eXTReMe Tracker WARNING: The opinions expressed and linked to in this blog are not necessarily mine (anymore).

My ideas are constantly changing as I learn. Sometimes they even change midway through writing a post.

Sunday, January 9


I haven't had time to read up on alternative theories to Objectivism's three axioms yet, but I have been thinking about them a little.

It seems like there is a problem in Objectivism that makes it difficult sometimes to get better knowledge. In order to find a good idea, one generally has to wade through many less good ideas. Rand suggests refusing to expend much mental effort in new ideas unless one has a good reason to think it might be true. The problem is, sometimes an idea doesn't get presented to one with the most relevant parts first. A particular person may not understand the idea fully himself or may not realize that he is assuming some ideas that you are not. One could miss out on a great new idea simply because it's presented badly. A little effort spent trying to understand the idea better may result in one finding out that it's actually a potentially good idea (at least, one that seems good given one's current knowledge). Another important thing about this is that even if the idea turns out to be wrong, as far as one knows, one will have learned more about the subject and possibly be able to better articulate one's own ideas better.

So back to the idea of potentially better ways to think about metaphysics. The little bits that I have read suggest thinking about things more wholistically.

"There were not two; beholder was one with beheld; it was not a vision compassed but a unity apprehended." (Plotinus quoted in Nonduality by David Loy.

At first, this seemed like nonsense. A TV is not the person viewing the TV. Thinking about it again, though, one could view the TV and the person as being part of something bigger - like the universe. There are a lot of things the TV and person have in common. For example, they might both be held down by gravity, have a "solid" form, make noise at times, need some sort of energy input. There are differences, too, of course. It may be that the differences are more important or useful to notice. I'm curious to find out whether there is some advantage to thinking about reality this way or whether it's just a way of enriching the views I already have.

No comments: