Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology (Ayn Rand)

A Brilliant, Seminal Work 
[My 5-star Amazon review (NDA) of “Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology” by Ayn Rand.]

“Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology” is a short (about 120 pages) but power-packed text, bereft of filler. Virtually every sentence commands contemplation, and unless you’re a genius, you’ll have to read this book a few times to fully digest Rand’s epistemology. But unlike many big-name philosophers, seemingly incapable of clear and concise thinking and writing, Rand is a paragon of clarity and conciseness; so you will not be slowed by her prose, only by her profundity. Rand eschews neologisms, so you will not have to sift through jargonized verbiage to try to figure out what she’s saying; but you will have to put on your thinking cap to do so.
This book is veritably teeming with brilliant epistemological insights, and I’ll touch upon a few of the main ones.

First, Rand claims she solved the “problem” of universals; and after deep and protracted consideration of her Objectivist argument, I finally realized she had. Rand argues that only particulars (existents) exist, and that universals are abstractions that enable man’s consciousness to identify and integrate these particulars. In my search to determine if Rand was right on this crucial philosophic matter, I read her most cogent and vehement detractor, Scott Ryan, author of “Objectivism and the Corruption of Rationality: A Critique of Ayn Rand’s Epistemology” Ryan spends half of his book trying to refute Rand’s position regarding universals—but to my mind, his arguments fail. Moreover, I also read “Reason and “Analysis” by Ryan’s “philosopher-guru,” the eminent Brand Blanshard, and he too failed to convince me Rand was wrong regarding universals.

Second, Rand identifies the axioms at the base of reality—existence, consciousness, and identity.  Because these axioms are irreducible, at the very base of reality, they are inescapable propositions that, as Leonard Peikoff, Rand’s foremost interpreter, puts it, “defeat their opponents by the fact that they have accept [them] and use [them] in the process of attempting to deny [them].” Once you understand these axioms, you will be able to apply them to deconstruct the thinking of anyone. Existence and consciousness are self-evident primaries, but Rand breaks new ground when she states existence is identity (in other words, to exist is to exist as some thing), and consciousness is the faculty that identifies reality. Although Rand fails to explicate the full (or mystical) implications of the function consciousness (which also includes the capacity to identify (and coincide with) Ultimate (or immeasurable and illimitable) Reality, her “new ground” provided me with the basis to elevate my mystical philosophy to a new, and impregnable, level.

Third, Rand introduces her theory of concept-formation, which is based on “measurement omission.” In short, this theory analogizes concept-formation to a mathematical process of calculation, but sans specific measurement. I find this theory quite tenable, especially in light of the Hindu Yoga philosophy which identifies the universe as “Maya,” which means “that which that has been measured out [by the ‘Immeasurable Prime Mover’].” Hence, man, as the measurer of the universe, employs an informal (measurement-omission) methodology as his non-scientific means to acquiring cognitive knowledge via concept-formation.

Fourth, the book contains a chapter, by Leonard Peikoff, which thoroughly deconstructs Immanuel Kant’s analytic-synthetic dichotomy. Kant’s analytic-synthetic dichotomy is nothing less than an unmitigated attack on the efficacy of man’s conceptual faculty and ability to identify reality, and Peikoff makes mincemeat of Kant, whom Rand considered “the most evil man in mankind’s history.”

In addition to the main text, the book includes a 150-page Appendix –“Excerpts from the Epistemology Workshops”—which consists of question-answer exchanges between a group of professors and Rand. The questions the professors ask, which may be the some of the same ones you would ask, will help you to better understand Rand’s epistemology.

In summary, I cannot recommend this book highly enough. It not only changed the way I think about thinking, it changed the way I think about everything.