rwsh@hound.UUCP (R.STUBBLEFIELD) (12/22/85)
Thanks to those of you who raised questions on my previous attempts to show that reason and force are opposites. I've taken a week to compose an essay responding to questions ranging from, "Can you say let them eat cake?" to "Doesn't your concept of reason necessitate infallibility?" The essay is 213 lines long so I've posted it separately from this thank you note. A few points about the essay: 1. Although the essay is long, I have edited it. (Multimate shows I entered 30992 keystrokes, but the result is 14351 characters.) 2. I've tried to delimit the topic to an issue of fact: Is what we name by the concept of force the opposite of what we name by reason? Although I think reason is a value, I have not attempted that derivation here. 3. Some contra-indicators for reading the essay (or, at least, for providing any useful feedback): a. if you don't think reality is independent of your consciousness (i.e., you are a subjectivist) b. if you don't believe you have to make an effort to make sure your beliefs are knowledge (i.e., you are an intrinsicist) c. if you don't believe your senses give you information of reality (i.e., you are a skeptic) d. if you don't believe concepts of consciousness have any explanatory value (i.e., you are a determinist) 4. Jan Wasilewski asked if I am an Objectivist. Yes--if you mean one who grasps and advocates the essentials of the philosophy of Ayn Rand. No--if that label is taken as someone who parrots Ayn Rand's statements without understanding them. Such a person is properly labeled an intrinsicist. No--if you take that label as one who is authorized by Ayn Rand's estate to represent Objectivist views. Thanks again. I appreciate thoughtful feedback. -- Bob Stubblefield ihnp4!hound!rwsh 201-949-2846