questions and provides the most complete and comprehensive explanation of the concepts philosophy is concerned with. Those who discover Objectivism, especially those who were previously mind-numbed by other philosophies, are easily convinced they have discovered the answer to everything.
There are, unfortunately, Objectivists who seem to think that philosophy is complete in Objectivism, and that any change or addition to philosophy beyond or different from Objectivism is tantamount to heresy.
In my article, Beginning With Objectivism, I wrote:
In spite of Objectivism’s contributions to the field of philosophy, however, it is not the end of philosophy, only the latest and greatest development in the field. As far as it has taken us, we still have further to go than we have thus far come. The problem is most Objectivists think we have arrived, when we should actually be starting on our way again.
Objectivist Orthodoxy
If Objectivism is not “the end of philosophy” but, “only the latest and greatest development in the field,” then any progress in the field of philosophy will necessarily contain new ideas either not found in Objectivism or even in conflict with some aspects of it. There are two things that must be true of any such concepts:
Any new philosophical discoveries are not Objectivism, because Objectivism identifies the philosophy developed by Ayn Rand. New developments that go beyond her contribution to philosophy are not her philosophy. To call any concepts not found in the corpus of Ayn Rand’s Objectivism by that name would be tantamount to calling Ayn Rand’s philosophy Lockianism, or Aristotelianism, because she only expands on those philosopher’s contributions to philosophy.
Any new philosophical discoveries must be real new concepts. They cannot be, as most criticisms of Rand’s Objectivism are, the reintroduction of concepts from failed philosophies that Objectivism has already demonstrated are fallacious. Any new philosophical concepts will not be found in any previous philosophy addressed by Objectivism or in Objectivism itself.
If there is to be any progress in philosophy, Objectivism must be studied to discover where the best of philosophy is today; but Objectivism must not be treated as an orthodoxy. Ayn Rand’s Objectivism truly is the best philosophy in all those areas she addressed, but she was neither omniscient or infallible, and her philosophy must stand or fall (and it will surely stand) on the merits of its objective achievements. To the extent any aspect of Objectivism is not open to critical objective analysis, it becomes a doctrine, not a philosophy.
On Our Way Again
This article introduces a planned series of short articles addressing specific issues which Objectivism fails to identify or to address in depth, as well as some minor mistakes in Objectivism itself. This is not a critique of Objectivism, it is the very opposite. Except for the specific issues that will be addressed, it assumes Objectivism is fundamentally sound in all other respects. The issues are raised solely to inspire further progress in philosophy and to identify any possible aspects of Objectivism that might, if embraced without question, be impediments to that progress.
Each short article will address a separate issue. There will not be an attempt to fully address and resolve the issues, because a major purpose of these articles is to stimulate discussion and thinking. I will include a brief explanation of what I believe is the right direction for resolving these issues, because it is easy to criticize without having a solution of one’s own. I’ve studied philosophy for over forty years and have resolved most of these issues and will address them all in depth in the continuation of the Autonomist Philosophy Series.
Ayn Rand has brought us further in our philosophical journey than any philosopher in history. We have been enjoying a long rest, enjoying the feast of knowledge she provided. But, we have tarried to long at the table and it is time we got moving. We could not ask for a better place to begin, or for better nourishment, or better rest than we have enjoyed. It is my intention that this series of articles will stimulate the kind of intellectual curiosity and desire for discovery that will set us on our way again in the pursuit of philosophical knowledge.
—(11/22/05)